[redsaph]

Has anyone side loading the Music bar file from Z30 to the Z10 STL -1? Maybe it's just deactivated from the app...

Posted via CB10 | Z10STL100-1/10.2.1.2141

[Nharzhool]

Has anyone side loading the Music bar file from Z30 to the Z10 STL -1? Maybe it's just deactivated from the app...

Posted via CB10 | Z10STL100-1/10.2.1.2141

I honestly haven't tried that. Though, I want the Miracast and Wi-Fi Direct. However, I will see if I can get the Z30 Airtunes Bar file and try it.

[santhoshmanikandan]

Here....
Attachment 258473

Posted via CB10

Also add z10 in the tweet

[sayf777]

I honestly haven't tried that. Though, I want the Miracast and Wi-Fi Direct. However, I will see if I can get the Z30 Airtunes Bar file and try it.

I have tried something similar, I used one of the bar files from the internal build that lengend leaked a while back that tests miracast or something. When I launched it, it said something like deactivated or not available on the platform / phone or something.

It was a while back so I can't remember.

Posted via CB10

[wincyUt]

BlackBerry should activate the OS or whatever is required on the STL 100-1 and just inform the buying public that there are two available choices of the Z10.

[Nharzhool]

BlackBerry should activate the OS or whatever is required on the STL 100-1 and just inform the buying public that there are two available choices of the Z10.

Yeah, It doesn't seem like a complicated thing that needs to be done here...

[ralfyguy]

I think Michael Clewley accidentally read STA100-1 not STL100-1.

Posted via CB10

[Nharzhool]

I think Michael Clewley accidentally read STA100-1 not STL100-1.

Posted via CB10

Will pop him a tweet about the Z10.

It is done:



Will see what he says.

Mmm...CB10! Just the tip though...

[eldricho]

Has anyone side loading the Music bar file from Z30 to the Z10 STL -1? Maybe it's just deactivated from the app...

Posted via CB10 | Z10STL100-1/10.2.1.2141

I think it's deeper than that
That the bar file/OS 'asks' the device for its name and that when the device responds, it then checks the list to see if it's name is white listed for that feature

Posted via CB10

[Nharzhool]

I think it's deeper than that
That the bar file/OS 'asks' the device for its name and that when the device responds, it then checks the list to see if it's name is white listed for that feature

Posted via CB10

It might also be that the driver has been removed from the device on purpose.

When trying to use the PlayOn function in BlackBerry Express, I get told that Miracast is not available on this device.

Mmm...CB10! Just the tip though...

[santhoshmanikandan]

Will pop him a tweet about the Z10.

It is done:



Will see what he says.

Mmm...CB10! Just the tip though...

Let's see what he replies.

[Omnitech]

While I agree it would be nice if a software update enabled those things, I would not get your hopes up TOO high that they will do this.

It is actually EXTREMELY common for a consumer product to have internal mechanical or electronic capabilities that are not enabled for the end-user. EXTREMELY common.

The fact that one might discover that a product one owns is one of those, does not automatically mean you are being "cheated" out of capabilities - a vendor is only obligated to deliver the functionality that they claimed the device had when you purchased it.

That said, there is a precedent here with BlackBerry 10 devices in particular - OS 10.2 enabled the FM radio functionality on the Q10/Z30 which previously was not functional. But once again, one has no realistic right to demand that a product should provide some "theoretically capable feature", only those features which the vendor claims it has, or decides now or in the future to support.

The other thing is that the Z10 at this point is starting to get a little long-in-the-tooth by smartphone standards - expecting the vendor to make a special effort to "update its abilities" is probably not something one should gets one's hopes up about. Especially since if I had to guess, the STL100-1 is the device they'd like to discontinue most because it's the "black sheep" and they have to do all this unique separate development to support it compared to the rest of the Z10 series. And because even the developing world is going to start wanting LTE before long.

[BionicKris]

@Omnitech- Well said.

Posted via CB10

[BBZ10wannabe]

I upgraded to the Z30 partially for this reason so by allowing it, they might be cutting into Z30 sales but the question is, would BBRY be better off and able to sell more Z10's to compensate? Would they receive more complaints from the non-STL-1 consumers for what it's worth? They could call it the Z11 or something..

I wouldn't mind but it might not be the best business strategy.

[kolowosh]

LOL. I don't think STL100-1 is really the "black sheep", it's powered by the best processor with a full of features. What's happened is TI exited mobile processor business in 2012, maybe that's why BBRY is not interested to activate all the capacities of the processor.

[badiyee]

being an owner of the z10 -1 model myself, I really support this initiative. The TI OMAP chip on the phone is no pushover.

[VR6]

great investigatory journalism OP!

[westcoastjay]

They should enable it, its like the Z30 on Verizon that supports wireless charging but the others don't

[Omnitech]

They should enable it, its like the Z30 on Verizon that supports wireless charging but the others don't

You just disproved your own argument.

[chalx]

The other thing is that the Z10 at this point is starting to get a little long-in-the-tooth by smartphone standards - expecting the vendor to make a special effort to "update its abilities" is probably not something one should gets one's hopes up about.

Locking chipset features is common in tech - HTC and Qualcomm were notorious in Win mobile days.
Anyway, I would say that locking and disabling features require more effort than enabling it, if drivers are present in OS. It would probbably require just a little good faith and few minutes of coding to remove intentionally implemented lock. I remember that some ATI graphic cards had locked features and that we flashed tweaked vga bios to unlock.

[anon(3732391)]

OP... thanks for the information.

I don't understand some of it and I never really paid attention to the Wi-Fi direct but yesterday I was making some calls on my Z10 and they were through Wi-Fi!
Only happened for about 30 minutes and 6 calls and hasn't gone through Wi-Fi again. (My mobile network is AT&T)

If you explained it already just tell me to read the info.
Other wise, any idea about my issue?

[eldricho]

OP... thanks for the information.

I don't understand some of it and I never really paid attention to the Wi-Fi direct but yesterday I was making some calls on my Z10 and they were through Wi-Fi!
Only happened for about 30 minutes and 6 calls and hasn't gone through Wi-Fi again. (My mobile network is AT&T)

If you explained it already just tell me to read the info.
Other wise, any idea about my issue?

What might have happened here is Wi-Fi Calling, which is a whole lot different from Wi-Fi Direct.
Wi-Fi Direct helps devices that are capable to connect directly to each other via Wi-Fi without an intermediate access point. You can then print, share, synch and display content on the other device.
Can't explain Wi-Fi Calling as it's not available in my country and I have only heard of it on these forums for T-Mobile phones

Posted via CB10

[Omnitech]

I don't understand some of it and I never really paid attention to the Wi-Fi direct but yesterday I was making some calls on my Z10 and they were through Wi-Fi!
Only happened for about 30 minutes and 6 calls and hasn't gone through Wi-Fi again. (My mobile network is AT&T)

If you explained it already just tell me to read the info.
Other wise, any idea about my issue?

That's quite strange if you are an AT&T customer.

Presumably you installed the T-Mobile release, 10.2.1.2228?

That's the only one with WiFi calling, to my knowledge. And it also includes a T-Mobile utility to configure that, but that shouldn't work on AT&T either.

How did you decide the call went over WiFi?

[Lumute]

There isn't much they need to do. It is a bit of software tweaking.

Do you have the smallest clue about how complex it is to develop a low level driver to support specific hardware? the fact that BB10 supports such features on one SOC does not mean it will automatically support it for all of them and its just a matter of fliping a software switch/flag. What looks simple to you can easily turn into huge project when you actually look at what needs to be done development wise. Especially for big companies like BlackBerry, a minor simple change needs to pass by a bunch of development phases and groups to be approved, spec'd, implemented, QA'd and release involving tons of people from multiple teams, etc...

Apart from that, you mentioned that those are non licensed features which is not completly true. SOC Manufacurers design their chips with as many features as possible, the fact is that not every project needs all of them but cost would be prohibitive to design, develop, manufacture, QA, etc. 10 different chips with different feature sets, so it is very common for them to offer these chips "a la carte", where the client (BlackBerry in this case) chooses the feature they want to use and the price of the chip depends on it, other features are disabled in the chip, others come with it by default but are just not used. Is that the case with Miracast, FM Radio and Wi-Fi Direct? Only BlackBerry/TI would know...

I recall a scandal a couple of years ago with a HTC phone that did not support something that everyone wanted even though it was listed in the SOC specifications, they made the mistake of promissing it to people and then were never able to deliver because the feature was disabled in the SOC. I just don't remember right now which feature was it... people was furious...

Your response makes it seem like you're arguing the point just to argue the point.

Thats funny, I have the exact same impression about your reply, that argument goes both ways

[Nharzhool]

Do you have the smallest clue about how complex it is to develop a low level driver to support specific hardware? the fact that BB10 supports such features on one SOC does not mean it will automatically support it for all of them and its just a matter of fliping a software switch/flag. What looks simple to you can easily turn into huge project when you actually look at what needs to be done development wise. Especially for big companies like BlackBerry, a minor simple change needs to pass by a bunch of development phases and groups to be approved, spec'd, implemented, QA'd and release involving tons of people from multiple teams, etc...

Yep, I get how difficult it is. I shouldn't have said that it is "just a bit of software tweaking". IF it IS a missing driver, it is a mission to code a driver. It is is just disabled in the OS, then it IS just some software tweaking.

Apart from that, you mentioned that those are non licensed features which is not completly true. SOC Manufacurers design their chips with as many features as possible, the fact is that not every project needs all of them but cost would be prohibitive to design, develop, manufacture, QA, etc. 10 different chips with different feature sets, so it is very common for them to offer these chips "a la carte", where the client (BlackBerry in this case) chooses the feature they want to use and the price of the chip depends on it, other features are disabled in the chip, others come with it by default but are just not used. Is that the case with Miracast, FM Radio and Wi-Fi Direct? Only BlackBerry/TI would know...

I'm going to need some sort of formal info before I believe this...it sounds too convenient. I only found that these are just open-source standards like DisplayPort.

Thats funny, I have the exact same impression about your reply, that argument goes both ways

I'm just trying to get some sort of official word from BlackBerry regarding this situation. I'm actually trying to do something NICE for fellow users of the device.

I'm not complaining that we aren't getting "what we're owed" or anything. I just want to find out from BlackBerry if it is possible to get this.

I don't feel cheated. I knew what I was getting when I got the phone. I still feel like it is worth more than I got it for.

I'm not arguing this point for the sake of it. It just seems like you're just going out of your way to be negative. I only posted on here to get some sort of attention for the Beta Zone article.

Mate, why can't you just try and support the other people here? It isn't unreasonable to ask BlackBerry whether this is possible and/or whether we might see it in future on our devices.

The idea I'm trying to get going here is not to incite a riot or mass-complaint. I just want lots of attention to be brought to BlackBerry regarding this to find out if it can/might happen.

I'm not expecting it to happen. I just want to see if we can get more from the devices at the leisure of BlackBerry.


Mmm...CB10! Just the tip though...