I'm just curious what the general consensus is out there between these two recovery modules. I've always used cwm rec until recently when I couldn't test flash ANY cm10 jb roms. I had to install twrp in order to flash them and it worked right away. It nice to have touchscreen controls but newer cwm's have that now too so I guess I just want to be sure I'm not losing anything or missing out on anything by leaving cwm rec for twrp .. and many say to switch anyways but what is the general feeling out there and what are you others using?
Sent from my SGH-I747M using Tapatalk 2
TWRP to me just has a better layout and mor responsive touch UI.. Havent had any problems with it so far not being able to flash or anything so...
+1 TWRP is overall smoother and easier to use IMO, and 0 issues so far flashing anything or restoring backups.
I've used CWM since it was available for the Samsung Captivate. Great program. I'm now using TWRP, and I like it better. It appears to be faster, quicker backups and allows for more options. TWRP feels more responsive than Touch CWM (and I paid for that program).
Two points to consider. Backups for each program are only able to be restored by that program. Meaning, you can't restore a CWM backup using TWRP and you can't restore a TWRP backup using CWM.
If you use TWRP v2.2.1, the INTERNAL SD card mount point is \data\media instead of extSdCard. That's really confusing for CWM users and really annoying general.
You can flash recovery zips in both CWM or TWRP.. I flash my .zips from the external card now that I'm using TWRP.....
Both great programs....:good:
My favorite part about TWRP is that you can enable compression on nandroid backups.
Sent from my SGH-I747 using xda premium
cellgeek said:
I've used CWM since it was available for the Samsung Captivate. Great program. I'm now using TWRP, and I like it better. It appears to be faster, quicker backups and allows for more options. TWRP feels more responsive than Touch CWM (and I paid for that program).
Two points to consider. Backups for each program are only able to be restored by that program. Meaning, you can't restore a CWM backup using TWRP and you can't restore a TWRP backup using CWM.
If you use TWRP v2.2.1, the INTERNAL SD card mount point is \data\media instead of extSdCard. That's really confusing for CWM users and really annoying general.
You can flash recovery zips in both CWM or TWRP.. I flash my .zips from the external card now that I'm using TWRP.....
Both great programs....:good:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep, I too had been using cwm since my first Captivate...and have always enjoyed it but have also recently switched to TWRP and find it to be better and plan to use it now.as.my only recovery.
It is unfortunate but true that u can't restore backups from the others program so all.my old.cwm nandroid backups are basically useless now unless I reinstall cwm but that's OK moving forward I guess.
I too was a bit confused by the internal.SD card file.system location in data/media and still.don't understand it but as long as u know then its OK. So far it sounds like twrp is the future of recovery and more and more people are switching...and the touch function and extra options.are.nice.features.
The bottom line is as long as I am not missing out on something or losing some important functionality then I'm fine with the switch from cwm and.will.stay with TWRP but will never deny the popularity and usefulness of cwm and how it got me going in the whole.game of flashing and.mod'ing phones.
TWRP is by far the best recovery I have ever used. I couldn't imagine life without it now.
hallo13th said:
TWRP is by far the best recovery I have ever used. I couldn't imagine life without it now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I totally agree. I was using CWM on my Thrill and didn't get a chance to use TWRP till I got my Fire. Now I will only use TWRP. CWM is an excellent recovery but I like the features of TWRP better.
Sent from my SGH-I747 using xda premium
a lot of the rooting/recovery guides are suggesting to use clockwork recovery, is that just because twrp wasn't really supported back then? any issues noticed with using twrp on the sgs3?
as with all programs there is no "best" just personal preference: try one, then the other and settle on that which suits yoiur phone and needs "the best"
I tried TWRP and went back to CWM -- many others, obviously, tried and preferred TWRP
TWRP is easier & more efficient to use. Bar none.
But with that said, IMO CWM is still the better recovery for some situations. First, there is more support for CWM still.
Second, if you use a ROM's built in functionality to update itself (like AOKP has), then that requires CWM as far as I can tell.
Also keep in mind that it's easier to screw up on TWRP because it is touch-based. I've accidentally pressed buttons without meaning to. It's only a matter of time before that gets me into trouble.
I just wish CWM would remove the thousand "no" that you have to sort through before getting to a "yes". And I wish they would update it more often.
I did pay for my ClockworkMOD, btw.
hey guys please give me tips on the twrp
i gave up on cwm i couldn't install cm10 on my galaxy s3 i747m ROGERS (at&t)
so can someone walk me through the twrp way of flashing cm10 rom
pleaaaaaaasee
cheers
totti107 said:
hey guys please give me tips on the twrp
i gave up on cwm i couldn't install cm10 on my galaxy s3 i747m ROGERS (at&t)
so can someone walk me through the twrp way of flashing cm10 rom
pleaaaaaaasee
cheers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly the same as cwm. Except all wiping option are put together in the wipe menu, you can select multiple file to flash on after another and fix permissions is in the advanced menu.
Sent from my SGH-I747 using xda app-developers app
CZ Eddie said:
TWRP is easier & more efficient to use. Bar none.
But with that said, IMO CWM is still the better recovery for some situations. First, there is more support for CWM still.
Second, if you use a ROM's built in functionality to update itself (like AOKP has), then that requires CWM as far as I can tell.
Also keep in mind that it's easier to screw up on TWRP because it is touch-based. I've accidentally pressed buttons without meaning to. It's only a matter of time before that gets me into trouble.
I just wish CWM would remove the thousand "no" that you have to sort through before getting to a "yes". And I wish they would update it more often.
I did pay for my ClockworkMOD, btw.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I use the touch version of cwm and am very thankful for the thousands no's, help mitigate those "oh crap" moments that touch screen introduces.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using xda premium
CZ Eddie said:
TWRP is easier & more efficient to use. Bar none.
But with that said, IMO CWM is still the better recovery for some situations. First, there is more support for CWM still.
Second, if you use a ROM's built in functionality to update itself (like AOKP has), then that requires CWM as far as I can tell.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Task and ktoonzes aokp ota updater now works with the newest twrp.
TWRP. I like its layout, and love that I can build a stack of .zips to flash. (Not sure if CWM has that feature, won't be causing me to switch over to it.)
Encrytion and backups!
The most impressive feature of TWRP hasn't been mentioned in this thread yet.. TWRP supports flashing ROM's on devices that have been fully encrypted !
Also, it allows for backup and restore of ROMs on encrypted devices that neither CWM nor CWM Touch support.
OhNJ n
Sent from my SPH-L720 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Related
I'm really trying to understand the difference. Is it more a personal preference in using a touch interface & options, or are there some core differences as to why you should use one over the other, especially in flashing the ICS ports we're using on our T989's.
In one post I've been reading, they're instructing you to use 'touch recovery' to flash the ROM. And in other post I've been reading, a highly trusted member said he won't use touch anymore because of issues he's had with it. I've seen it go both ways many times.
I read in another post, that one member thought the 2 versions handled the cache partition differently. If that's the case, doesn't using thederekjay's Darkside SuperWipe make that null & void anyway, because it formats, erases and aligns all the disks partitions properly anyway before you flash?
I've never used touch to flash an ICS ROM, or any ROM yet, and I'm certainly not against it. But I haven't had a lot of the issues that some are having either to make me go that way. So I'm trying to determine, or see if you guys really think that using one version over the other can really make a difference in the stability of the ROM; and if so...then why? Thanks!
And of course; if the OP tells me to use touch recovery to flash their ROM, I will certainly do so if I flash the ROM. Just trying to get a better understanding.
I use touch. Its just a personal preference. Then again the errors are a hit or miss thing.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk
recovery version doesn't matter. it would be quite cumbersome to flash a different recovery every time i wanted a different rom. Touch vs no touch just affects GUI and user interacting, nothing more.
When in RECOVERY I want stability ....no touch gimmicks necessary if there's even the slightest chance of an error.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using XDA
bzlik88 said:
When in RECOVERY I want stability ....no touch gimmicks necessary if there's even the slightest chance of an error.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
word. having to button press your way thru the menues is a security feature.
SGS2 (T989) on CM7_373R5
Touch is the best way!!
I used for much time the Classic CWM, until I want flash the new ICS Rom; I have a lot problems, boot loop, kernel loop, reboots, FCS…. My solution was the new CWM Touch Version.
After I make all wipes with this CWM Touch version all things on ICS for T-Mobile t989 works very very well.
In my opinion non-touch recovery works best because its stable and touch recovery is still experimental and can still have some bugs.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using XDA
osangoqui said:
I used for much time the Classic CWM, until I want flash the new ICS Rom; I have a lot problems, boot loop, kernel loop, reboots, FCS…. My solution was the new CWM Touch Version.
After I make all wipes with this CWM Touch version all things on ICS for T-Mobile t989 works very very well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I had the same experience. Which was confusing.
I figured it was just people not flashing properly which was causing the issues.
So I used non-touch CWM. Tried 4 times with various combinations of wiping to try and get it to boot. To no avail.
Flash touch CWM, flash once, works perfectly. So confused as to why that is.
So this is what confuses me. I was just reading through some posts at the 'NexusMod' thread. A member posted that some of the issues another member was having with the ROM was due to the user using standard recovery. He said standard recovery makes the cache partition as r/o instead of r/w and this is causing some of the issues when people flash the ICS ROMS.
Really? So in GB ROMS it doesn't matter if it's r/o because I've always used standard recovery and never had, or heard of these issues before related to the recovery?
So there's that big of a difference between the 2 versions of recovery that one leaves the cache partition as r/o and the other r/w. That seems pretty major to me if true. I'm not doubting anybody here, just trying to get a better understanding so I know which recovery to use.
I like and just feel safer using the non-touch version. But if need be, I could go touch... If I need too.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-T989 using Tapatalk
CWM v6.0.0.0
http://plus.google.com/u/0/103583939320326217147/posts/cPF6gkmpM9m
koush said:
The recovery builder is now building version 6 of the recovery. The main changes are as follows:
Backups are much faster. 4-5x faster. (Bug fix due to excessive status updates of the UI and new backup technique)
Incremental backups are smaller. Way way smaller. Only 15-20MB each for each additional backup of a ROM. This is done using a new tool I wrote to dedupe the files between incremental backups to eliminate duplicates.
Here's a test build for maguro (Galaxy Nexus GSM):
http://download.clockworkmod.com/test/maguro-test-recovery.img
And the builder site:
http://builder.clockworkmod.com
Still in alpha, please test.
Update: Here's the touch version as well:
http://download.clockworkmod.com/test/maguro-touch-test-recovery.img
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Team Win Recovery Project
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1592689
http://www.teamw.in/
http://goo.im/devs/OpenRecovery
ClockworkMod Recovery
http://download.clockworkmod.com/recoveries/
http://download.clockworkmod.com/test/
Custom Recovery - The first prerequisite for our jollification! Which do you think is better?
Edit : flashable zip in the existing recovery (GSM)
CWM_maguro_v6.0.0.0.test_touch.zip
TWRP_maguro_V2.2.0b1.zip
Clockworkmod.
I miss the clockworkmod-based 4EXT Recovery (for the Nexus One, amongst others), though.
I preferred the polished look and feel of TWRP, but alas when I boot into recovery it would be gone. Im not sure what's going on there.
CWM so far hasn't given me any problems, and now I have several nandroids using the recovery, so Ill probably stick with this version.
I wont say neither is better. As long as they are functional its all a matter of preference.
CWM > TWRP tried the latter didn't like it as its pretty limited when I had it. Couldn't flash Zephyr Keys and the like. Still loving the original.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
I really liked CMWR, i have used it almost in every Android phone i've had but TWRP is way to go now. Extremely fast backups, touch-friendly UI and most importantly - you can give names to your backups right from recovery which i find very useful.
daskalos.healing said:
...
Edit : flashable zip in the existing recovery
CWM_maguro_v6.0.0.0.test_touch.zip
TWRP_maguro_V2.2.0b1.zip
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
TWRP faster and more convenient than CWM
the title said "vs" but nothing is compared...
anyway, im using touch cwm, as long as it's not broken, not going to change to other recovery. im scared of bricking it haha
I was SO confused. I've been using CWM Recovery since 2008... but the same backup states with each recovery resulted in 1200mb file size with CWM and about 700mb with TWRP using compression. Still sorta prefer CWM's looks, but that could just be because I'm used to it after so long.
uansari1 said:
I was SO confused. I've been using CWM Recovery since 2008... but the same backup states with each recovery resulted in 1200mb file size with CWM and about 700mb with TWRP using compression. Still sorta prefer CWM's looks, but that could just be because I'm used to it after so long.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
cwm recovery wasnt around in 2008, and almost everyone was using Amon_RA recovery in 2009(almost all android recoveries are based off Amon_RA recovery, including cwm btw).
simms22 said:
cwm recovery wasnt around in 2008, and almost everyone was using Amon_RA recovery in 2009(almost all android recoveries are based off Amon_RA recovery, including cwm btw).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow, you're right! I WAS using Amon_RA on the G1..I guess I switched to CWM on the N1. They looked the same if I'm not mistaken.
Anyway, my point is I've been using that basic format all these years, so I likely need time to get used to a whole new look..
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
uansari1 said:
Wow, you're right! I WAS using Amon_RA on the G1..I guess I switched to CWM on the N1. They looked the same if I'm not mistaken.
Anyway, my point is I've been using that basic format all these years, so I likely need time to get used to a whole new look..
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
they did look the same. CWM was based on amon_ra.
i think the first CWM was only a slightly tweaked version of amon_ra
Zepius said:
they did look the same. CWM was based on amon_ra.
i think the first CWM was only a slightly tweaked version of amon_ra
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I do recall that as well.
So does anyone have a technical summary of the disadvantages of one vs the other?
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
uansari1 said:
Wow, you're right! I WAS using Amon_RA on the G1..I guess I switched to CWM on the N1. They looked the same if I'm not mistaken.
Anyway, my point is I've been using that basic format all these years, so I likely need time to get used to a whole new look..
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Zepius said:
they did look the same. CWM was based on amon_ra.
i think the first CWM was only a slightly tweaked version of amon_ra
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yup. cwm was a tweaked amon ra recovery. speaking off, ive been trying to talk amon ra into making a new ns and gnex recovery(since he has both phones), but hes pretty solid solid about being retired from recovery work. at least we have a great base that these new recoveries can use to grow from.
TWRP. Keyboard in recovery, file manager, terminal emulator, zip queueing, back up partitions larger than 2GB, more convenient intuitive layout, battery percentage in recovery and time in recovery. And probably a few other things I'm missing. TWRP.
jesusice said:
TWRP. Keyboard in recovery, file manager, terminal emulator, zip queueing, back up partitions larger than 2GB, more convenient intuitive layout, battery percentage in recovery and time in recovery. And probably a few other things I'm missing. TWRP.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
dimension of the backup introduced by cwm is a big change what about twrp backup dimension?
spupuz said:
dimension of the backup introduced by cwm is a big change what about twrp backup dimension?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you elaborate? What is the question?
jesusice said:
Can you elaborate? What is the question?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i mean the cwm backup size is around 16/20mb bucause there a share "blob" dir for all the backups that contain the redundant data, what's the dimension of the twrp backup?
spupuz said:
i mean the cwm backup size is around 16/20mb bucause there a share "blob" dir for all the backups that contain the redundant data, what's the dimension of the twrp backup?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe you're speaking of differential backups, where only updated data is backed up and a centralized backup is used as a base.
I don't believe differential backups are supported by TWRP, but it is on their to-do list. So at this point, every backup is a full backup.
Cilraaz said:
I believe you're speaking of differential backups, where only updated data is backed up and a centralized backup is used as a base.
I don't believe differential backups are supported by TWRP, but it is on their to-do list. So at this point, every backup is a full backup.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah sorry for my bad english that was the point
Cilraaz said:
I believe you're speaking of differential backups, where only updated data is backed up and a centralized backup is used as a base.
I don't believe differential backups are supported by TWRP, but it is on their to-do list. So at this point, every backup is a full backup.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I haven't used new CWM yet, how is it? Incremental backups sound cool but makes me worry that there's more things that could go wrong. Since I've got a 32GB Gnex I'm not really concerned about size though.
First of all are there any downsides to using TWRP. I have heard of some issues with a long reboot time?
Also my original back up is on CWM is there anyway to migrate or somehow get my original back up on to TWRP?
mainstang said:
First of all are there any downsides to using TWRP. I have heard of some issues with a long reboot time?
Also my original back up is on CWM is there anyway to migrate or somehow get my original back up on to TWRP?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1) i havent experienced the first thing you mentioned
2) no. they use totally different formats.
CWM just released 6.0 alpha currently in testing. I've always used CWM but I recently used TWRP on my Nook Tablet and I must say that it is pretty cool. Very touch-oriented and feels more like a GUI then a text based recovery like CWM...
However, maybe I'm just used to CWM, but TWRP seemed more complicated. CWM is pretty laid out and straight forward. Both pretty much do the same thing but I trust CWM much more then TWRP. For example, my TWRP updated and left me unable to read my Internal or External storage. It kinda screwed me for a while.
I guess both are nice and can get you to the same place. TWRP is getting updated a lot because it is still new while CWM is kind of seasoned. I use Touch CWM and I don't really have a reason to update it. If it works, why screw with it. A recovery isn't a ROM you flash to get more features. As long as it does what you need it to do, why chance screwing with it?
One of the features I noticed that would be nice is being able to name your backup. Is there a way to name backups in CWM. I tried to within a file browser one time and the backups I renamed were not working afterwards.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda app-developers app
I have been using TWRP on my HOX and found it really easy and pretty forward without issue.. On my Nexus I used CWM and found it okay easy as well...
BUT I installed it on my Nitro HD and wound up in CWM HELL with out a way out. My phone is currently (hopefully) being unbricked as I could not get out of CWM....Yes I did a back up and when I ran it it stated system back up not found.
So on my Nexus I also just switched it up to CWM after reading other issues also.
Again not bashing CWM just not trusting it to much at this point.
As far as I know, renaming backups in CWM is possible? Try long pressing on one of the backups under 'Manage/Restore', it should allow you to edit the name.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda app-developers app
It is possible via a file manager just long press edit name it to what u want just the name don't put a file extention at the end ex. .zip just leave it be it sets the file name for you I had that issue before
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Xparent ICS Tapatalk 2
You can rename a backup, it just can't have spaces or it won't restore. I just add to the end of the name so you can delete and return to original name if you have issues.
I know this might be a stupid question but I was wondering if they have a version of touch recovery for the AT&T SGS 3. I have seen the sprint one but was uncertain if the AT&T had one please if anyone knows can you point me in the right direction. Thank you for your help on this I really appreciate it!!
If you install Goo Manager from the play store, you can install TWRP, which is a touch recovery. As far as CWM goes, Koush had released a touch version of CWM version 6, but it was buggy and he pulled it. He'll have another one up for us soon. My suggestion is to stick with CWM. After the initial backup, subsequent ones just fly.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2
lordmorphous said:
If you install Goo Manager from the play store, you can install TWRP, which is a touch recovery. As far as CWM goes, Koush had released a touch version of CWM version 6, but it was buggy and he pulled it. He'll have another one up for us soon. My suggestion is to stick with CWM. After the initial backup, subsequent ones just fly.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey thank you i will do that but i was just wondering, thank you for the response.
I personally use cwm 5.8.4.5. Which is also touch. But my biggest reason is because its the only one with external access. I prefer my backups and ROMs on external.
Ends said:
I personally use cwm 5.8.4.5. Which is also touch. But my biggest reason is because its the only one with external access. I prefer my backups and ROMs on external.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
TWRP has external SD ability. Much better than CWM IMHO.
thacounty said:
TWRP has external SD ability. Much better than CWM IMHO.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I did not know that. I never switched over because the backups wernt compatible and I didn't want to lose them.
thacounty said:
TWRP has external SD ability. Much better than CWM IMHO.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A couple weeks ago, I would have agreed with you. Then I upgraded to CWM 6.something. First impression was shaky. That first nandroid took over 20 minutes. But all subsequent backups take less than five and can be done straight from Rom Manager. Choose backup in RM, click OK, and it reboots to recovery, does a nandroid, then reboots the phone...hands free. The first nandroid backs everything up to a blobs folder. Subsequent backups only backup what has been changed...so very speedy.
Also, I can format /data in CWM. TWRP would always fail...but I do miss the touch interface of TWRP.
lordmorphous said:
If you install Goo Manager from the play store, you can install TWRP, which is a touch recovery. As far as CWM goes, Koush had released a touch version of CWM version 6, but it was buggy and he pulled it. He'll have another one up for us soon. My suggestion is to stick with CWM. After the initial backup, subsequent ones just fly.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What he said. Tried TWRP back when it came out and was not pleased. Flashing was a chore with them. Don't know if it has changed. CMW is the king IMHO. Miss the touch part but it will come when its ready. Stick with what's tried and true. Is my opinion.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using xda premium
A backup in twrp for me takes about 130 seconds to back up a tw rom, less for aosp roms. Not sure why your backups take so long. Been using twrp for the past year about and I see no reason to go back. Zip que, the gui, the organization are all much better in twrp in my opinion. Of course everyone's opinion differs but that's my 2 cents.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2
corythug said:
A backup in twrp for me takes about 130 seconds to back up a tw rom, less for aosp roms. Not sure why your backups take so long. Been using twrp for the past year about and I see no reason to go back. Zip que, the gui, the organization are all much better in twrp in my opinion. Of course everyone's opinion differs but that's my 2 cents.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with this. Being able to flash the rom and gapps at once is pretty sweet. Plus Rom Manager seems to cause problems on roms. Of course I know you don't need Rom Manager to have CWM.
Hello! Which one is better / more feature rich / YOUR favorite ?? And why?
Twrp... Search this and other threads... Been a long debated and posted about topic b4.....
Sent from my SPH-L710 using xda premium
Twrp too. Love how fast make nands. Plus themeable.
Sent from my phone...
Twrp. Its got every thing you want in a recovery
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2
TWRP
Sent from my SPH-L710 using xda premium
I like twrp but I feel more secure with cwm for some reason
Also twrp doesn't pickup my cwm nandroids
It might not be a bug idk
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Emperor using psycommu
twrp without a doubt.
I always ran cwm on my other phones so when I bought this one I went straight to cwm. Then I heard about twrp and tried it out. I will never go back. Twrp now the only recovery I will flash.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using xda app-developers app
Thanks so much for all the replies! I've rooted several GS3 for friends and coworkers and left CWM since they wont ever go in and use it anyways (they all wanted the free hotspot lol) but I finally made the jump back to android since I got an iPhone 4s when it came out for Sprint and followed your advise to use TWRP recovery. Hopefully it will not be a problem if I decide to start messing around with Cyanogen based ROMs for the GS3.
TWRP
Sent from my bad ass Odexed Blue SIII
CWM
Sent from my BAKED SIII
TWRP no question
eurominican said:
Thanks so much for all the replies! I've rooted several GS3 for friends and coworkers and left CWM since they wont ever go in and use it anyways (they all wanted the free hotspot lol) but I finally made the jump back to android since I got an iPhone 4s when it came out for Sprint and followed your advise to use TWRP recovery. Hopefully it will not be a problem if I decide to start messing around with Cyanogen based ROMs for the GS3.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I used to be on CM or any other AOSP ROMs while using a themed TWRP v2.2.2.0 and had no issues
Sent from my SPH-L710 using xda app-developers app
TWRP
the latest CWM Version included in GNT 9.2 keeps crashing during Backup - the Backup file is about 20MB in size.
won't trust CWM anymore...
I never understood this question. Best for what? Flashing zips every once in a while? They both do that. What do you want your recovery to do that one or the other do not do? Try them both and see which one appeals to your sense of what's best.
where can one find twrp?
TrusterX said:
TWRP
the latest CWM Version included in GNT 9.2 keeps crashing during Backup - the Backup file is about 20MB in size.
won't trust CWM anymore...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you delete .android_secure from internal sd? I had problems till I did that. Also:
QUESTION: Why are the backups size soo small now compared to the previous cwm backups?
ANSWER: Basically on the new cwm all the data is stored in a blobs folder in the clockworkmod folder. The backups folder now doesnt hold the actual data and instead the system and data files contain links to the files in the blobs folder (with the hash of the file as its filename). When you perform another backup only the changes have to be added so it performs incremental backups instead of full backups everytime. You can still flash different roms and back them up as any new data is stored in the blobs folder with the links in the backup folder. Several backups can share the same blobs file so over several backups the total file size of all the backups will be much much smaller. When you delete a backup via cwm you can then free space of the blob files that are no longer needed to keep everything tidy and make sure that no files are stored that arent referenced to any backup. If you don't free the space then any unused files will automatically be deleted when the next backup is performed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
eurominican said:
Hello! Which one is better / more feature rich / YOUR favorite ?? And why?[/QU
I have to say TWPE i WAS ON CWM BUT TWP GIVE SO MUCH MORE IN RECOVERY
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I prefer CWM, just because I'm used to it...
TWRP