Related
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/27589/GDC_Microsoft_Announces_XNA_Game_Studio_40.php
^it's only a matter of time before you l337 ha><ors will find a way to customize EVERYTHING on WP7S. i got a lot of confidence in all of you cookers.
personally i'm really excited to see what you guys will come up with, not just the standard offerings that OEMs will give us.
if you thinking cooking ROMs now is l337... just wait til you start truly diving into VB and using real powerhouse computer languages to bring a new look to the new phones.
i am already requesting this:
please, som1 'cook' up a LCARs star trek TNG UI complete w/sound fx =). i think the "tricorder" is no longer sci-fi. it's REAL and it's ON
I must have missed the memo when VB became "1337"
it's a mean to an end =P. a tool. ultimately it's l337 ha><ors on here will figure a way around the restrictions and put in their own UI designs =). i don't doubt it. it'll simply be a matter of time and figuring out the BIOS portions. these phones have like a BIOS type stuff like PCs don't they?:
JediFonger said:
if you thinking cooking ROMs now is l337... just wait til you start truly diving into VB and using real powerhouse computer languages to bring a new look to the new phones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry, is this VB as in "VisualBasic" or something else that is abbreviated to "VB"? Because I'm really not recognising that as a description of VisualBasic.
JediFonger said:
it's a mean to an end =P. a tool. ultimately it's l337 ha><ors on here will figure a way around the restrictions and put in their own UI designs =). i don't doubt it. it'll simply be a matter of time and figuring out the BIOS portions. these phones have like a BIOS type stuff like PCs don't they?:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah, cool, so you're just giving us textual diarrhea and don't really have a clue what you're on about?
Cheers for the link, anyway.
Shasarak said:
Sorry, is this VB as in "VisualBasic" or something else that is abbreviated to "VB"? Because I'm really not recognising that as a description of VisualBasic.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
may be typo,
I think is VS (Visual studio )
But why XNA don't support VB.net?
elyl, every1 asks me all the time the same question IRL . muhahaha
i think i'm referring to the whole software development package in general. i still use 'old terms' like VisualBasic to refer to the whole 2008 .net C#, etc.etc.etc. and all new languages that are used =P
WP7 is going to support .NET and Silverlight. All managed code so they'll limitations to what you can do. On the brightside that also means they'll be limitations to how much a program can mess up your device lol.
XNA 3.1 doesn't support VB through VS.NET, but you logically, you should be able to use VB for XNA in some fasion, considering it all goes to CLR anyways.
This post is retarded though. WM6.5 had already had access to .NET CF which is alot more complex than the .NET Framework they are exposing to WM7. Where WM7 wins is with Silverlight and XNA. But then again, even both of those frameworks rely on exactly what pieces of the .NET Framework they make available.
If WM7 programming is anything like the Zune HD, expect pure failure. Zune HD SDK is nothing but an embarssment to Microsoft and developers who even want to code with it. I can't imagine Microsoft would make a similar move with WM7, but if they do, Android and iPhone, hell even Palm will have a lead.
Only time can tell, and that time is in a few day. The Beta SDK will be released to MIX Attendees, TAP Members and MSDN Subscribers come monday/tuesday. Expect next week to be a huge week in the development and potential for success of WM7.
cohowap said:
Only time can tell, and that time is in a few day. The Beta SDK will be released to MIX Attendees, TAP Members and MSDN Subscribers come monday/tuesday. Expect next week to be a huge week in the development and potential for success of WM7.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not that I don't believe you (it makes sense) but where'd you hear that?
JediFonger said:
i still use 'old terms' like VisualBasic to refer to the whole 2008 .net C#, etc.etc.etc. and all new languages that are used =P
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
..Don't
Just skimming the news. Anyone know (links please) otherwise than these claims ?
http://www.knowyourcell.com/news/1219326/windows_8_to_be_the_windows_phone_7_apollo_update.html
Source ^
Text:
Jan 25, 2012
"Renowned blogger and editor of Russian website Mobile-Review has let slip that the Windows 8 update we're looking forward to may actually be codenamed Windows Phone Apollo.
Eldar posted a tweet saying, 'Do u know that windows phone 8 os is special? May be we even dont see word phone here but that's apollo and oct2012'
This was quickly followed by a post stating Windows Phone 7 apps won't be compatible with Windows 8:
'WP8 os isn't compatible with wp7 on app level (u need to rewrite all apps). Thats another os core with metro ui...'
Just what is Mutazin suggesting here?
Will we see a separate mobile OS called Windows Phone 8, or will that be Windows Phone 7 - but a newer version?
Also, Nvidia's CEO mentioned last year that Windows Phone 7 apps would work natively on Windows 8.
Although Eldar Murtazin is very often correct with his predictions, he sometimes is way off the mark. We sincerely hope he's wrong about Windows Phone 7 apps not working on Windows 8.
After all, there are very few spectacular ones our there - surely Microsoft wouldn't want to start again?"
If it's better than windows Phone 7 then that would be great, but if it's crapy then no. I can already see disaster with people having to re-write and re-buy apps. I don't know about MS now days, some one over there must be hitting the crack pipe pretty hard.
Eldar is a moron. It has been outright stated by two much more competent sources that wp7 apps would work on windows 8.
z33dev33l said:
Eldar is a moron. It has been outright stated by two much more competent sources that wp7 apps would work on windows 8.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok, cool, but did you forget the links ?
Nope, no need to dig from a mobile device. Both Nvidia and a Microsoft rep said that it'd be done. NVIDIA stated it outright, and Microsoft said that you'd be able to exit a game on your phone and pick up where you left off on your windows 8 enabled PC. I am interested in seeing how games with accelerometer controls transition or if that will require further support from the dev. Only time will tell.
Eldar was speaking ill of Mango 4 months before the beta was leaked, he's an analyst, if he's right, he predicted the future. If he's wrong, well he's not a fortune teller, his industry is a joke.
ohgood said:
Ok, cool, but did you forget the links ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
z33dev33l said:
Nope, no need to dig from a mobile device. Both Nvidia and a Microsoft rep said that it'd be done. NVIDIA stated it outright, and Microsoft said that you'd be able to exit a game on your phone and pick up where you left off on your windows 8 enabled PC. I am interested in seeing how games with accelerometer controls transition or if that will require further support from the dev. Only time will tell.
Eldar was speaking ill of Mango 4 months before the beta was leaked, he's an analyst, if he's right, he predicted the future. If he's wrong, well he's not a fortune teller, his industry is a joke.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Right here is the NVIDIA link --http://www.winrumors.com/nvidia-ceo-claims-windows-phone-7-apps-will-run-on-windows-8/
(date is obviously old. This new rumour in the OP's post is recent. So can't say if this link still holds the same value)
Morons will be morons.
Think about it this way wp7 marketplace is barely catching up to likes of android and ios. Why do you think any developers would bother redoing the apps for wp8. Paid apps maybe but not free apps so MS would be starting almost from scratch
z33dev33l said:
Nope, no need to dig from a mobile device. Both Nvidia and a Microsoft rep said that it'd be done. NVIDIA stated it outright, and Microsoft said that you'd be able to exit a game on your phone and pick up where you left off on your windows 8 enabled PC. I am interested in seeing how games with accelerometer controls transition or if that will require further support from the dev. Only time will tell.
Eldar was speaking ill of Mango 4 months before the beta was leaked, he's an analyst, if he's right, he predicted the future. If he's wrong, well he's not a fortune teller, his industry is a joke.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats a big ass dream. Entirely plausible, but very unlikely to come from Microsoft.
Sent from my Nexus S using Tapatalk
Am I misreading or is everyone else.
NVidia and Microsoft said Windows Phone 7 apps will be natively compatible with Windows 8 the PC OS.
What Eldar is suggesting is "WP8 os isn't compatible with wp7 on app level". Honestly, that would be the most ridiculous move MS could make in the whole WP existence.
That would be so stupid that I refuse to believe it. Unless WP8 had to run WP7 in some kind of sideloaded enviroment and even then why would MS scrap and start over again?
nicksti said:
Am I misreading or is everyone else.
NVidia and Microsoft said Windows Phone 7 apps will be natively compatible with Windows 8 the PC OS.
What Eldar is suggesting is "WP8 os isn't compatible with wp7 on app level". Honestly, that would be the most ridiculous move MS could make in the whole WP existence.
That would be so stupid that I refuse to believe it. Unless WP8 had to run WP7 in some kind of sideloaded enviroment and even then why would MS scrap and start over again?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Windows Phone 7 development uses XAML from Silver Light. Microsoft is dumping Silver Light. Perhaps Eldar misunderstood and thought they were getting rid of XAML and the development tools of Visual Studio 2010 for Windows Phone 8.
http://everythingexpress.wordpress.com/2011/11/17/news-microsoft-kills-silverlight/
Also, it is possible that the apps will all need to be retargeted and recompiled to take advantage of any OS benefits of Windows Phone 8. This was true of Mango to get the fast resume. All a dev needed to do is upgrade the SDK. Change the target platform in the project. Then rebuild. Done.
nicksti said:
Am I misreading or is everyone else.
NVidia and Microsoft said Windows Phone 7 apps will be natively compatible with Windows 8 the PC OS.
What Eldar is suggesting is "WP8 os isn't compatible with wp7 on app level". Honestly, that would be the most ridiculous move MS could make in the whole WP existence.
That would be so stupid that I refuse to believe it. Unless WP8 had to run WP7 in some kind of sideloaded enviroment and even then why would MS scrap and start over again?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm....Windows Mobile? Besides its not like they would be losing much by starting over again.
Sent from my Nexus S using Tapatalk
vetvito said:
Hmm....Windows Mobile? Besides its not like they would be losing much by starting over again.
Sent from my Nexus S using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They'd lose support from the developers of the existing 60k apps for sure. Not allowing WP7 apps to run on WP8 would be suicide. That said, I wouldn't be surprised to see the development environment change to something closer to Windows 8. I just think we'll see compatibility for WP7 apps as well.
PG2G said:
They'd lose support from the developers of the existing 60k apps for sure. Not allowing WP7 apps to run on WP8 would be suicide. That said, I wouldn't be surprised to see the development environment change to something closer to Windows 8. I just think we'll see compatibility for WP7 apps as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I like the idea jvt put forward up there better.... recompile and carry on. It would on the other hand be a very effective weeding out process to trim down from 50000 redundant /replicative apps to ones that are solid and usable.
Silverlight is .net and the .net libs are platform independent. That means that 90% of your code is reusable either way. The goal is that you can take a shared library that contains your program logic and copy it from your windows pc to your phone without having to recompile or anything. The only thing that then needs rewriting is the user interface lib which must then take advantage of the underlying shared API. Infact it could even be that this is already the case. Either way anything in the future would only require little effort to sort out and if any w8 windows phone convergence happens that does cause incompatability, the mass amount of windows 8 support would be enough to make it neglible.
fed44 said:
Silverlight is .net and the .net libs are platform independent. That means that 90% of your code is reusable either way. The goal is that you can take a shared library that contains your program logic and copy it from your windows pc to your phone without having to recompile or anything. The only thing that then needs rewriting is the user interface lib which must then take advantage of the underlying shared API. Infact it could even be that this is already the case. Either way anything in the future would only require little effort to sort out and if any w8 windows phone convergence happens that does cause incompatability, the mass amount of windows 8 support would be enough to make it neglible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not entirely true. .NET libs are not entirely platform independant. Ever write an app for you phone in C# and try to run it on your PC. Or write it for you PC and run it on your Phone. It doesn't work.
Phones use a compact dot net framework. Windows Phone 8, might supply an updated compact version. This may be incompatible with the previous version, just as the version on Windows Phone 7 is not compatible with the 3.5 version on Windows Mobile 6.5.
In fact, Windows 8 For Tablets is supposed to be getting WinRT.
Here is a negative slanting article, but seems pretty accurate with some exceptions.
http://www.i-programmer.info/profes...3323-windows-phone-7-sunk-by-silverlight.html
I suspect the tablets will also support a dot net compact framework for some time to come.
I've heard from multiple reliable sources at work and through different training companies that Silverlight is done. Development with it is just for phones (for now).
I am hoping they provide some XAML migration, so apps can be easily converted.
Actually, when reading the comments following the video here: http://www.neowin.net/news/former-microsoft-pm-silverlight-is-dead
XAML is coming to C++. With WinRT, C++ and native programming will be in Windows 8 on tablets.
XAML is the mark up language ued by Silverlight. Silverlight uses C#. But, since the programmer uses XAML to define the UI and Silverlight is used to glue it to the C# backend, something else could easily tie the XAML to the backend, so a minimal amount of work would be needed to to rebuild the apps affter Silver Light goes off into the sunset.
What MS meant was Windows 8, not Windows Phone 8. WP8 is, of course, an upgrade of WP7.
They said this because initially they said that crossing apps between windows 8 and phone 8 was possible.
For the folks that though Microsoft might break compatibility for existing apps, a tweet from Brandon Watson
@eldarmurtazin Rewatch Mix11 keynote. We were pretty clear on this. Any app built today will run on next major Windows Phone version.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here is the link to the same http://www.mobiletechworld.com/2012...paign=Feed:+Mobiletechworld+(MobileTechWorld)
Sent from my TITAN X310e using Board Express
Sigh... Sometimes I just wish Eldar would let his age old hate against MS aside and try digging up some useful information...
He's been such a douché since MS wouldn't let him run the official MS Russia site...
is apollo confirmed as wp7 1gen upgrade ? Or it will be designed for high ends ?
Hi im new to the site and fairly new to the Microsoft surface. like a noob I didn't really read to much on the surface before I bought it. Didn't realize that it was running an ARM processor. But once I figured that out I did some research online, came across this site learned bout the jailbreak and x86 emulator. Now I love my little surface despite what others are complaining bout online. Im not even gonna bother upgrading to a pro anytime soon, pretty content. everyday I come and check to see if there have been any new ports added or any upgrades to the x86 emulator. (sorry for the rambling) Now my question is.. With the emulator can it or will it in the future have the ability to run Ventrilo? Thank you for your time and any help that may be provided..
There's actually already a thread for such questions, but to take it here: I haven't tested Vent (have you?), but I suspect it's a little beyond the emulator's capabilities right now. However, there's a pretty good chance that it will be supported in the future. Hardware-wise, Surface RT can certainly run it even with the emulation overhead (although it will use more CPU than you might expect). Software-wise, I don't believe Vent relies on any of the features that were cut from Windows RT, so that shouldn't be a problem.
With that said, a possibly better approach would be to to ask the Ventrilo devs to build a Windows Store version of the app, including an ARM version. That way it will run natively and will not require jailbreaks or emulators.
Thank you for the replies. Did some further research and it appears they are in the works of making an ARM version of Ventrilo.
Oh, and as a new Surface owner, this is the best thing you could do: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2265773
It's a beta! It's buggy, it's slow (at least on a Surface RT).
If you use your tablet daily, stay away from this thing. Wait for the full release.
SilverHedgehog said:
It's a beta! It's buggy, it's slow (at least on a Surface RT).
If you use your tablet daily, stay away from this thing. Wait for the full release.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
expecting bumps. so far it's good and I am not experiencing any hiccups yet. I very much like the changes.
cheers
Well, I found it rather buggy - though considering how I use it, I'm rather surprised how well it works in 8.0. Still, a warning might be a good idea - I'm sick of people attacking companies when beta software is behaving like beta software.
It's also so limited in terms of the number of devices and regions it will actually install in, I rather get the impression it was a real rush job to try and show that improvements are at least coming at some point.
SilverHedgehog said:
It's a beta! It's buggy, it's slow (at least on a Surface RT).
If you use your tablet daily, stay away from this thing. Wait for the full release.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don`t stand by you .I think the RT 8.1 is perfect。The experience on my surface RT is nice
seven7xiaoyang said:
I don`t stand by you .I think the RT 8.1 is perfect。The experience on my surface RT is nice
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I second that.. My Surface is faster and smoother now. Especially with IE11. I have no more lags or getting the Browser to freeze. I love it!
I have the 8.1 Preview on my Surface RT and it seems fine. I wouldn't caution anybody against it based on what I've seen so far.
Tk
ToddKlindt said:
I have the 8.1 Preview on my Surface RT and it seems fine. I wouldn't caution anybody against it based on what I've seen so far.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Jailbreak. 'Nuff said.
Using Spotify crashes the browser - worked perfectly in 8.0.
A reminder to all who find bugs: PLEASE report them to MS! This is our last chance to ask Microsoft to fix things while the software is in development. Once it ships and gets handed off to a maintenance team, changes will be much slower to arrive.
Note: while the continued restriction on running our own desktop apps is not strictly a bug, this is also a good time to complain to MS about that; it's a very easy policy for them to change, if they decide it would be worth it!
So far my experience with windows rt. 8.1 is very nice. I like the outlook 2013, the keyboard and the response time of the tablet.
GoodDayToDie said:
A reminder to all who find bugs: PLEASE report them to MS! This is our last chance to ask Microsoft to fix things while the software is in development. Once it ships and gets handed off to a maintenance team, changes will be much slower to arrive.
Note: while the continued restriction on running our own desktop apps is not strictly a bug, this is also a good time to complain to MS about that; it's a very easy policy for them to change, if they decide it would be worth it!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You need to read up on win32 vs. RT as well as some basic application architecture, then you will see why your complaint isn't valid.
Just because it has a pretty desktop and a run box doesn't mean apps magically work... Code for winform apps has to be compiled for arm vs x86/x64 to function and that just isn't going to happen. Explorer is there for a shim/stopgap.. By win9, will likely be gone for good.
This is like winnt on alpha and 2008 on titanium all over again... Except its now in the hands of consumers that don't understand what's going on under the covers.
MS should have never put a traditional desktop/explorer in RT and just finished the port of apps to modernui because its confusing to the average user.
Just think if apple had a shortcut in iOS to give you a macosx desktop that didn't run Mac apps..
Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
@libbycm: Despite being here even longer than I have, you appear to have no idea who you're talking to *or* what you're talking about.
I maintain the Ported Apps thread for RT, and have ported a few of them myself (and should get back into it with something more realistic than Chrome, which I still hope to get working Some Day Soon Now). I am quite *personally* familiar with the requirements of porting, the difficulties of working around missing functionality (almost all of which, it should be noted, is missing by design and not neccessity), and the realities of what an ARM processor can and cannot do.
First of all, .NET apps (including WinForms ones and even once that use COM or P/Invoke to system libraries) work just fine, no recompile needed. That's a pretty small portion of the overall Windows software ecosystem, of course, but it's a growing one and also it's one that would be seen as worth targeting by more developers if they saw an actual benefit to architecture-independent toolchains on Windows.
Second, and related to the first, .NET is far from the only architecture-independent language. Java (though IKVM, though .NET) kind of works on RT already; it wouldn't take much to make a serious platform worthy of an official port. Same for Python, and we already have Perl. Yeah, that's still miniscule next to the bulk of legacy x86 code, but it would nonetheless make RT a far more popular platform (for example, many of the Windows bittorrent clients are either Java or Python code, and some very popular games are written in those languages).
Third, even with the crippled tools that we have cobbled together to do our porting, and despite the fact that it's all done on our own time, we've managed a fair number of native ports already. There'd be far more if it weren't for the fact that we can't port closed-source programs (and many open-source ones don't happily compile under MSVC, which is the only RT-targeting compiler we have right now). Already, a growing number of programs are natively available on x64 - after all, it's just a drop-down selection and another click on "Build" in Visual Studio. Well, the same is true of RT. It wouldn't get legacy software, but there's no reason that *new* software released in the last half year - even proprietary commercial stuff - couldn't support RT. After all, it's more customer base for almost no additional work (supporting x64 is sometimes actually more work than supported ARM; at least ARM uses the same-width pointers as x86).
Fourth, legacy code is - by its very nature - older code and generally suitable for running on less-powerful systems. You mentioned Apple... but you failed to mention that when Apple went from 68k CPUs to PowerPC CPUs, and then from PPC to x86, they used mostly-transparent emulation layers to bridge those gaps. Yeah, the code ran slower, but it ran well enough for most purposes. Yeah, ARM is *less* powerful than x86, not more powerful (although you could argue that the same is true for some use cases when going from a G5 to a first-gen Core Duo), but we've also gotten better at this emulation thing. When Apple did it before, they hired the best folks in the business, and pushed the entire field of CPU emulation forward with their need to make it work. When Microsoft declined to do that, one guy on XDA took it upon himself, in his free time, with only a partial toolchain and no access to Windows internals, hacking on open-source pieces, and built a transparent emulation layer for RT. Microsoft's Windows application compatibility team almost certainly loses more man-hours in one day's bathroom breaks than @mamaich has been able to spend on that project to date, and yet some of those very same people who pushed the whole industry forward at Apple, doing things like inventing what is today called dynamic recompilation, now work at Microsoft. They have the expertise to make it work if they'd wanted to.
Fifth, Windows on Itanium failed (mostly; it's still being used, just not developed) because Itaniums were targeted specifically at the enterprise market but weren't very good even there; there's plenty of software for that instruction set in the aforementioned market. Alpha (never mind Windows on Alpha, which I actually know people who used and worked on) failed because DEC wanted outrageous sums of money for it, seeking high-end margins instead of embracing the commodity market. Had they done otherwise, they might even still exist as a company today. NT on MIPS and PPC was similarly niche, targeting brand new (and poorly-merketed) segments that didn't have great penetration in the ecosystem (NT for PPC was a server/workstation OS, not a MacOS alternative). Unlike all those achitectures, though, ARM is well established in the consumer market for commodity computers, and its market share there is growing. If Microsoft is serious about succeeding with RT (and I think they are), they should look at the success story in that market... and it's not Apple anymore. Despite Apple's huge first-mover advantage with the consumer market, Android is rolling over them. Yet Microsoft seems determined to repeat many of Apple's mistakes, despite having precious few of its advantages. They need to make themselves a better Android, not a me-too Apple clone.
Sixth, while Microsoft has made no secret of their desire to move to WinRT, I don't really forsee them having much more success with that than with their prior effort to move people to .NET; lots of small developers will go, but the big programs that are the movers and shakers of the Windows world will stick with the vastly more powerful, flexible, and (frankly) useful Win32 API. Porting an app to RT is a hell of a lot harder than porting x86 native code to ARM, though...
Hi all,
There is any news about unlock bootloader for surface RT to install Android ?
Did your search button stop working, or are you just incapable of reading the forum rules?
GoodDayToDie said:
Did your search button stop working, or are you just incapable of reading the forum rules?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, my search button work well , i have read the rules, so don't be angry
Just i want to reactivate the discussion and get any idea.
best regards
Trust me, if there'd been any progress in the area, somebody would have said something either in one of the (many) existing threads, or in a new one to discuss the method specifically. The topic is dead for a *reason*. Attempting to disguise necroposting by creating a new thread instead of bumping an old one is arguably worse; using an existing thread at least provides some context and shows that you did in fact do some searching. Of course, people would still be annoyed for bringing up an old topic without contributing anything to the discussion... which is exactly what you did anyhow.
Do you actually *have* anything to contribute to this discussion? If all you're trying to do is find the current state of the answer, you could (should) have done that by reading the existing posts. We know it's wanted. Nobody is going to have a breakthrough in that area and just forget to post about it... Most of the RT hacking effort right now is focused on an 8.1 jailbreak, though, and there isn't much there. I'd say your odds of getting Android on RT *before* that jailbreak is available are effectively zero.
Why so aggressive?
Why so aggressive? We are not all genius developers, we just enjoy using our tabs and are disappointed with RT, as no doubt are you. We are looking for answers/discussion, not derision.
GoodDayToDie said:
Trust me, if there'd been any progress in the area, somebody would have said something either in one of the (many) existing threads, or in a new one to discuss the method specifically. The topic is dead for a *reason*. Attempting to disguise necroposting by creating a new thread instead of bumping an old one is arguably worse; using an existing thread at least provides some context and shows that you did in fact do some searching. Of course, people would still be annoyed for bringing up an old topic without contributing anything to the discussion... which is exactly what you did anyhow.
Do you actually *have* anything to contribute to this discussion? If all you're trying to do is find the current state of the answer, you could (should) have done that by reading the existing posts. We know it's wanted. Nobody is going to have a breakthrough in that area and just forget to post about it... Most of the RT hacking effort right now is focused on an 8.1 jailbreak, though, and there isn't much there. I'd say your odds of getting Android on RT *before* that jailbreak is available are effectively zero.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can load kernel drivers soon after boot, but note that this is after UEFI has been shut down. This means the memory layout cannot be changed, etc., which can make booting Linux in UEFI mode really nasty.
If I ever do decide to give out my exploit against Windows's Secure Boot implementation, I'd mention it so it could be used.
I am curious if there has been any success in the jailbreak that was released early last year and recompiling any apps like Bluestacks or Andyroid to run on arm.
"I kind of scar wed to ask q westions cause tards like to nerd bash newbs here.... .. im just a wittle man with no real life and dont know how to use search features.
Just wanted to get that out there ahead of time... bash away...
walidham said:
Hi all,
There is any news about unlock bootloader for surface RT to install Android ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
in the sweet world there are many nvidia tegra 3 devices ran android with android bootloader.it can possible to replace UEFI firmware with android bootloader on surface RT
jmart said:
I am curious if there has been any success in the jailbreak that was released early last year and recompiling any apps like Bluestacks or Andyroid to run on arm.
"I kind of scar wed to ask q westions cause tards like to nerd bash newbs here.... .. im just a wittle man with no real life and dont know how to use search features.
Just wanted to get that out there ahead of time... bash away...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Surface RT and Surface 2 are too weak to support an android emulator
Sent from my Q5 using XDA Free mobile app