claude0001
-
Content Count
603 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
76
Posts posted by claude0001
-
-
1 hour ago, steff said:
For all of you, who are planing to use the pro1x as a daily driver, i hope you are right. I just do not believe in it [...]
I agree. I am in the lucky position to own an original Pro1 that is unaffected by all these issues. It shows that F(x)tec can make functional phones, just to emphasize that here once more.
One thing @Michael074 could do is join their beta testing programme and provide debug-info to them. I haven't done so yet because my Pro1-X is already on LineageOS. Also, I admittedly have too much other fish to fry right now and cannot routinely carry a second smartphone along just to study its field-behaviour.
That being said, admittedly, even with all necessary debugging info provided, I no longer count on them fixing the Pro1-X's radio problems. Mainly because I do not believe they have the financial means to do so.
-
10 hours ago, Michael074 said:
shows there is a strong mobile network connection. when someone calls me it says unavailable. when i try to make calls the screen shows that its calling, but there is no sound at all, no ring tone and eventually i get the notification mobile network not available.
That's a very similar symptom I observe often: Apparently, there is a signal, but calls can't get in or out, and finally the phone "gives up" and you get the "no network" message.
Unfortunately I have no solution. For me (German carrier), calls do work in principle, but only with specific cells/bands, and only with VoLTE. Do you have the latter enabled?
At this point, no one really knows what is going on. Sadly, if F(x)tec do not come up with a fix for this, be prepared to never be able to use the Pro1X as a (reliable) phone ...
-
1
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, Hook said:
Sorry, no. IGG is a platform that provides a service.
Of course. There is a lot of frustration resonating in that message, wherever it came from.
-
1
-
-
22 minutes ago, Hook said:
It may be quite accurate, but seems to be from the perspective of a lower down employee panicking as they get inundated with complaining emails.
It does confirm what I wrote above almost to the letter, even including the words "out of control" and "mess". And I have no behind-the-scenes insight. So, yes, I think this is a quite realistic picture of the situation.
22 minutes ago, Hook said:about IGG being a pyramid scheme...
Maybe it could be classified a pyramid scheme in the sense that IGG earn their income from companies running their campaigns through them, with many of these campaigns failing, backers and/or companies loosing their money, and with only IGG themselves making profit in the end.
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, EskeRahn said:
Read comments more carefully. Indeed the situation is bad, but they clearly state that they have other projects profiting that are -and for quite some time has been- paying to the project, including for the shipping - though slowly.
Even though they communicate much more openly since a few days ago (which is good), their "careful" phrasing still leaves room for speculation about what is happening, of course.
However that post from "Project owner" I quoted already above seems pretty clear to me:
"[...] shops have obtained stock from our warehouse without our permission or knowledge. This action was taken by our warehouse in an attempt to recover a some of the outstanding balance that they are due to paid by us." (emphasis mine)
and later:
"We are told that 300 devices were given(sold) to the Japanese shop. We understand another 800 or so were committed to them, but this is what we're trying to stop at the moment [...]" (emphasis mine)
So, my interpretation is that, in July last year, Expansys were given all manufactured devices and ordered to store most of them and ship the ~1900 that belong to IGG backers. However, F(x)tec refuse to pay / cannot pay the corresponding invoice. Those must have been the "contractual issues" all along.
Since then, F(x)tec try to scratch money together to ship the phones bit by bit, and try to make us believe that, although things are going slower than expected, everything was under control. However, somehow Expansys do not seem to agree with that salami slicing tactic, and are obviously now ready to take drastic measures to finally get their money. While the initial sale of a batch of Pro1-X on Expansys' own website seems to have been part of some arrangement to generate liquidity, Expansys are now unilaterally appropriating devices without F(x)tec's consent. Besides draining their stock of manufactured devices, the fact that hundreds of Pro1-X are hitting the market at bargain prices will also compromise F(x)tec's ability to sell the remaining ones themselves in a profitable way. That is, should they ever manage to get a grip on them once more.
Things are not under control. Name that situation what you want. I call it a mess.
-
2
-
-
On 3/21/2023 at 3:08 PM, claude0001 said:
Actually, reading through the IGG comments, I find now that F(x)tec actually confirmed the "appropriation" theory!
[...]
However, they also state that, as they have manufactured many more devices then needed, there are (still?) enough to deliver to all backers ...
Reading down the IGG comments a bit further, I come to the impression that this is F(x)tec's last stand. They're completely out of money. Their devices sit in Hong Kong with no clearance to ship because F(x)tec are unable to pay the bill. Pro1-Xs "appearing" on the market are due to Expansys acquiring devices as a way to obtain their payment. Probably, F(x)tec are at the point where the few shipments actually taking place are being paid from employees' revenue.
What a mess.
-
1
-
-
21 minutes ago, EskeRahn said:
Remember this is crowdfunding, so WE, and not FxTec bare any risk of our investments.
I am fully aware of that. Crowdfunding is shifting the risk from the company to the backers -- and that is precisely what F(x)tec should have taken advantage of!
In January 2021, they should have declared that, with the SD835 unexpectedly impossible to source, the project had reached a dead-end, and that -- as much of the raised funds had already been spent -- backers could unfortunately NOT be refunded, but would be granted a discount on the Pro2, just entering development.
Then they should have quietly sat down and designed a proper Pro2 -- reusing as many of the parts already purchased for the Pro1-X as possible, but without pressure to actually manufacture and deliver any devices beyond pre-production units.
Finally, once the Pro2 would have matured and be ready for marketing, former Pro1-X backers would receive a 30% discount coupon for the Pro2, maybe even with the option of finally getting their personalized engraving ...
Analysing bad decisions taken and trying to learn from the past is not contrafactual history writing, btw.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, claude0001 said:
I also once had a theory along the lines of Expansys "appropriating" part of the stock . However, F(x)tec now explicitly state that at least all IGG-backed phones are "ready and in Hong Kong".
Actually, reading through the IGG comments, I find now that F(x)tec actually confirmed the "appropriation" theory!
F(x)tec (@IGG):
Quote[...] shops have obtained stock from our warehouse without our permission or knowledge. This action was taken by our warehouse in an attempt to recover a some of the outstanding balance that they are due to paid by us. [...]
However, they also state that, as they have manufactured many more devices then needed, there are (still?) enough to deliver to all backers ...
-
1
-
-
21 minutes ago, Casey said:
[...] But there were some unpredicted events that really impacted this project, namely, the SoC change - where we spent nearly half the fundraised amount. If those funds were still available, all problems would be solved.
We've also addressed some key questions people have been raising in the IGG comments section. [...]
I agree with some of the IGG comments that it would have been better to end the project when it became clear that the SD835 could no longer be acquired. I wonder if some of the Pro1-X's problems could have been avoided, had it not been developed under the pressure of having to deliver it to all backers ...
I understand that it is easy to feel smart in hindsight, and that decisions made two years ago cannot be undone anyhow. But, in the IGG comments, you argue that continuing the project based on the new SD662 had literally been the only option, as the SoC change "only became apparent 1.5+ years into the campaign". I do not see how this is true.
The fundraising campaign started in October 2020 and officially ended in December 2020. According to your own timeline on IGG, re-design of the mainboard for the 662-Pro1-X started as early as in January 2021. That's just one month after the funding had been raised, based on the assumption that a trivial 835-Pro1 variant would be made ...
-
1
-
-
25 minutes ago, zundappchef said:
Meantime the shipping company just sold the stock because of payment issues to people who are interested and shipped them to Japan [...] Now the shipping partner might be able to ship but might not have any devices 😅
I also once had a theory along the lines of Expansys "appropriating" part of the stock . However, F(x)tec now explicitly state that at least all IGG-backed phones are "ready and in Hong Kong".
-
2
-
-
I own both an original Pro1 and a Pro1-X, so I'm in the lucky position to be able to compare the two devices side-by-side. Part of your criticism (which I partly share) applies to both phones, but some things are also regressions introduced with the Pro1-X only.
2 hours ago, arkenoi said:The keyboard is decent and APPEARS like it was modeled after the Nokia n950, BUT. You can open n950 or e7 (if you did not have a chance to lay your hands on a development prototype) with one smooth sliding motion. For Pro1x, you need to pry it with your nails, and don't miss what the proper side is! Srsly, Fxtec?
I agree. In three years, I never dared trying to learn to open the Pro1 single-handedly, out of fear it would jump out of my hand in the process. I could never have afforded an N950 (😉) but even my N900's simple sliding keyboard mechanism was more practical from my point of view.
2 hours ago, arkenoi said:The camera protrusion does not allow you to place the phone firmly on the table! I had to glue small pieces of rubber to make it possible. It would not be a problem for a regular phone, but it is a basic operation mode for a horizontal qwerty slider.
I fully agree that this is a really annoying downgrade from the Pro1. The latter actually had a sunken-in camera window, precisely to protect it when the phone is placed on a table.
2 hours ago, arkenoi said:Thanks for the AMOLED, kb button mechanics and Qualcomm chip (old and cheap, but still better than Mediatek), but the rest of the hardware is crap. The camera does not match even today's Chinese midrange phones. The battery life is mediocre at best, and the hinge quality is a silly imitation attempt to Nokia's swan song of qwerty sliders; it does noticeably wobble, so it feels pretty cheap, too.
I agree with @Rob. S. that it might be unfair to generally expect quality and performance on par with big players from a small-volume manufacturer. That said, I do not feel that the hinge mechanisms feel cheap or wobbly, even with my three-year-old Pro1. Then again, I actually use the hw keyboard much less than I initially expected. Others might wear it down much faster ...
I too was never happy with the Pro1's camera, neither with regard to optical quality, nor to firmware behaviour (autofocus). With the right third-party software (OpenCamera) it becomes acceptable at best. The Pro1-X was in fact expected to have a better camera sensor, but I must admit I have not played much with it yet, mainly because of this last point:
2 hours ago, arkenoi said:Something is severely wrong with cellular connectivity in particular. It drops out of the network and loses calls and data connection for no apparent reason.
This is absolutely an issue of the Pro1-X only! With both devices placed side-by-side, the Pro1-X's mobile connectivity is abysmal compared to the Pro1's, to the point where using the X as a phone is not practically possible for me. This is a much discussed issue with the device, and there is some hope that this will be improved with future firmware updates. I'm not holding my breath, though.
-
1
-
-
58 minutes ago, Rob. S. said:
I'm just offering the small experience I have with this faulty phone so that others, too, might find a way to still actually use it [...]
Thanks for sharing your experience. As you know, you shouldn't take people too seriously on the internet. Many trolls are actually nice people in everyday life, but somehow flip a switch when they sit down at a keyboard ...
Are you actually able to place and receive calls through VoWiFi while connected to the LTE router? While I don't think I would ever settle for such a solution, technically, the portable hotspot is an interesting workaround.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Rob. S. said:
While their reasons for not leaving all IGG backers in the lurch might also have had to do with trust, something which they were already losing back then. Who would have trusted them again if they had just taken the backers' money without them getting anything?
Of course that would have been a tough decision to make. But, retrospectively, I think it would have been the right one, and a more experienced company would have gone that way.
The Pro1-X crowdfunding campaign was never meant for hardware development. It was about making a "collector's edition" of the existing Pro1 with improved alternative-OS support.
When the SD835 went EoL (something they should have seen coming btw.), they should have taken the chance to communicate that -- given these circumstances -- backers unfortunately cannot get the Pro1-X device they backed, but will be offered a yet-to-be-determined discount on the successor Pro2, now in development, as soon as that hits the market.
Of course there would have been outrage. But could it have been worse than what we have now?
I see the reasons why they did not do this: They see this as a community thing, they regard their backers as friends which they do not want to betray. That might make them good persons, but it's also the reason why they fail as a company ...
-
1
-
-
For completeness, one should mention that this news story is about a phone that was ordered on 11 November 2022 and delivered on 31 January 2023. I.e. the customer had her device in hand 2.5 months after placing the order, inspite of Christmas, CoViD, and war standing in the way. In my view, this rather illustrates that international commerce, against all odds, is indeed working.
The delays F(x)tec and their customers are facing are of a different order of magnitude and probably caused by other (additional) factors.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, throwaway9284939 said:
Is there any other course of action that can be take to get my money back that isn't "wait to get your phone then resell it"?
As harsh as it sounds, in retrospect, F(x)tec’s biggest mistake was to keep up the effort of delivering all promised devices to their IGG backers. That they tried (and are still trying) to get a device to any one who invested in the Pro1-X crowdfunding campaign is honourable, but, from a business point of view, it was the wrong decision.
When it became clear that the SD835 could no longer be delivered, they should have declared the IGG campaign a fail, taken the money, and invested it fully into development of a viable successor of the Pro1, without committing to delivering any devices beyond prototype or pre-production units. That would have allowed them to stay in business after the unexpected EoL of the (relatively successful) Pro1.
As we all know, they did not do this. They clung to the idea that they could develop a successor phone and deliver it to all backers. Something that was obviously not planned at the start of the IGG campaign. In result, they rushed into full-scale production of a Pro1 successor without sufficient QA.
Now, the damage is done. I no longer believe the Pro1-X’s connection problems will be solved by some OTA magic. F(x)tec have been "in the final sprint" to provide such a fix for too long. I think the device has problems with its RF hardware, full stop. Of those who unbox it, some will be lucky enough to be in region where the phone works at first. But soon they will travel around and find that the device simply cannot fulfil that "my-always-on-mobile-office" promise made in the ads.
Sadly, I think this is the end. F(x)tec had this one chance to make their next phone and they missed it. Even I would hesitate to support them if they were to launch a Pro2 campaign now.
-
3
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, EskeRahn said:
The 48MP sensor produces 12MP images after interpolation
I think "interpolation" is not quite the right word here. The idea with these 48 MP sensors is that they group equally-coloured pixels in bunches of four, and usually average over these four neighbors to yield a 12 MP image. This is called "pixel binning" and reduces noise through the averaging operation.
Technically, in optimum light conditions, the camera could indeed record all pixels individually to yield a 48 MP image. But, seemingly, the Pro1X's drivers do not support that mode.
7 hours ago, PoongZY said:CPU-Z says it is 665
As @EskeRahn and @daniele606 point out, CPU-Z is wrong. Other apps correctly identify the SoC as SD662, in agreement with the phone's specs.
-
3
-
-
28 minutes ago, EskeRahn said:
As can be seen even on the hash of the last four, the boot.img is not identical [...]
Well, as the timestamp updates, I do not see how the hash could stay identical, even if there are no functional changes. That said, there probably is a reason why LOS recovery does not allow downgrading via sideload ...
-
3 hours ago, Hook said:
After that, you only do ADB sideload or use OTA (when official).
Yes, normal users need to fastboot-flash the boot.img only once, and can then sideload-away for years to come.
But I believe @EskeRahn specifically wants to backup previous Lineage versions, to be able to jump back to them in case regressions were to be introduced in the OTAs. In such a scenario, he would indeed have to first flash the boot.img matching the timestamp of the *.zip. This is because, to my knowledge, Lineage recovery does not allow downgrading itself via sideload (at least in 16.0 it didn't).
So my only point was that it is not necessary for him to figure out a scheme to keep track of all his boot.img-versions. If needed, he could always extract the right one from the *.zip itself, which -- I think -- is an acceptable inconvenience in such an advanced use-case.
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, EskeRahn said:
So not that easy to extract after all
Well, it is really easy for those who have a lineage build environment up and running anyway. Extracting some previous payload.bin is a required step in making your own ROM.
For those who are not running on Linux (and thus have no preinstalled Python), people have made stand-alone extractor programs (like this one or that one). Please note that I haven't tested those, and think twice before running your phone's boot partition through some random tool from the internet.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, Sean McCreary said:
you may need to set "PROTOCOL_BUFFERS_PYTHON_IMPLEMENTATION=python"
Seemed to work without this on my Bullseye. Thanks anyway for the hint.
-
2 hours ago, EskeRahn said:
It might be so on other builds, but not on the official builds for LineageOS 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, nor AICP as far as I can see.
As the Pro1 and Pro1-X are A/B devices, the images are inside "payload.bin". The official LineageOS tool to extract them is extract.py, but there are others ...
-
1
-
1
-
-
17 hours ago, EskeRahn said:
And the recovery boot image now always have the name boot.img, so you would need to manually rename or move in subfolders to to keep pairs of files for later usage.
The sideloadable *.zip actually contains all images, including boot.img, dtbo.img, and vbmeta.img.
That the latter are offered as separate downloads is just for greater convenience. For the purpose of "archiving" an old build, it is enough to just store away the *.zip. In case of need, the matching recovery image could be easily extracted from there ...
-
8 minutes ago, DillonM said:
ya but at least i can say that i am trying to resolve the issue. and i get practice in flashing and restoring.
that's the spirit. 👍
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, DillonM said:
Sad to say but I am going to have to switch over to lineage or stock. After too many missed calls or unreceived texts from my SO, i am being request to fix the situation. [...]
You've probably thought about this, but just in case:
The Pro1X has connection issues with LTE and GSM (calls). We do not know why, but we believe it is either: a problem in the hardware (yikes!) - or - a fault in the stock Android drivers and firmwares, which also SFOS is using. The latter (if existing) might be fixed in a future OTA from F(x)tec (that, eventually, also SFOS would pick up, I guess), but we do not know for sure.
There are many (many!) people reporting missed calls and general mobile connection issues in, both, stock Android and Lineage. I'm one of them, as you might have guessed.
I'm sorry for not being able to provide a solution to your problem. Just be warned that ditching your SailfishOS might not actually change anything to your troubles ...
-
1
-
PRO1, LineageOS 16.0 Official Builds: Discussion
in General Discussion
Posted
The latest build of LineageOS 16.0 (for SD835-Pro1 only) is available at
https://findus.zwergenschaenke.net/~puma/linux.html#lineagepro1.
Go for the ROM dated 201230326. It includes backported ASB fixes up to 5 March 2023.
As for the last months, there is no upstream code review any more. I can confirm that there are no problems on my own Pro1.
Beyond the ASB, there are no changes since last month. My full list of increments with respect to the upstream LOS 16.0 tree can be downloaded for reference.
Have fun.