[berryite]

Original Article Here ... ATTN BlackBerry Bold 9700 Users: All OS Code Not Created Equally... - CIO.com - Business Technology Leadership

_ _ _ _ _


ATTN BlackBerry Bold 9700 Users: All OS Code Not Created Equally...

New BlackBerry Bold 9700 owners should be particularly cautious about installing new operating-system code on their smartphones. That's true whether the OS was released "officially" by a wireless carrier other than your own--or leaked via unofficial channels.

Attention from gadget-heads, anxious to get their thumbs on the new device--and rightfully so, the Bold 9700 is RIM's best BlackBerry ever, in this blogger's humble opinion. It won the eyes of businesspeople looking to upgrade their aging BlackBerrys to sleeker, more powerful e-mail machines. And it earned attention from RIM's own software developers, who are working studiously away on new Bold 9700 operating system code as you read this.

This last fact is evidenced by the surge of both sanctioned and leaked, or "unofficial," Bold 9700 OS code that's found its way to a handful of wireless carriers and various file-sharing sites like RapidShare.com and MegaUpload.com.

It's not at all uncommon to see leaked BlackBerry operating systems hit the Web. But the frequency at which we're seeing new Bold 9700 leaks is out of the ordinary. Which brings us to the point of this particular post: Not all BlackBerry Bold 9700 operating systems are created equally.

Furthermore, there are two "flavors" of BlackBerry Bold 9700--T-Mobile U.S.A's 9700, which supports the carrier's unique 3G band (1700MHz); and the Bold 9700 sold through AT&T in the U.S. and various additional carriers across the globe, which supports the much more common 1900MHz and 850MHz bands for 3G. However, the two devices are identical beyond the difference in 3G-band support, according to RIM.

That distinction is a significant one: it means OS code that runs like a well-rested Kenyan marathoner on an AT&T Bold 9700 could be nothing but trouble for Bold 9700 owners on T-Mobile's U.S. network. This may seem obvious to experienced BlackBerry users. But I've seen a bunch of kvetching on Twitter and heard reports of performance issues from enough new T-Mo Bold 9700 users who went all willy-nilly installing those new operating systems to know some folks aren't thinking twice before installing, regardless of carrier.

In fact, I recently installed a leaked Bold OS on my own personal T-Mobile 9700 after hearing a variety of praise for the code from AT&T users, only to find my device constantly freezing and randomly rebooting.

Here's a comment from RIM PR on the subject:

"[T]he two versions of the Bold 9700 are identical other than the band support you mentioned. Because of this difference, the AT&T and TMO devices do use different versions of the BlackBerry OS - an OS created for one carrier's device may not run well on the other."

First and foremost, you should be aware that installing any unofficial, or "beta," BlackBerry OS is a risk; remember, it's unofficial for a reason, and if it was "Ready-for-Primetime," so to speak, RIM would've probably made the code official. So there's always a chance that your BlackBerry--or some app on it--won't get along with some random OS build.

And carriers also often release their "own" versions of BlackBerry OS code for the same devices, with certain network-specific optimizations or fixes, so one build may work better on the same 9700 running on AT&T in the U.S. than an identical 9700 running on Rogers in Canada.

So...as a rule of thumb for the BlackBerry Bold 9700, if you're going to install OS code from somewhere other than your carrier's download site, specifically OS code for the T-Mobile U.S.A. Bold, you should probably wait for another user on your network to give the thumbs-up. Or at least be prepared to swiftly downgrade to an earlier OS that's tested and proven to run well on your specific device and/or wireless network.

[se1000]

R

10 char

[Doctor A]

All due respect to Mr. Al Sacco but T-Mobile 5.0.0.330 was giving me random reboots before I had a chance to charge the phone. I took it back 2 days later to store and exchanged for a new one and reboots continued. I updated OS to 5.0.0.423 and reboots are now very rare. The T-Mobile specific OS that was to play nice with my T-Mobile branded 9700 has been the one with most problems. The problems were there out of the gate before installing any apps so could not blame third party apps. Happy for the releases/leaks since these have helped my 9700 function better. Of course if and when T-Mobile releases new version of "their own" I may give it a try.
Doc

[JusticeCalibur]

Excellent find. Other than doing the deletion of the vender to have it work on your phone. I have found the culprit to cause the problem of constant rebooting. The culprit is :BBThumb: in your SD card.

The BBThumb is register to your previous OS vender. Therefore, when you look at your media, the phone would reboot.

To prevent this from happening, my steps are as follow:

1) connect phone to computer prior to installing new OS
2) open media folder and "cut and paste" the music/ringtone/picture/video onto desktop
3) On desktop, open the folders and "show hidden files" - BBThumb will appear.
4) Delete it.
5) Install new OS with the deleted vender
6) Once everything run smooth. Drag the music/ringtone/picture/video back into the SD card.

Ta-da! Of course there are other culprits. But that's the one I know of.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[Projectile]

If this were true RIM would have disseminated this information long ago. The only difference is in phone branding, which tells the phones radio which band to use for 3G. RIMs firmware updates don't overwrite branding info (Which is done at the factory). Carrier tweaks, could cause issues, but most don't heavily tweak firmware releases, they just add customizations. All those extra icons...

[dLo GSR]

repost

http://forums.crackberry.com/showthread.php?t=398736

[element526]

Interesting article. Good find on the fix Justice. I would tend to go with Projectile though on the carriers adding in though. When I had my 9000 and attempted to load 5.0 the native browser would not work with ATT. Every other carrier had a working browser. RIM or ATT? I would tend to believe ATT was the culprit.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[rick9700]

This article matches exactly what my local T-Mobile "store BB expert" sales rep. told me when I asked why I'm not running the latest version of the os! He said I should wait for T-Mobile to release the new os or id be sorry!!! I am taking his advice.....

[c_86]

ohh dear god...........

[mookish]

This article matches exactly what my local T-Mobile "store BB expert" sales rep. told me when I asked why I'm not running the latest version of the os! He said I should wait for T-Mobile to release the new os or id be sorry!!! I am taking his advice.....

Because the thousands upon thousands of us here that run leaked or unoficial software are all wrong and we're all "sorry" too...

[c_86]

Because the thousands upon thousands of us here that run leaked or unoficial software are all wrong and we're all "sorry" too...

and apparently we all have random reboots and not say anything to anyone to figure out why... some people these days really need to learn the tech before talking

[rick9700]

I was beginning to enjoy this forum, but getting comments like this for simply stating my opinion makes me regret I ever did. I am so sorry for offending you and I will make sure it never happens again! I was trying to be sarcastic stating the "BB store expert" who is just a kid that really has no idea what he is talking about! My reasons for not upgrading to a non t-mobile os are more warranty related than anything else! thanks for making a new guy feel welcomed..... I never meant to imply anyone running a non t-mobile os on a t-moible 9700 dose not know what they are doing......

[Projectile]

I was beginning to enjoy this forum, but getting comments like this for simply stating my opinion makes me regret I ever did. I am so sorry for offending you and I will make sure it never happens again! I was trying to be sarcastic stating the "BB store expert" who is just a kid that really has no idea what he is talking about! My reasons for not upgrading to a non t-mobile os are more warranty related than anything else! thanks for making a new guy feel welcomed..... I never meant to imply anyone running a non t-mobile os on a t-moible 9700 dose not know what they are doing......

Welcome new guy. Please excuse my Crackberry brethren, they don't mean to come off that way. But you must understand that many of the Crackberry folks sometimes get frustrated with new posters, as many of them have done quite a lot of reading before becoming Crackberry addicts. Cut them some slack they sometimes get agitated and can be quite sarcastic themselves. The statement "My reasons for not upgrading to a non t-mobile os are more warranty related than anything else!" comes from a lack of understanding of how Blackberrys work and Update firmware updates are accomplished. By and large you can almost always restore your phone back to warranty defaults after an update. But you would know that by reading a few of the awesomely crafted Blackberry How too's. To clarify, Blackberrys are very sophisticated pieces of technology, not to mention not easily brickable, there are How too's on this site that explain and will answers all of your questions regarding Firmware Updates, and many other tweaks, expeditiously.

I say to you Welcome!

[janaincberry]

Welcome but let me ask u this, what happens to the "unlocked" or "virgin" fones? - mine is a fresh piece untouched by a vendor - am I stuck with the OS that came with it....

With all due respects, the OS for a bold 9700 is 130 mb approx - do we know what complex codes go into it for that size?? And don't u think it handles all conceivable issues ???

Having said that its a software and there is nothing called a perfect software and that's why there are improved versions coming out now and then .....so, let's have fun tweaking our devices

Reason I'm posting is some new members may take this as a expert opinion cos its on CB and we got to be careful....

Just my 2 cents

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[USSZulu]

...I disagree with most of what this post says. I have run multiple 9700 OSes on this device (T-Mobile) with NO issues other than the normal bugs not related to the differences between the devices. I will continue to load OSes if I believe they will improve the performance of my device.

Posted from my BlackBerry using BerryBlab

[bradkb]

Just my 2 cents on this, being in the UK and pretty much always been on Orange, who take forever to release an OS for blackberry, I have always updated with AT&T or other firmwares and never ever had an issue. Mostly I find my blackberry becomes more stable, faster and a pleasure to own and use.

My 8320 never had an issue, and now my 9700 has been up from 351 to the latest and again, its stable, works great, superb battery and I am very happy.

How many people on here are constantly upgrading their OS? A simple look at the OS threads will see they are popular, and if these problems really existed I am sure they would have surfaced many many devices before now.

I cannot see RIM making operator specific OS's for every carrier around the world, could you imagine the change control process needed? Not only that their R&D department would need to run a device for every carrier to test (or at least a simulator). Not likely.

[big_chunuts]

Question for the crackberry gurus, hoping that I can tap into your experience on this subject matter?

Do we need to make sure we align carriers with same GSM networks? I.e. My carrier runs 850 at high speed, so only use a build from another carrier with the same network to ensure coverage/speed performane, if my carrier hasn't released the latest software?

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[c_86]

Question for the crackberry gurus, hoping that I can tap into your experience on this subject matter?

Do we need to make sure we align carriers with same GSM networks? I.e. My carrier runs 850 at high speed, so only use a build from another carrier with the same network to ensure coverage/speed performane, if my carrier hasn't released the latest software?

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

absolutely not... its doesn't matter... the frequencies are flashed (permanently) into the device at the manufactures... so to matter what OS you put on it will work... as long as you have the correct device for your network, (ex: t-Mobile US, you need the tmo 9700 etc).

You can use any 9700 OS on your device regardless of where it has come from... if we have to pay attention to that stuff then the forums would be FLOATED with issues, or they wouldn't post them to download etc etc... your device will do all the work for you, the firmware will know what frequencies to use and such when connected to the network, the OS has nothing to do with that

[big_chunuts]

absolutely not... its doesn't matter... the frequencies are flashes (permanently) into the device at the manufactures... so to matter what OS you put on it will work... as long as you have the correct device for your network, (ei: t-Mobile US, you need the tmo 9700 etc).

You can use any 9700 OS on your device regardless of where it has come from... if we have to pay attention to that stuff then the forums would be FLOATED with issues, or they wouldn't post them to download etc etc... your device will do all the work for you, the firmware will know what frequencies to use and such when connected to the network, the OS has nothing to do with that

Many thanks, .442 is working brilliant for me! I take from this not to downgrade back to my carriers .351

[aviatorjud]

The article's author doesn't know anything. As others have said, the frequency bands that the phone will use are dictated by the low level phone branding and will NOT be altered by changing the OS. The "tweaks" done by each carrier are very minor and as someone else said are mostly icons and services.

[berryite]

my 9700 has been up from 351 to the latest and again, its stable, works great, superb battery and I am very happy.

Thanks for your post. Out of curiosity, what OS are you currently running today?

[berryite]

absolutely not... its doesn't matter... the frequencies are flashes (permanently) into the device at the manufactures... so to matter what OS you put on it will work... as long as you have the correct device for your network, (ei: t-Mobile US, you need the tmo 9700 etc).

Interesting observations.

Someone oughta put together a thread citing exactly what processes RIM goes through in updating OS versions. In other words, what steps are taken when say RIM goes and jumps from say a .423 OS version to a .442 version.

And another thing ... what happened along the way to versions .424, .425, .426, .427, .428, .429, .430, .431, .432, .433, .434, .435, .436, .437, .438, .439, .440 and .441?

[vinmontRD]

Interesting... unless any of us has inside information from within RIM's software dev team, we can only go by observations and experience. However the experience within this community is vast, and members have done tons of experimentation over the years, so this experience has been tremendously valuable in my opinion...

What I've seen makes me think that the CIO.com blog piece was, in fact, making the situation out to be something that it isn't. The quote from RIM's PR department also doesn't fully support the conclusion that the CIO blogger came to either.

If we take a look at the way Blackberry software is distributed, and combine with this the experience of perhaps hundreds of thousands of users who have been using beta releases of firmware for years -- regardless of the particular carrier branding -- we can draw some useful conclusions.

To date, the user community -- including those who have been putting together "hybrids" combining COD files from different versions into a single OS package -- have been convinced that the actual OS files (COD files) from a given numbered release are *identical*, regardless of the vendor for whom the overall package was customized. I still believe that to be true.

RIM has been using a well defined system for using these identical releases and differentiating features across various carriers for several years. This consists of a combination of the "burned in" vendorID information that's deeply embedded in each device (e.g., 100 for T-Mobile, 102 for AT&T, etc) and the ALX files with conditional include sections that are based on vendorID.

When the AppLoader is loading a new OS, it examines the devices burned-in vendorID, and then when the ALX file is loaded and processed, sections that pertain to the device's vendorID are executed (e.g., the specified COD files are loaded into the device). Sections whose vendorID specs don't match the device will NOT be executed, and the COD's specified therein will not be loaded into the device.

As long as we don't muck with this, a single numbered OS release can provide unique combinations of COD files to phones branded for different vendors.

RIM's PR warning most likely responds to the practice in the blackberry enthusiast community of selectively bypassing the vendorID controls to allow us to try out new releases that may be targeted for another carrier's device.

We've learned that we can delete the vendor file that comes with an OS, and thereby convince AppLoader to start processing the OS whether or not it was targeted for our carrier -- that's the first step. But AppLoader still respects the restrictions coded by vendorID into each ALX file.

We've also learned that we can edit the ALX files and, essentially, tell AppLoader which COD files we want loaded into our Blackberrys.

This is very powerful and useful -- and also presents the potential of running code on our devices that truly doesn't belong there.

Removing the vendorID specification in a given ALX section might let us "unlock" all the various vendor specific themes and try them out on our device.

Modifying the ALX (or moving / deleting specific COD files) is also a way of having AppLoader NOT load a given piece of code. For example -- some folks don't want the extra overhead of having Voice Dialing, and modify the code to avoid having it loaded when installing an OS release.

Where we might get ourselves in trouble would be cases such as:

- modifying an ALX and having a blackberry we run on T-Mobile load all the Verizon PTT (push to talk), Verizon Navigator, VCastMusic code or Vodafone Music code that simply doesn't work on T-Mobile;

- forcing AppLoader to load Fave Five code on a blackberry that we use on AT&T;

We can also edit BlackBerry.alx and "trick" AppLoader into loading all the files needed for T-Mobile's UMA support into a Blackberry that we'll use on Verizon or AT&T.

These are the types of issues that can probably cause our Blackberry's to act weird if we mess with non-standard OS installations. But that's very different than assuming that there are hidden OS code differences from vendor to vendor in the various releases. I'm still convinced the COD files from one vendor's release of a given numbered OS version are identical to those included in any other vendor's release of the same numbered OS version.

If somebody has specific information to the contrary, that would be good to know. But I am skeptical before even seeing replies, because RIM has been a serious software shop, and has controlled releases in a rigorous fashion. Putting out identically named and numbered software releases that are different than each other would be atypical in a shop with such practices.

On a gross level, as controlled by vendorID, the software is "different" for different vendors. But I am strongly convinced that the actual OS code does not, in fact, differ at all.

[risingsun124]

^^^I was just going to say that. Ha ha!

[vinmontRD]

^^^I was just going to say that. Ha ha!

well! if you had posted before me, you could have saved me a lot of typing!