Re: N900 Specifications
 

If both the Euro and the US version are same (as currently thought), your N900 will work ONLY on T-Mobile USA's 3G network (1700 Mhz).

Re: N900 Specifications
 

So now that this feature is not available what are the proposed alternatives for use cases? TransferJet?

Why doesn't Nokia use a FS which is specifically designed to run on flash like UBIFS or LogFS?

N900 has USB support. You mean USB host mode.

Maybe a USB powered hub with USB host mode could solve this? 2 in 1.

I can charge my Iriver H340 over USB, and I can also use USB host mode on it, but I never used USB host mode, and the device has 2 USB. (Since Iriver H340 doesn't have 3G I couldn't use it with my digicam to upload pictures.)

It is possible to configure both features in software using the stock (!) firmware (don't know about Rockbox).

In theory, one could put a bigger 2"5 HDD in the H340 (stock is 2"5 40 GB, PATA) and use USB host mode to export this to the N900?

Or, is it then, that one would need to use the H340 because that is the device with USB host mode? In that case, a dumb device with a web interface (and preferably SSH) and USB host mode could function as a bridge.

Re: N900 Specifications
 

Because that device is an eMMC block device, NOT a MTD device. Some years ago people realized it's a lot of fuss to work with MTD-s on the software level (wear leveling ? block management ? addressing ? error correction ? spare blocks ? MLC vs SLC ? CPU overhead ?), and put all this functionality, tailor made for that particular flash device, into something that is known as managed NAND (=aka eMMC).

Take a look for some pretty pictures at
http://download.micron.com/pdf/prese...nHEC_Cooke.pdf

(talks about eMMC around page 55)

Re: N900 Specifications
 

I agree with this... For me, USB Host Mode would be nice, but USB charging was the deciding factor for me in upgrading. :)

It's a pity we can't have both, but it sounds like they did try pretty hard and it just wouldn't work out.

Re: N900 Specifications
 

The problem isn't that it didn't work out, the problem is that we were strung along for so long: "Trust us with the details, we're sure when you see the lead Fremantle device it will be a great improvement and you'll love it".

And now my trust has been betrayed: the N900 is missing the things I valued about the N8x0: the screen size, the big battery, and now this: the loss of USB host functionality.

Maybe I need to wait a year (or whatever) for the RX-71. It sure would be nice to know something useful about Nokia's directions forwards from here with this "product line" (if the widely-differing Maemo devices can even be called a "product line").

Maybe the RX-71 is a slate with a 4.3 inch screen, big battery, and two USB OTG ports. More likely not.

Regards,
Roger

Re: N900 Specifications
 

well this IS only step 4 of a 5 step plan...

Re: N900 Specifications
 

So what features are going to be removed or downgraded for step 5?

Re: N900 Specifications
 

On the other hand, I'm sure many people value the decreased screen size, the smaller casing and the other new features ;)

Re: N900 Specifications
 

lol, heck if i know. I agree with u, Nokia is giving us no direction where they want to go with Maemo. i was just repeating a 'line' that we've all heard before. sorry if the sarcasm wasn't emphasized...

Re: N900 Specifications
 

Read all the messages here about Swap, but can you switch off swap space in the settings? Or create a swap file or partition on a microSD on the N900?

Rich

Re: N900 Specifications
 

I would assume that there are mkswap, swapon etc. commands so you can always do this manually

Re: N900 Specifications
 

Never mind, I meant on /

My question is answered here: http://lists.maemo.org/pipermail/mae...il/002226.html (and on Wikipedia)

Instead of JFFS2, UBIFS is now used.

Re: N900 Specifications
 

Then dont upgrade man. Seriously - its not like Nokia promised you the moon and didnt deliver, I am sure that many people feel the n900 IS a worth lead Fremantle device. They delivered a device that will please some people and obviously not please others. It sounds like the n900 is not the phone for you - but for a great many other people it is. Wait for a year - you may get the phone you want. Or its entirely possible you wont. Thats the way the world works.

Re: N900 Specifications
 

Batterysize isn't everything. With the new cpu, doing exactly the same things as you would with n810 the battery would last longer even if it's smaller. Add to that the potential savings, if any, from the smaller screen... Subtract all the extra things youll do with the n900.. Hopefully the sum is near n810 battery performance in terms of user experience.

Re: N900 Specifications
 

That's true of course, but the use case that concerns me is web browsing. With my N810 and bluetooth phone, browsing the web over 3G is making use of two batteries: one in the tablet and one in the phone.

In the N900, one battery has to do both jobs.

Regards,
Roger

Re: N900 Specifications
 

So, have you seen the lead Fremantle device? I mean, other than in pictures and in youtube videos. If not, you really should. See if there's a Nokia store near you that has one, and take it for a test drive...

Re: N900 Specifications
 

... except it won't have to do the bluetooth ;-)

Re: N900 Specifications
 

That's somewhat offset by the N900 battery not having to feed both sides of a bluetooth PPP session. But yeah, 3G connectivity is probably the largest (or maybe second-largest after the screen?) battery drain on the device and there are advantages to offloading that to a separate device.

Re: N900 Specifications
 

Invalid comparison. The N900 doesn't have to power both sides of a Bluetooth link.

Re: N900 Specifications
 

It's not entirely predicatble, but I'd say my e75 lasts longer idling on IRC by itself than serving out internet to N810 idling on IRC. Certainly on my old Nokia 6820, serving out internet over bluetooth uses huge amounts more..

hopefully IPv6 will arrive soon, and hopefully ISPs and operators wont **** it up into a similar mess as with IPv4. That would give lots of power savings for the mostly-idle use cases of IM and push email.

Re: N900 Specifications
 

Of course, bluetooth takes 2.5mW (times two for both sides of the connection), while HSDPA takes 2W, so there is much more HSDPA pain than bluetooth gain.

Re: N900 Specifications
 

I don't remember where I read it, but ~2mW was the difference in the consumption if the BT was simply on instead of off and if receiving-transmitting should be ~1W. Could be really wrong though.

In any case, 2.5mW doesn't look like a realistic number for something transmitting/receiving. .

Re: N900 Specifications
 

Don't forget these mW are for transmitted power, not power usage.

Re: N900 Specifications
 

For sure I will test drive the device when I can, but there's nowhere in my city that has an N900. I notice that quite a few people here reported being "won over" by the device once they test drove it.

Maemo is exactly the software that I want on a mobile computer. A 3-row keyboard with a 3.5" screen, small battery, and small-but-fat form factor is exactly the hardware that I don't want on a mobile computer.

Not happy, after a year of promises. But I'll stop whining because it's not a constructive thing to do in a forum.

Regards,
Roger

Re: N900 Specifications
 

Depends on the class of bluetooth.

Class 2 has a maximum permitted transmission power of 2.5mW. Class 1 is 100mW. Either way, it's a lot less than the 3G radio's power. But that makes sense...bluetooth is generally talking to something in the same room...3G is talking to a tower hundreds of meters (or more) away.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluetooth

And has been noted...these numbers reflect the amount of power being radiated by the antenna...the underlying chip logic generating the signals consume energy in addition to that.

Re: N900 Specifications
 

:rolleyes:
Obviously I was talking about 'consumption'

since Matan said 'takes'

I assumed takes = consumes, since he multiplies it by 2 when receiving and transmitting and the context of the conversation is battery consumption.

Re: N900 Specifications
 

Even so..."consumption" is likely in the 10's of milliwatts range (assuming class 2) no matter how you want to define it, with rolling eyes or not, and not in the whole-watt range as you have surmised. The chip doesn't take that much juice to run. By way of example, a typical usb bluetooth dongle has a maximum *total* power draw of around 400mW or less, and that's with all the logic to run the USB bus on top of the bluetooth logic and radio. In the OMAP3 platform, the bluetooth logic connects via a simple (and by comparison very efficient) serial bus to the chipset. Another example (and perhaps more telling) is that many bluetooth headsets consume on the order of 50mW when actively communicationg (http://www.techonline.com/product/un...2000480?pgno=2) So, no matter how you slice it, the original argument stands insofar that the 3G radio is a FAR larger power hog than is the bluetooth stack.

Re: N900 Specifications
 

I've seen bluetooth consume almost 150mA on an idle connection on N810, that's about 500mW :) Usually reconnecting brings the power use down. Radiated power is pretty insignificant compared to total power used by the radio.. Also noticeable with the wlan, where you basically see no measurable difference in power use between 10 and 100mW settings, not even when sending huge files from N8x0.

Another comparison point, streaming music (screen off) my N810 uses a bit more power (on wlan) than my E75 on edge. :)

Re: N900 Specifications
 

So, with the device in "standby" (screen off), in order to start a phone call, I have to turn it on (that's OK), start playing with the device in the air to bring it to an upright position so the phone App starts, touch the on-screen num buttons or select a phonebook entry and then touch the call screen-button? What happens if I'm lying on a bed where I hold the phone facing down? I still have to manage to convince the device to bring up the phoneApp...

Or else, I have to navigate to home screen and press a phoneApp shortcut etc?

I have a feeling that Nokia chose a WAY TOO minimalistic approach regarding the dedicated-operation buttons. Yesterday, I was really excited enough to pre-order it (when I "discovered" that it even has IR port!!), but today I'm thinking, I'll wait to see the next iterations and stick with my HTC Kaiser (:() and my 2 N800s (:))

hypest

Re: N900 Specifications
 

I think you can do it by 2 way.
- place phone shortcut on every homescreen.
- start typing a name (I read in some threads that n900 will start searching from contacts right away)

Re: N900 Specifications
 

I'm confused as to how this differs from any other phone? I need to navigate to the home screen on my N95 to make calls too. Incoming calls has a popup where you can click answer, so that is the same too.

Re: N900 Specifications
 

and wouldn't it even be possible to create a home screen shortcut to automatically give contact x a phone call? that would be even one step shorter than today's fastest method: key shortcut [1-9] + phone key.

Re: N900 Specifications
 

Can you actually add the same app shortcut multiple times, I wonder?

Re: N900 Specifications
 

Yes, first ask how long it boots, then ask about x terminal and run 'dmesg >MyDocs/x.txt' and then try web browser with your web mail account and send x.txt to yourself or post it here directly :-)

Re: N900 Specifications
 

this is a nice feature (HTC calls it smart-dialing and is really clever) but it needs the qwerty open and thus needs both your hands to hold and type-in! I do have such experience with my Kaiser (for strangers to HTC Kaiser: it's a qwerty equipped WindowsMobile phone, and quite similar to the n900: see the gsmarena.com comparison http://www.gsmarena.com/compare.php3...&idPhone1=2024) and let me tell you: qwerty open needs both your hands, or your risking dropping your precious ;)

Agree! The detail is that on your N95 you actually have a tactile button to quickly go to the home screen: the hangup button! This nice button is what I was using on all my Nokias too (and currently on my Kaiser) to quickly and successfully go to the home screen...

what I'm trying to say is that I appreciate the slickness of a button-less facade, so I would be happy with a button to bring up the phoneApp, even if this button is not in the front of the device. This button could be configurable so other people can use it for other purposes (eg. launch the browser!)... anyway, I'll cut the rant here... :)

hypest

Re: N900 Specifications
 

Twitter, Pastebin.ca ... :) (please do indeed! I'd love to test out Nokia N900 but I don't know where a Nokia shop is near me...)

Re: N900 Specifications
 

So all this discussion is interesting because I have an Openmoko Freerunner here that has the AB plug -- I flip a /sys kernel flag and it switches from regular (battery-charging/client) mode to host-mode (where it won't charge).

So odd that Openmoko solved this but Nokia did not. Perhaps OM didn't have to be as standards-compliant or something.

Re: N900 Specifications
 

Yes, please keep in mind that Nokia has to tread more secure ground. Other, lower profile (for the general public, not geeks :) ) did not need to care that much if they have that USB certified sticker or not. For example USB configurations like the Pandora's and even the Beagleboard's are non-certifiable from the get-go (which doesn't make them non-functional, luckily :) )

Re: N900 Specifications
 

The power actually used in radio transmission is a very small percentage of total power usage. As you say, this is why the 10/100mW option for WiFi on N8x0s isn't a powersaving option but a regulatory one.

Re: N900 Specifications
 

(Originally a slightly snarky reply to eiffel about how constructive whining is, but I didn't realize that I was responding to something much further back in the thread and that he had already said basically the same thing himself. My bad.)

The host mode thing may not be simply a matter of Nokia not finding a solution, but that they didn't have the time to implement it... or that hardware was already finalized when a solution was found. It could have been anything really.