 |
 | 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 / Providers / Sprint PCS / May 2008Unofficial Sprint Mogul ROM 3.49, WM 6.1, threaded SMS
http://www.sprintusers.com/forum/showthread.php?t=162980 If you don't have a RAR extractor, try open source: http://peazip.sourceforge.net/ > http://www.sprintusers.com/forum/showthread.php?t=162980 > > If you don't have a RAR extractor, try open source: > > http://peazip.sourceforge.net/ Is there anyway you can tell me if it works with http://m.tvguide.com ? The last "official" ROM for the Mogul does not. TIA Roger: Sorry, just tried and got "The page contains errors and cannot be displayed." Bob > http://www.sprintusers.com/forum/showthread.php?t=162980 > > If you don't have a RAR extractor, try open source: > > http://peazip.sourceforge.net/ Is there anyway you can tell me if it works with http://m.tvguide.com ? The last "official" ROM for the Mogul does not. TIA Thanks for the info and Bummer. That is what my current version of the ROM for my Mogul does. I found a way around it but it involves using http://www.google.com/gwt/n and then saving the URL it comes up with. > Roger: > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > TIA > Is there anyway you can tell me if it works with http://m.tvguide.com ? > > The last "official" ROM for the Mogul does not. This issue you're having still pisses me off because I haven't figured it out! ;-) My HTC Wizard, when running either WM5 or 6 has no problem with the m.tvguide site, and I can't imagine how the browser on the Mogul (IE mobile) should be different than any other Windows Mobile device. Just a few questions to hopefully try and sort this out: 1. Does the page display properly if you hit it from WiFi? (This would make Sprint the culprit if it works from WiFi but not from a Sprint data connection) 2. What user agent does the phone report? I assume from your prior postings you don't need any help figuring it out, but if you need a quickie way to check it, go here: http://showip.net/check_user_agent.php and it'll be displayed. (This is probably not a very useful troubleshooting avenue in this case- I just tried m.tvguide.com from my desktop and the mobile version loads fine- I was thinking perhaps tvguide.com didn't allow access from a desktop browser and was confused by the Mogul's UA, but since it displays fine in IE 7, it doesn't seem to care what accesses it. I was even able to log in on the desktop with my mobile phone number to get my area-customized listings!) But, just in case, the UA on my Wizard is: "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows CE; IEMobile 6.9)." Is the Mogul's different? It's the little annoyances like these that really get under my skin! Hopefully, we'll get this fixed one way or the other! ;-) > > Is there anyway you can tell me if it works with http://m.tvguide.com ? > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > the m.tvguide site, and I can't imagine how the browser on the Mogul (IE > mobile) should be different than any other Windows Mobile device. The "HTC Wizard." is the only PPC I've seen with real "Stereo" speakers but I'm sure there are more. > Just a few questions to hopefully try and sort this out: > > 1. Does the page display properly if you hit it from WiFi? (This would make > Sprint the culprit if it works from WiFi but not from a Sprint data > connection) It doesn't matter how the connection is made it still comes up with the error ""The page contains errors and cannot be displayed." > 2. What user agent does the phone report? I assume from your prior postings > you don't need any help figuring it out, but if you need a quickie way to [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows CE; IEMobile 6.9)." Is the Mogul's > different? The Mogul with the current ROM is: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows CE; IEMobile 7.6) Sprint:PPC6800 But, I've seen a "Touch" with "IEMobile 7.6" that works with m.tvguide.com so there is something else going on here. But, I've also seen a WM6 device that comes up with IEMobile 7.7 and it doesn't work with m.tvguide.com either. > It's the little annoyances like these that really get under my skin! > Hopefully, we'll get this fixed one way or the other! ;-) I would hope so but until then I know a way around the problem. >> Is there anyway you can tell me if it works with http://m.tvguide.com ? >> >> The last "official" ROM for the Mogul does not. >This issue you're having still pisses me off because I haven't figured it >out! ;-) My HTC Wizard, when running either WM5 or 6 has no problem with >the m.tvguide site, and I can't imagine how the browser on the Mogul (IE >mobile) should be different than any other Windows Mobile device. WTF don't you use a different browser? Is the mogul not capable of running user installed applications? > >> Is there anyway you can tell me if it works with http://m.tvguide.com ? > >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > WTF don't you use a different browser? Is the mogul not capable of running > user installed applications? We had this discussion on the "tvguide on your Sprint Mogul" thread and I'll repeat myself. 1. I can get "m.tvguide.com" to work if I go to the following site first: http://www.google.com/gwt/n 2. There is no other browser for WM6 that can do FTP and HTTP from what I've seen. 3. I'm still waiting for skyfire: (from a post on the "tvguide on your Sprint Mogul" thread) BTW after seeing page 99 of the May 2008 LAPTOP magazine I think I'll try the browser at: http://www.skyfire.com/ BTW I have heard the browser that comes with WM6.1 will have new features so I'm willing to take a look at it. > We had this discussion on the "tvguide on your Sprint Mogul" thread and I'll > repeat myself. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > 2. There is no other browser for WM6 that can do FTP and HTTP from what > I've seen. Netfront does, I believe, but it's expensive ($30) sluggish, and overkill for rendering a WAP site like TV Guide. > 3. I'm still waiting for skyfire: (from a post on the "tvguide on your > Sprint Mogul" thread) > BTW after seeing page 99 of the May 2008 LAPTOP magazine I think I'll try > the browser at: > http://www.skyfire.com/ I just got my invitation to the beta last week. It's not a "real" browser, IMO. It's a viewer application that works off a special server maintained by Skyfire. (Much like Opera does for Opera Mini.) The rendering is done at Skyfire HQ and the "image" of what they render is sent to your phone. This means everything you do on the browser <insert ominous music here> funnels through their servers. For the less "Big Brother" sensitive (like myself) it also means when the server is down, Skyfire won't run. It's also painfully slow, but is the only WinMo browser I've tried that plays TV from www.hulu.com, so I can grab a "Man From UNCLE" fix (albeit at 2fps!) from just about anywhere! ;-) > BTW I have heard the browser that comes with WM6.1 will have new > features so I'm willing to take a look at it. New features, yes (zoom in/zoom out most notably), but the same old rendering engine under the hood, from what I've read. A real overhaul is not planned until WM7, when the browser will be replaced with an IE6- compatible one. >> On Wed, 14 May 2008 11:01:47 -0600, Todd Allcock ><elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >running >> user installed applications? >We had this discussion on the "tvguide on your Sprint Mogul" thread and I'll >repeat myself. >1. I can get "m.tvguide.com" to work if I go to the following site first: > http://www.google.com/gwt/n >2. There is no other browser for WM6 that can do FTP and HTTP from what >I've seen. irrelevent. 1) You don't need FTP to read tv guide. 2) they all do HTTP, it is the basic protocol for retrieving web pages. Do continue to have the insane notion that one can't have multiple browsers installed at the same time? > >> On Wed, 14 May 2008 11:01:47 -0600, Todd Allcock > ><elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > irrelevent. 1) You don't need FTP to read tv guide. 2) they all do HTTP, > it is the basic protocol for retrieving web pages. True, but I can use FTP to get files from my home computer when HTTP doesn't work with certain file names. > Do continue to have the insane notion that one can't have multiple browsers > installed at the same time? Just because I have to use a bookmark to view m.tvguide.com is no reason to add a second browser to my Mogul. > irrelevent. 1) You don't need FTP to read tv guide. 2) they all do HTTP, > it is the basic protocol for retrieving web pages. > > Do continue to have the insane notion that one can't have multiple browsers > installed at the same time? I think it's more of a case where Roger doesn't see the need of installing an extra browser just to render one website (that he's managed to workaround anyway.) At one time I had five browsers on my phone, yet still used IE Mobile 95+% of the time, so I'm down to three- the included IEM, Opera Mini for the occasional site IE has trouble with, and Skyfire, which, unless it's improved greatly by the time it's out of beta, will be uninstalled the day they start charging for it! >> irrelevent. 1) You don't need FTP to read tv guide. 2) they all do HTTP, >> it is the basic protocol for retrieving web pages. >> >> Do continue to have the insane notion that one can't have multiple >browsers >> installed at the same time? >I think it's more of a case where Roger doesn't see the need of installing >an extra browser just to render one website (that he's managed to >workaround anyway.) and why solve a problem when you can just whine about it? > >I think it's more of a case where Roger doesn't see the need of installing > >an extra browser just to render one website (that he's managed to > >workaround anyway.) > > and why solve a problem when you can just whine about it? Installing a new browser doesn't solve the problem as much as it sidesteps it. Other models of phone, running essentially the same browser don't have the same problem. I find that interesting. If it won't render a simple mobile site, who knows what else it can't render. >> >I think it's more of a case where Roger doesn't see the need of >installing >> >an extra browser just to render one website (that he's managed to >> >workaround anyway.) >> >> and why solve a problem when you can just whine about it? >Installing a new browser doesn't solve the problem as much as it sidesteps >it. It solves it. There is no sidesteping. >Other models of phone, running essentially the same browser don't have >the same problem. I find that interesting. not really. >If it won't render a simple mobile site, who knows what else it can't render. Who knows? Who cares? Maybe you should write a book about it. Devote the rest of your life to catalog every single f.cking web application that doesn't work on one particular version of one particular browser on one particular system runing one particular operating system. I don't see what the problem is. If you have one website that your main browser can't handle, yet you have a different browser that'll handle it then the problem is solved. Completely. Make a note to check future versions of your main browser, perhaps, but get on with your f.cking life. Do you see people complaining that they can't find any decent cars that can do 0-60 in under 5 seconds, seat ten, get 50mpg, and haul the contents of a 4000 square foot house? No. There are specialized vehicles and nobody is stupid enough to expect one particular model to do everything. Ditto for web browsers. > >Installing a new browser doesn't solve the problem as much as it sidesteps > >it. > It solves it. There is no sidesteping. Again, I would agree IF all phones running IE Mobile exhibited the problem, but they don't. Just a very small number. Where I come from, that's called a "bug." Ignoring the bug by using different software isn't fixing the bug. That's a sidestep, IMO. > >Other models of phone, running essentially the same browser don't have > >the same problem. I find that interesting. > not really. You mean YOU don't find it interesting. Fair enough. Your lack of interest is noted, yet you're apparently interested enough to complain about Roger not following your advice, or anyone trying to deduce the problem. > >If it won't render a simple mobile site, who knows what else it can't render. > Who knows? Who cares? Maybe you should write a book about it. Devote > the rest of your life to catalog every single f.cking web application that > doesn't work on one particular version of one particular browser on one > particular system runing one particular operating system. But that's just it- THAT'S not the case if you've read the entire (apparently uninteresting) thread- the SAME VERSION of the SAME BROWSER on the SAME OS behaves differently on different models of phone. Again, where I grew up, we call that a bug. > I don't see what the problem is. If you have one website that your main browser > can't handle, yet you have a different browser that'll handle it then the > problem is solved. Completely. True. Arguably, he could also just bin the phone, switch providers, and buy a new one. Alternatively, he could forsake all electronics and technonogy, build a log cabin in the woods, and live off the land. There are many solutions- and yours is certainly an easy one. (Roger's was also easy- bookmark the Google reformatted page and use that, which is also a sidestep.) > Make a note to check future versions of your > main browser, perhaps, but get on with your f.cking life. Christ, it's just an intellectual exercise, not my life's work. I enjoy the odd bit of troubleshooting and problem solving- it keeps the mind sharp. Some people play sudoku... One evening recently when I had nothing better to do, I tried to figure out why my son's recently-upgraded-to-Vista PC no longer played dialog sounds in two of his RPG games (from the same vendor- ironically Microsoft), but still played music and sound effects even though ALL game sounds (those that worked and those that didn't) were just 128k bitrate MP3s, and all played just fine under XP. The dialog clips that wouldn't play in the game also wouldn't play in WMP. To troubleshoot, I e-mailed a few to myself and discovered they'd play in WMP in EVERY other PC in the house- whether XP or Vista and even on my PPC phone. I played with different audio drivers, adding/removing codecs, analyzed with GSpot and graphedit for awhile, but by hour #3, I threw in the towel and sidestepped. (Even I will only waste so much time on a purely intellectual exercise!) I sidestepped by batch re-encoding all of the dialog files for both games to .wma and back to .mp3 and they now worked- whatever the PC didn't like about original files was obliterated by the re-encoding.. I saved the original versions in case I ever want to "reopen the case" (unlikely unless we run into more .mp3s or games that refuse to play.) > Do you see people complaining that they can't find any decent cars that can do > 0-60 in under 5 seconds, seat ten, get 50mpg, and haul the contents of a 4000 > square foot house? > > No. There are specialized vehicles and nobody is stupid enough to > expect one particular model to do everything. Ditto for web browsers. Yes, but if your red sports car did 0-60 in 5 seconds, and my blue one with the same body, engine, and transmission, did it in 20, I'd consider mine defective. The issue isn't that "IE Mobile" itself can't render a particular WAP page, but that HIS copy of it can't, where virtually all others, older, newer and the same, can. At the risk of repeating myself, that's a bug, and Microsoft, HTC, and/or Sprint shouldn't be let off the hook just because an alternate browser is available. Where we ARE in agreement is that the issue is only worth so much time worrying about. We just differ in how MUCH time! Sadly, you and I have spent/wasted more time debating the merits of it than anyone has spent trying to troubleshoot it. If Roger is still reading, at this point, I'm drawing a blank, and since I have no device it doesn't work on, I'm unable to troubleshoot it further. At this point, I'd contact Sprint and HTC and put the ball in their courts (knowing full well that in all likelyhood nothing will be done about it, particularly since HTC's usual bug-fix advice is "buy the next model.") > If Roger is still reading, at this point, I'm drawing a blank, and since I > have no device it doesn't work on, I'm unable to troubleshoot it further. > At this point, I'd contact Sprint and HTC and put the ball in their courts > (knowing full well that in all likelyhood nothing will be done about it, > particularly since HTC's usual bug-fix advice is "buy the next model.") Please give up on Al. I've been through that "New Browser" routine with him before and there is no stopping him. As for my Mogul. I know someone that says he has m.tvguide.com working on his Mogul along with other things like WM6.1 so I'm going to try everything he did. On May 14, 10:35 pm, Todd Allcock <eleccon...@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote: > At one time I had five browsers... I'm down to three... [1, 2] and Skyfire, which, > unless it's improved greatly by the time it's out of beta, will be uninstalled the > day they start charging for it! So it dosent work? It looks interesting, but I'm skeptical. Todd W. > > At one time I had five browsers... I'm down to three... [1, 2] and > > Skyfire, which, > > unless it's improved greatly by the time it's out of beta, will be > > uninstalled the > > day they start charging for it! > So it dosent work? It looks interesting, but I'm skeptical. No, it works, but it's slow, takes forever to start up (checks to see if the Skyfire server is up and connects to it) and is a little akward to use. (Tapping on a link when zoomed out zooms you in rather than selects it, even if the link/page was readable when zoomed out.) The flash support is nice, but it's certainly my browser of last resort rather than first choice (which, despite all of it's faults, is still IE Mobile.) > http://www.sprintusers.com/forum/showthread.php?t=162980 > > If you don't have a RAR extractor, try open source: > > http://peazip.sourceforge.net/ I found something interesting today. It says: "UPDATE: It looks like we may have jumped the gun with this one. It's come to our attention that this is not an official ROM leak, but rather a cooked homebrew ROM put together from an official Kaiser WM6 build." Source: http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2008/02/01/new-sprint-mogul-rom-leaks-with-window s-mobile-61/ |
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.