 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General General TopicsGSMBluetoothProviders AlltelATT WirelessCingularFidoNextelSprint PCST-MobileVerizonManufacturers EricssonNokiaMotorolaCountry Specific Australian GroupUK GroupRelated Topics PocketPCPalmMore Topics ... |
Cellular Phone Forum / Manufacturers / Motorola / March 2008Charging Cell Phone from Computer
I regularly charge my Motorola phones from both my Toshiba laptop and my Dell desktop computers. Recently my daughter noticed me doing this and said she had tried repeatedly to charge her phone (Motorola) the same way without success. I wondered if this is one of the unmentioned advantages on Motorola Phone Tools, in that I have MPT loaded and updated on both my computers and she does not. If so, is there any reason that she should not download one of the free versions (ver 4.04) from the internet? Thanks-- Big John >I regularly charge my Motorola phones from both my Toshiba laptop and my >Dell desktop computers. Recently my daughter noticed me doing this and [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >reason that she should not download one of the free versions (ver 4.04) >from the internet? That would of course by a violation of copyright and a bad lesson for her. Instead just download the legitimate Motorola driver from <http://developer.motorola.com/docstools/USB_Drivers/Handset_USB_Driver/> (registration required but free).  SignatureBest regards, MOTOROLA WIKI: John Navas <http://cell.wikia.com/wiki/Motorola> > I regularly charge my Motorola phones from both my Toshiba laptop > and my Dell desktop computers. Recently my daughter noticed me doing [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > If so, is there any reason that she should not download one of the > free versions (ver 4.04) from the internet? Motorola phones won't charge from a PC via a USB port unless the Motorola USB drivers are installed on the PC. The drivers are installed as part of the MPT installation, but they're available on their own from http://direct.motorola.com/hellomoto/nss/driversNplugins.asp Select the "USB Drivers". SignatureBert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | bert@iphouse.com >> I regularly charge my Motorola phones from both my Toshiba laptop >> and my Dell desktop computers. Recently my daughter noticed me doing [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >Select the "USB Drivers". That driver is (currently) version 3.2.0 The driver on the Developer site (link I posted) is more current, 3.4.0 SignatureBest regards, MOTOROLA WIKI: John Navas <http://cell.wikia.com/wiki/Motorola> >>> I regularly charge my Motorola phones from both my Toshiba laptop >>> and my Dell desktop computers. Recently my daughter noticed me [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > The driver on the Developer site (link I posted) is more current, > 3.4.0 Downloading from the developer site requires registration. Since the OP is only interested in enabling charging, v3.2 will likely be more than good enough. SignatureBert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | bert@iphouse.com >>>> I regularly charge my Motorola phones from both my Toshiba laptop >>>> and my Dell desktop computers. Recently my daughter noticed me [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > >Downloading from the developer site requires registration. True, but it's free and can be done anonymously if you prefer. >Since the OP is only interested in enabling charging, v3.2 will likely >be more than good enough. Perhaps, but drivers can have serious bugs even in that limited role. While I know of nothing wrong with 3.2.0, there's another version of this driver that will crash the computer on Resume from Standby if the handset is disconnected from computer charging while in Standby. This is why it makes sense to get the latest version available. SignatureBest regards, MOTOROLA WIKI: John Navas <http://cell.wikia.com/wiki/Motorola> > Motorola phones won't charge from a PC via a USB port unless the > Motorola USB drivers are installed on the PC. That is so wrong! I charge my V3r with any of three cables; one from my portable USB hard drive, one from my Cannon camera and the the third one from my TomTom. >> Motorola phones won't charge from a PC via a USB port unless the >> Motorola USB drivers are installed on the PC. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > hard drive, one from my Cannon camera and the the third one from my > TomTom. I didn't say anything about what cable to use. From a Windows PC, any standard USB cable will work, so long as the Motorola USB drivers are installed. I've seen reports that you can charge from some Macs without any drivers. SignatureBert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | bert@iphouse.com >>> Motorola phones won't charge from a PC via a USB port unless the >>> Motorola USB drivers are installed on the PC. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >I've seen reports that you can charge from some Macs without any >drivers. I've also heard you can with Vista. I'm still using XP and had to install the drivers before mine would work. Larc §§§ - Change planet to earth to reply by email - §§§ OK, it is a Windows driver issue. I use Ubuntu and apparently the driver is already built in. > OK, it is a Windows driver issue. I use Ubuntu and apparently the driver > is already built in. My L6 charges without any OS installed at all! I happened to plug it in while building a new system and it charged happily. What won't work is charging if the battery's too flat - for that you have to use the mains charger. > I've seen reports that you can charge from some Macs without any > drivers. Any Mac running OS X should be able to charge it without anything special except for a regular USB cable. >> I've seen reports that you can charge from some Macs without any >> drivers. > > Any Mac running OS X should be able to charge it without anything > special except for a regular USB cable. So Macs can do it, PCs running Linux and Vista can do it, but PCs running XP can't without the Motorola drivers. What's XP doing differently? Is XP "wrong" or just different but within specs? I've also read that plugging into a simple powered USB port (like those cute automobile cigarette lighter adapters) won't charge a Motorola phone either. SignatureBert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | bert@iphouse.com >So Macs can do it, PCs running Linux and Vista can do it, but PCs >running XP can't without the Motorola drivers. > >What's XP doing differently? Is XP "wrong" or just different but >within specs? I think it's just a matter of that ability not being included in XP. Remember, XP is basically an old OS. Although we have had SP1 and SP2 (M$ will release SP3 soon), and there have been monthly updates at least, much technology exists now that wasn't even dreamed of when XP was first released nearly 6½ years ago. Larc §§§ - Change planet to earth to reply by email - §§§ > I've also read that plugging into a simple powered USB port (like > those cute automobile cigarette lighter adapters) won't charge a > Motorola phone either. I charge my V3r with the cable that came with my TomTom. >> I've also read that plugging into a simple powered USB port (like >> those cute automobile cigarette lighter adapters) won't charge a >> Motorola phone either. >> > I charge my V3r with the cable that came with my TomTom. What's on the other end of the cable? SignatureBert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | bert@iphouse.com > What's on the other end of the cable? The TomTom came with two chargers; a car charger(cigarette lighter adapter), and a 110v wall wart charger. Both of them work just fine on the V3r. I like the car charger more because I used to run an inverter to power the wall-wart that came with the V3r. I keep seeing ppl say there is something wrong with the Motorola, but I have had no problem interchanging among four USB cables and two wall warts. More likely they have a bad/crippled cable, or a Windows PC the lacks the Motorola driver. > I keep seeing ppl say there is something wrong with the Motorola, > but I have had no problem interchanging among four USB cables and > two wall warts. There is something "wrong" with Motorola phones; you apparently have two chargers from the same vendor that perform the correct magic trick to wake up your phone. > More likely they have a bad/crippled cable, While it's possible to have a bad cable, even good cables exhibit the same problem. > or a Windows PC the lacks the Motorola driver. That part's correct. http://pinouts.ru/CellularPhones-A-N/razrv3_charger_pinout.shtml SignatureBert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | bert@iphouse.com >> There is something "wrong" with Motorola phones; you apparently have > two chargers from the same vendor that perform the correct magic trick > to wake up your phone. > http://pinouts.ru/CellularPhones-A-N/razrv3_charger_pinout.shtml Yep, it is a Motorola defect. My experience indicates that it is not that hard to get a cable that is not crippled. Quoting from the link: "RAZR V3 will not charge by simply supplying 5V through USB (it's possible to use common USB cable for charging if you are using Motorola special PC driver software).". I'll bet most problems are Windows driver based and the cable is just fine. I would think it is fair to say it is way beyond possible; but it is highly likely your cable will work. A cable that doesn't work can easily be replaced with a standard cable. >> I've also read that plugging into a simple powered USB port (like >> those cute automobile cigarette lighter adapters) won't charge a >> Motorola phone either. >> >I charge my V3r with the cable that came with my TomTom. It's not usually the cable that is important, but rather, whether the charger supplies the Razr with whatever signal it needs to know there is a dedicated charger attached rather then a computer or USB hub without proper drivers. >What's XP doing differently? Is XP "wrong" or just different but >within specs? XP doesn't have a Razr driver built in, OSX and some flavours of Linux do. Should Motorola release a driver that meets Microsoft's requirements, Microsoft would likely include it in the catalog, and quite possibly even release it via Windows Update, which would make this whole problem much easier to solve. >I've also read that plugging into a simple powered USB port (like >those cute automobile cigarette lighter adapters) won't charge a >Motorola phone either. This is the crux of the problem, many USB-interfaced decides will charge as soon as any sufficient power supply is available. Some devices (Razr, iPod Touch, etc) do not, and will only charge once they have permission from the USB host (in the form of a valid driver configuration OR a charger that can identify itself as a charger and not just a 5V power source) It's not a bad design, and is required if the device plans on sucking more power then the USB spec permits a device to use without permission, but it's a pain that more cheapo 5V power sources don't emulate the correct signaling. It can be a huge pain when you're traveling if you use your laptop as a charger power source for your Razr and iPod -- You get everything started charging, go to bed, then wake up in the morning with a surprise, your laptop went to sleep and your toys noticed there was no driver available and stopped charging. Ooops. > It can be a huge pain when you're traveling if you use your laptop > as a charger power source for your Razr and iPod -- You get > everything started charging, go to bed, then wake up in the morning > with a surprise, your laptop went to sleep and your toys noticed > there was no driver available and stopped charging. Ooops. I find the whole thing rather annoying; it means that I can't steal a charge from any random powered-up USB port. Also, my phone (a V195) won't charge from a USB port unless it's (the phone) turned on, which I'm sure slows things down considerably and likely means it won't charge at all if I ever let the battery go completely dead. All of this means that I just have to drag along the AC and car chargers whenever I'm on the road. SignatureBert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | bert@iphouse.com >I find the whole thing rather annoying; it means that I can't steal a >charge from any random powered-up USB port. Indeed. The flip side is that Motorola's design won't fry any built-to-the-spec (and not a penny over) USB port. This was once a much larger concern, these days USB's face has changed, we're running more then an occasional mouse on USB, and most systems can provide several times the spec-required minimum amperage. Personally, I just wish Motorola would give users the choice, many other devices have a way to force a charge (Many of Creative's Zen line, for example, only charge if they get a driver connection, but if you set the "lock" switch then they'll charge from any 5V power source) >>What's XP doing differently? Is XP "wrong" or just different but >>within specs? Sorry for butting in but this is wierd.I have an old hp machine with xp and just plugged my razr v3 into it. The xp has just been installed without updates or any software added the the v3 is happily charging > I regularly charge my Motorola phones from both my Toshiba laptop and > my Dell desktop computers. Recently my daughter noticed me doing this [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > reason that she should not download one of the free versions (ver > 4.04) from the internet? Motorola is very annoying this way. On some Windows machines, a driver is actually required to do the charging. John Navas has posted a link to the driver though. On Macs, it just seems to work "Free" software is actually pirated, and god knows what else is included as a "free" bonus. Signature-- Todd H. http://toddh.net/ >> I regularly charge my Motorola phones from both my Toshiba laptop and >> my Dell desktop computers. Recently my daughter noticed me doing this [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > On Macs, it just seems to work I don't this is Motorola's fault, I think this is a Windows thing. Windows seems to like to turn the power off on the USB port when it doesn't recognize the device attached to it (which it won't if it doesn't have a driver), while Macs leave the power on regardless. Someone told me that this was a Windows power management thing, and that you could maybe get it to leave the power on if you turned off power management for the USB port. I no longer have a windows machine to try this on, however, so I have no idea if that's true. Dennis Ferguson >I don't this is Motorola's fault, I think this is a Windows thing. No -- It's neither's "fault", it's simply a matter of how USB works. The USB specification requires that devices connect in a low-power mode (100 mA maximum) and state how much current they need, before switching, with the host's permission, into high-power mode. Since charging the battery draws more then 100mA, Motorola would be in violation of the spec if the phone assumed it could draw as much power as it wanted without permission. In order to ask for permission, you need a valid driver installed. >>I don't this is Motorola's fault, I think this is a Windows thing. > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >In order to ask for permission, you need a valid driver installed. There's nothing to prevent the phone from slow charging at 100 mA if unable to switch into a higher power mode, and bus power may be limited by other devices and/or the host, so I personally think this is at least in part a Motorola handset implementation issue. SignatureBest regards, MOTOROLA WIKI: John Navas <http://cell.wikia.com/wiki/Motorola> > >>I don't this is Motorola's fault, I think this is a Windows thing. > > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > by other devices and/or the host, so I personally think this is at least > in part a Motorola handset implementation issue. Agreed. When I briefly looked into this, I vaguely recall something about the wiring of that connector that kept usb on windows from just working. I'm afraid I don't have time to chase that down, but I believe this discussion took place here or in the cingular newsgroup. Windows must be also partly to blame as well because when I plug my Krzr or Razr into my mac iBook dual USB.... it starts charging. No driver required. I got the tip from another Mac user who wondered what the problem was when I reported my troubles charging on a Windows PC. -- Todd H. http://toddh.net/ >> There's nothing to prevent the phone from slow charging at 100 mA if >> unable to switch into a higher power mode, and bus power may be limited [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >working. I'm afraid I don't have time to chase that down, but I >believe this discussion took place here or in the cingular newsgroup. The problem is that not all Standard-A to Mini-B USB cables are the same -- there are both 5-connection cables and 4-connection cables, and only proper 5-connector cables will work without a special USB driver. <http://pinouts.ru/CellularPhones-A-N/razrv3_charger_pinout.shtml> Standard USB has only 4 connections. Mini USB has 5 connections, the extra connection being the ID pin. <http://pinouts.ru/Slots/USB_pinout.shtml> <http://pinouts.ru/Devices/mini-USB_pinout.shtml> >Windows must be also partly to blame as well because when I plug my >Krzr or Razr into my mac iBook dual USB.... it starts charging. No >driver required. I got the tip from another Mac user who wondered >what the problem was when I reported my troubles charging on a Windows >PC. If anyone is to blame, I'd say it's Motorola for not getting its USB Modem driver into the standard Windows Update process. Consider grief and confusion could have been avoided that way. SignatureBest regards, MOTOROLA WIKI: John Navas <http://cell.wikia.com/wiki/Motorola> >> There's nothing to prevent the phone from slow charging at 100 mA if >> unable to switch into a higher power mode, and bus power may be limited [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >what the problem was when I reported my troubles charging on a Windows >PC. Recent-ish Linux versions also work just fine, as when you plug in the phone the kernel will auto-load the cdc-acm driver and give you a virtual serial device to use the phone as a modem while you're at it. Depending on the OP's particular phone, you might be able to switch the handset into memory card mode for the USB (The L7 can do this). With this, Windows will see the phone as a generic mass storage device like a memory stick so you won't need any special drivers at all, unless you're using Windows 98. Signature-- Michael "Soruk" McConnell Eridani Star System MailStripper - http://www.MailStripper.eu/ - SMTP spam filter Second Number - http://secondnumber.matrixnetwork.co.uk/ > Depending on the OP's particular phone, you might be able to > switch the handset into memory card mode for the USB (The L7 can > do this). With this, Windows will see the phone as a generic mass > storage device like a memory stick so you won't need any special > drivers at all, unless you're using Windows 98. That's great advice IF the OP isn't using anything other than charging the phone but I think switching will stop MPT, BitPim, etc from working until the phone is switched back. Just personal opinion here: Since the current USB drivers are a free download from Motorola with free registration (you need only provide an email addy and user name) and since non-current ones are free from multiple places it makes little sense not to download and install them. If you don't run any phone software that needs the drivers you may decide to do so in the future so there's really no reason not to install the drivers that I can see. SignatureXS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org >> Depending on the OP's particular phone, you might be able to >> switch the handset into memory card mode for the USB (The L7 can [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >decide to do so in the future so there's really no reason not to >install the drivers that I can see. A slightly older USB Driver is downloadable with no registration from <http://direct.motorola.com/hellomoto/nss/driversNplugins.asp> SignatureBest regards, MOTOROLA WIKI: John Navas <http://cell.wikia.com/wiki/Motorola> >A slightly older USB Driver is downloadable with no registration from ><http://direct.motorola.com/hellomoto/nss/driversNplugins.asp> Why bother? WinMe and WinXP both see the phone as a USB drive without benefit of added special drivers, assuming you configure the phone port as USB vs as Modem/Com. I can't see any more of the phone's innards in USB drive mode with a Motorola USB driver than I can with what WinMe and XP provide natively. >>A slightly older USB Driver is downloadable with no registration from >><http://direct.motorola.com/hellomoto/nss/driversNplugins.asp> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >innards in USB drive mode with a Motorola USB driver than I can with >what WinMe and XP provide natively. Because with a non-Moto driver, even if charging works, you can't access it properly with software. There's really no good reason not to install the Moto driver. SignatureBest regards, MOTOROLA WIKI: John Navas <http://cell.wikia.com/wiki/Motorola> >>>A slightly older USB Driver is downloadable with no registration >>>from [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > access it properly with software. There's really no good reason > not to install the Moto driver. Agreed, the exception would be using someone else's computer but not for me, if I'm travelling I carry the charger with me in my suitcase and the car charger lives in the glove box. If the computer is your own the Moto drivers might as well be installed. SignatureXS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org >>>A slightly older USB Driver is downloadable with no registration from >>><http://direct.motorola.com/hellomoto/nss/driversNplugins.asp> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >it properly with software. There's really no good reason not to install >the Moto driver. I can drag and drop anything I can see listed back and forth between my phone and my computer. I think you mean I can't access things like the address book without a different driver that allows access via some software like MPT. That would be true, but then the phone isn't set as a USB device, the phone port has to be set as a modem/com port. > If you don't run any phone software that needs the drivers you may > decide to do so in the future so there's really no reason not to > install the drivers that I can see. Unfortunately, this still means that you can't steal a charge from any random USB port you can find. Those cute cigarette-lighter plugs with powered USB sockets in them for power and charging applications are out of the question too. SignatureBert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | bert@iphouse.com >> If you don't run any phone software that needs the drivers you may >> decide to do so in the future so there's really no reason not to [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Those cute cigarette-lighter plugs with powered USB sockets in them >for power and charging applications are out of the question too. You should be able to in both cases if you have the correct cable, which enables USB charging without a special port driver. See <http://pinouts.ru/CellularPhones-A-N/razrv3_charger_pinout.shtml> SignatureBest regards, MOTOROLA WIKI: John Navas <http://cell.wikia.com/wiki/Motorola> > Windows must be also partly to blame as well because when I plug my > Krzr or Razr into my mac iBook dual USB.... it starts charging. No > driver required. I got the tip from another Mac user who wondered > what the problem was when I reported my troubles charging on a Windows > PC. Imagine that...on a Mac, it just works. Mr. Strat schrieb: >> Windows must be also partly to blame as well because when I plug my >> Krzr or Razr into my mac iBook dual USB.... it starts charging. No [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Imagine that...on a Mac, it just works. Same for Linux btw. > Motorola is very annoying this way. On some Windows machines, a driver > is actually required to do the charging. John Navas has posted a link > to the driver though. > > On Macs, it just seems to work Yet another reason I try to avoid any version of Windows. >> Motorola is very annoying this way. On some Windows machines, a driver >> is actually required to do the charging. John Navas has posted a link [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Yet another reason I try to avoid any version of Windows. You could always go back to DOS or APPLESOFT and avoid all those nasty graphical user interfaces. Think how much fun it is to program in basic. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > You could always go back to DOS or APPLESOFT and avoid all those nasty > graphical user interfaces. Think how much fun it is to program in > basic. DOS I could handle. But Windows sucks...OS X doesn't. >> Motorola is very annoying this way. On some Windows machines, a driver >> is actually required to do the charging. John Navas has posted a link [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Yet another reason I try to avoid any version of Windows. It has nothing to do with Windows per se; it has to do with the USB specification. If another OS will let the phone charge from a USB port without first checking to see if it requires over 100 milliamps then that OS has improperly implemented the USB specification. I sympathize to an extent with those who want their computers to operate the way they want them to operate, but if you want a battery charger; buy a battery charger. Without the safeguards built into the USB spec you could destroy a USB port. That's never good, and it's especially bad if the port is on your motherboard. >>> Motorola is very annoying this way. On some Windows machines, a driver >>> is actually required to do the charging. John Navas has posted a link [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >USB spec you could destroy a USB port. That's never good, and it's >especially bad if the port is on your motherboard. Next time please read the entire thread before jumping in. The real problem here is Moto's failure to get the driver into the Windows driver package and update process. If it had done so, there would be no issue whatsoever. SignatureBest regards, MOTOROLA WIKI: John Navas <http://cell.wikia.com/wiki/Motorola> >>>> Motorola is very annoying this way. On some Windows machines, a driver >>>> is actually required to do the charging. John Navas has posted a link [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >Windows driver package and update process. If it had done so, there >would be no issue whatsoever. So, do you think this is a reason to avoid any version of Windows? That's quite obviously what I was responding to. threads evolve. Please try to keep up. >>>>> Motorola is very annoying this way. On some Windows machines, a driver >>>>> is actually required to do the charging. John Navas has posted a link [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > >So, do you think this is a reason to avoid any version of Windows? No. >That's quite obviously what I was responding to. threads evolve. >Please try to keep up. Your discourtesy is uncalled for, and your suggestion that the USB spec somehow protects USB ports from damage is just plain silly. What the power spec does is ensure fair power allocation among USB devices, nothing more, nothing less, and that's not an issue with a single device on a USB port. SignatureBest regards, MOTOROLA WIKI: John Navas <http://cell.wikia.com/wiki/Motorola> >>>>>> Motorola is very annoying this way. On some Windows machines, a driver >>>>>> is actually required to do the charging. John Navas has posted a link [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > >Your discourtesy is uncalled for,... It was no less called for than your own "Next time please read the entire thread before jumping in." If you can't take it; don't dish it out. This is, after all, Usenet, not a tea social. Act as you wish to be treated or else brace yourself for a response in kind, preferably sans whining when it happens. >...and your suggestion that the USB spec somehow protects USB >ports from damage is just plain silly. What the power spec does is >ensure fair power allocation among USB devices, nothing more, >nothing less, and that's not an issue with a single device on a USB port. Yes, I misspoke about how ports are protected by driver software and you caught it, but no, the USB spec does NOT "ensure fair power allocation." It simply determines whether enough power is left to power whatever is being plugged in, ASSUMING the device being plugged in is not defective and can communicate its needs and wait for pewrmission before powering itself up fully using port power. It's first come first served, not "fair allocation" among all devices present. And if the device is defective and just jumps in there with a short across the power pins, or is shorted deeper within its circuitry so it doesn't present an initial short, but does so after receiving permission to power itself up, then you've got a problem - potential port damage - if the protection circuitry doesn't do its job properly. Now if you can honestly assure me that protection circuitry ALWAYS functions properly, you'll be the first to do so. That's how a single device can damage a USB port, which you say isn't an issue for a single device. Make that a single PROPERLY FUNCTIONING device and I agree with you. >>Your discourtesy is uncalled for,... > >It was no less called for than your own "Next time please read the >entire thread before jumping in." What I wrote was a polite request. It was pretty clear that you hadn't read the entire thread. >If you can't take it; don't dish it >out. This is, after all, Usenet, not a tea social. That's no excuse for discourtesy. >Act as you wish >to be treated or else brace yourself for a response in kind, >preferably sans whining when it happens. That's pretty childish. Are you this rude face-to-face, or only in cyberspace? SignatureBest regards, MOTOROLA WIKI: John Navas <http://cell.wikia.com/wiki/Motorola> >>>Your discourtesy is uncalled for,... >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > >Are you this rude face-to-face, or only in cyberspace? Are you this whiney face-to-face or only on Usenet? >>Are you this rude face-to-face, or only in cyberspace? > >Are you this whiney face-to-face or only on Usenet? I thought so, but thanks for the confirmation. SignatureBest regards, MOTOROLA WIKI: John Navas <http://cell.wikia.com/wiki/Motorola> > Are you this whiney face-to-face or only on Usenet? Well, he's a dick in the newsgroups. I'd like to meet him in person so that I could tell him he's a retard to his face. >> Are you this whiney face-to-face or only on Usenet? > >Well, he's a dick in the newsgroups. I'd like to meet him in person so >that I could tell him he's a retard to his face. I wish everyone who feels that way would just ignore him so as not to add to the noise level he brings to the group... as I plan to from now on. >>> Are you this whiney face-to-face or only on Usenet? >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >add to the noise level he brings to the group... as I plan to from now >on. Good for you. Seriously. If only others were so sensible. SignatureBest regards, MOTOROLA WIKI: John Navas <http://cell.wikia.com/wiki/Motorola> > So, do you think this is a reason to avoid any version of Windows? > That's quite obviously what I was responding to. threads evolve. No, there are many reasons I avoid Windows for personal use: Ugly Pitiful security Prone to lockups And that's just three >> So, do you think this is a reason to avoid any version of Windows? >> That's quite obviously what I was responding to. threads evolve. > >No, there are many reasons I avoid Windows for personal use: > >Ugly Purely in the eye of the beholder. Personally I choose an OS for its usability, useful features, for the software available to run on it and for the development tools available to develop software for it. So you'll not get me to defend Windows as pretty, but neither is it ugly. There are some ugly programs written for it, but that's true of any OS. Now Vista seems to be an attempt to add useless beauty and other gee whiz visual appeal and most I know who have tried it have "upgraded" back to WinXP. But then your own OS X has nothing more to recommend it in the ugly/pretty area, nor do the assorted Linux shells... but when it comes to OS X, the choice of software to run on it and the development tools available are severely limited vs Windows. Forget the assorted Linux distros. Maybe if I wanted to spend more time being my own brain surgeon vs getting something useful done, but otherwise, with some exceptions, Linux is more of a religion than an OS the masses will ever embrace. Also I'm not even remotely attracted to Apple because some commercial sings about how "she comes in colors" or is "a new soul." Yael Naïm is hot, but that new Macbook Air is underpowered, under featured, and waaaaay overpriced. No wonder Apple doesn't advertise features or functionality. >Pitiful security Hmmm, and how many security updates have there been to OS X? You'll find out just how secure your Apple is when the virus writers think there's enough Apples out there to bother writing viruses for them. Have you ever seen that classic demo of how fission works using a zillion mouse traps set up an inch or so apart all across a basketball court with ping pong balls on them that get tossed in the air when they go off? Toss one extra ball into their midst and the whole mess goes up in a few seconds. Now put a hundred such traps evenly spaced across a full basketball court and toss a ball out there and you'll be luck to hit one let alone start a reaction is you do. That's why Apples don't have the same problem with viruses as Windows systems do. There aren't enough to generate the critical mass needed to sustain an Apple based virus. That's changing now that Win boxes and Apples use the same CPU. Brace yourself! >Prone to lockups > >And that's just three Pot, meet kettle. Many have little nice to say about the Thoth news reader you're using with OS X. The several folks I know with OS X machines are quite unhappy with the choice of news readers, email and other software in general, but they're happy in knowing they're sticking it to Bill Gates and paying something like a 50% premium (more like 100% if it's a MacBook Air) for the hardware to do so. I'm glad you're happy. ;-) > Purely in the eye of the beholder. Windows is just too "in your face." > Now Vista seems to be an attempt to add useless beauty and other gee > whiz visual appeal and most I know who have tried it have "upgraded" > back to WinXP. If you thought XP sucked, Vista takes "suck" to a whole new level. > But then your own OS X has nothing more to recommend it in the > ugly/pretty area, nor do the assorted Linux shells... but when it [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > some exceptions, Linux is more of a religion than an OS the masses > will ever embrace. Side-by-side, OS X is far more attractive visually than any version of Windows. > Also I'm not even remotely attracted to Apple because some commercial > sings about how "she comes in colors" or is "a new soul." Yael Naïm > is hot, but that new Macbook Air is underpowered, under featured, and > waaaaay overpriced. No wonder Apple doesn't advertise features or > functionality. Did Apple say the Macbook Air was for everybody? > Hmmm, and how many security updates have there been to OS X? How many OS X viruses/spyware? *ZERO* since it was introduced in 2001. How many for Windows? sh.t, I don't know that our numbering system goes that high. > You'll find out just how secure your Apple is when the virus writers > think there's enough Apples out there to bother writing viruses for [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > to sustain an Apple based virus. That's changing now that Win boxes > and Apples use the same CPU. Brace yourself! You Wintards never seem to get it. It has nothing to do with market share. It has everything to do with how the operating system is designed. With OS X, the default user is not logged in as an admin with root access. Get a clue! And it also has nothing to do with the processor. > Pot, meet kettle. Many have little nice to say about the Thoth news > reader you're using with OS X. The several folks I know with OS X > machines are quite unhappy with the choice of news readers, email and > other software in general, but they're happy in knowing they're > sticking it to Bill Gates and paying something like a 50% premium > (more like 100% if it's a MacBook Air) for the hardware to do so. I've had no problems with Thoth (any version). Office 2008 is working fine as are all of my other applications. Try comparing apples to apples (no pun intended) before regurgitating the old myth that Apple products are more expensive. Compared to your e-Machine, yeah, they are more expensive. Todd H. says... > Motorola is very annoying this way. On some Windows machines, > a driver is actually required to do the charging. John Navas > has posted a link to the driver though. > On Macs, it just seems to work What about dedicated (i.e.-dumb) USB chargers, like AC-powered chargers or something like the Minty charger? Will Moto's work with them? I ask because this issue has come up concerning iPods and other MP3 players - some will work with *some* dedicated MP3 chargers, but you never quite know which match will work. And in researching this in preparation for building a charger, I came across some forum threads that may explain it. As others have said, there's normally a negotiation process on a USB connection that determines how much power the device can draw from the port. It appears Windows insists on following that convention, whereas Macs just let her rip. But a dedicated charger isn't going to be doing any negotiating, or even communicating. Until recently, there was no standard on what a dedicated charger should do with it's USB data pins, which are the two inside pins on a type A connector. But in March of 2007, there appeared a new USB standard that specifically addressed the port power issue for hosts, hubs, and even dedicated chargers, as well as the devices that connect to them. Now, a dedicated charger is supposed to *short* the data lines together, and that alone identifies it as a dumb charger, which the device may draw power from at will, and without negotiating anything. The problem is that now downstream devices are starting to *require* the shorted pins, and if they don't find them shorted, and can't actually connect and negotiate, they refuse to charge, which technically is what the standard says they should do. As time goes on, all dedicated chargers will have those pins shorted, but virtually none of the older ones did, so it's gonna be a can of worms for a few years. But eventually, *any* dedicated charger should work for every USB device. Anyway, the grizzly details of *exactly* how power consumption is supposed to work on USB can be found here: http://www.usb.org/developers/devclass_docs/batt_charging_1_ 0.zip In theory, newer Motorola phones should work with newer dedicated chargers, even those of other brands. It will be interesting to see if they do. >Todd H. says... > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >chargers or something like the Minty charger? Will Moto's work >with them? Yes if the cable is wired correctly; no if it isn't. >As others have said, there's normally a negotiation process on a >USB connection that determines how much power the device can draw >from the port. It appears Windows insists on following that >convention, whereas Macs just let her rip. But a dedicated >charger isn't going to be doing any negotiating, or even >communicating. I explained the problem, which isn't USB negotiation, earlier in this thread. >Until recently, there was no standard on what a dedicated charger >should do with it's USB data pins, which are the two inside pins >on a type A connector. Mini USB has one (and only one) extra pin as compared to Standard USB. SignatureBest regards, MOTOROLA WIKI: John Navas <http://cell.wikia.com/wiki/Motorola> > I ask because this issue has come up concerning iPods and other > MP3 players - some will work with *some* dedicated MP3 chargers, > but you never quite know which match will work. And in > researching this in preparation for building a charger, I came > across some forum threads that may explain it. Since the third generation (2003), iPods have used a proprietary connector for charging. One end may be USB, but the iPod end is specific only to iPods (and the iPhone). |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.