• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

Root SBC Kernels

I call BS...All I see here are a buch of jealous devs that have come out with kernel after kernel after 150 kernels that never change from revision to the next. HAVS no HAVS, etc. This MS guy comes a long and redefines batt life all together for the EVO...I'm talking tripled my life...All I see are haters. I will use all his kernels until my phone POPS!
 
Putty said:
I call BS...All I see here are a buch of jealous devs that have come out with kernel after kernel after 150 kernels that never change from revision to the next. HAVS no HAVS, etc. This MS guy comes a long and redefines batt life all together for the EVO...I'm talking tripled my life...All I see are haters. I will use all his kernels until my phone POPS!
Click to expand...

Honestly, I really feel that you are correct and I'm torn on what to do. I love what the SBC kernels do for battery life, particularly with the extended batteries. I truly believe, with everything that I have read, that the only "harm" that is potentially present is shortening the life of the battery from the standpoint that it won't hold a "full" charge. In my estimation, that would still be 1 year away from happening and I can get batteries for so cheap that it is inconsequential.

That said, if I am wrong, that is an awfully expensive mistake if my phone explodes.
 
hard to argue with a guy who loves female orgasms, but after akazabam pointed out that he was getting better battery with life with the non SBC I decided to test it out for myself. Oviously the SBC stayed at 100% for longer than the non sbc, but I have to say when I looked at how long it took my phone to get from 100% down to say 40% with both kernels, I felt that the non SBC actually lasted about the same or maybe even slightly longer, so when I took into account the risk/lack of reward, I made the switch. But I do agree that he made some major changes that should be applauded, I just dont want to be the guinea pig for little or no potential pay off .... long live female orgasm! :)
 
luigic81 said:
hard to argue with a guy who loves female orgasms, but after akazabam pointed out that he was getting better battery with life with the non SBC I decided to test it out for myself. Oviously the SBC stayed at 100% for longer than the non sbc, but I have to say when I looked at how long it took my phone to get from 100% down to say 40% with both kernels, I felt that the non SBC actually lasted about the same or maybe even slightly longer, so when I took into account the risk/lack of reward, I made the switch. But I do agree that he made some major changes that should be applauded, I just dont want to be the guinea pig for little or no potential pay off .... long live female orgasm! :)
Click to expand...
I agree with Luigic agreeing with Putty..but then I have to agree with Luigic agreeing with Akazabam....so I agree I will not use sbc...but bravo and hats off to the devo's that came up with the idea...long live thinking..and female orgasm's
 
i had a whole thing typed and i changed the web page bc i wasnt paying attention, the short of it is we get upgrades every 12 mos and i get the 2nd best batt life to when i had fresh 3.2 with netarchy 4.1.8 so i am sticking with it and i have heard no proof, just i heard it from this guy who heard it from that guy who heard it from your mother so hearsay i say
 
Okay, for people that are using SBC kernels, which one are you using??? I used the old one(4.1.9.1v7) And I had absolutely no issues with it. It performed as advertised. And then I got spooked by all of the hype. So I am running a stock one now(on Azrael). Only been in this config for 1.5 days. Not bad battery but not great either. What I liked about the SBC I was using is that aforementioned 100% for 2 hours off of the charger.....basically, it was an ADDED 2 hours to your battery life and THEN it started to drop in proportion. So if you timed your battery down to 90%, while other kernels almost instantaneously go to 90% when you pull the plug, you are getting even MORE battery life. So "time to 90%" can be as much as 3-4 hours....if not more, depending on usage.

Anyway, I never felt my battery get warm on the charger or anything. I would imagine if it was going to explode, it would get warm first...just an ignorant assessment.
 
check the logs...if you are using the battery monitor that was suggested.

the logs will show you what has been happening with your battery, and the logs are stored on the sd card.
the big response to this has been "...yeah but what if it isn't monitoring correctly/accurately"

I am in the middle of testing some other things so I am not using my sbc kernel but I will make it back once I figure out the other stuff I am working on. for now my phone is back to stock and running htc's #15
 
I briefly talked about this in the other SBC thread, but I guess I'll throw it in here too (though it's been mentioned already here). I agree that the information on whether or not this is harmful is inconclusive at best. The battery does stay at 100% longer, but I always found that once it started dropping, the constant drop rate was higher than without SBC. Having switched to the exact same kernel (netarchy 4.3 CFS HAVS) but without SBC, the battery life is actually better. Of course, YMMV and all that, but I never found much of a benefit. As with others, the battery never got hot, and I don't think it harmed anything. To be honest, we probably won't see any *real* good or bad results from this for a few months after people started using it.
 
akazabam said:
I briefly talked about this in the other SBC thread, but I guess I'll throw it in here too (though it's been mentioned already here). I agree that the information on whether or not this is harmful is inconclusive at best. The battery does stay at 100% longer, but I always found that once it started dropping, the constant drop rate was higher than without SBC. Having switched to the exact same kernel (netarchy 4.3 CFS HAVS) but without SBC, the battery life is actually better. Of course, YMMV and all that, but I never found much of a benefit. As with others, the battery never got hot, and I don't think it harmed anything. To be honest, we probably won't see any *real* good or bad results from this for a few months after people started using it.
Click to expand...

on the note of yrmv...

pre sbc my typical work day would end with me leaving work at about 50% left...on extended battery.

post sbc...70%

so what I assumed I was gaining was about 20%

now..on specific sbc kernels...i noticed a HUGE INCREASE of "in use" drain

it was once I switched to netarchy's 4.1.9 no havs etc etc SBC that I saw this sbc thing work like it should.

which is one of the reasons I really really want more concrete information on this. I do believe that it is possible that some may have tweaked and prodded and poked this sbc set up into frankenkernels and possibly caused issues.
 
Ed, that is kinda what I was saying up top there....since most "stock" based kernels go to 90% almost imediately, the SBC ones appear to give you an extra 20% right on top since you spend a good bit of time at100% and then a proportional leak down from there to 90%. And I will agree with you on the "in use" drain. Most of my "in use" drain comes from playing games. games absolutely roast your battery no matter what kernel. Anyway, jammin' the Azrael with the stock #15 for now. Not a bad ROM really.
 
yeah...i have some pretty interesting theories right now about some ongoing issues people are having...I just don't have the know how (yet) to prove anything

basically some other non phone real world events have me looking deeper into the roms/kernels/etc we are flashing..basically anything that has been "developed" by someone.

one constant across the board has been that earlier versions of ROMS X y and Z worked wonderfully...but as these ROMs were enhanced in line with OTA updates...things started going haywire. Many of us have believed and pushed..don't OTA update...run a new ROM incorporating the update.

My theory is along the lines of this
How does a dev update/upgrade their ROM when an OTA comes out?
a. start from scratch with the OTA
b. add to their previous ROM, an overlay of OTA on rom version "last" + new tweaks
c. a combination of both

much like I suspect with the sbc kernels...some of these people/devs could potentially be making changes along the lines of b and c...with oversights. For instance change this variable for that result but not considered how this one variable may affect a number of other variables all centered on other changes made by HTC/Sprint in the update.

Fix one and break three.

like I said...I was "just thinking"
my phone has been flashed sooooo many times, done properly every time. Things worked pretty well up until recently, right around the 3.70 update. After talking with Azakabam I realized I have NEVER since the first OTA done an OTA update...I have just flashed newer ROMS.

so...what we came up with was the idea to unroot, flash the stock ruu, and update up to current via OTA then root.

I have done this and I tell ya what..so far..much of what was broke..ain't broke no more
---at least after about 8 hours of playing and messing that is.

what I want to do now is really compare some things..and in the process cook my own ROM... it is just going to take me some time to do so.
 
Mr. Ed, I wonder if some of the issues you and others are having are due to the fabled problems that are caused by the unrevoked s-off method. It hasn't come up much recently, but there used to be some controversy as to whether or not s-off via unrevoked caused weird problems, especially when it came to flashing things. Personally, I've never had *that* many problems other than inexplicably getting stuck at the splash screen on a normal reboot. I've considered fully unrooting, and rooting again via the universal autoroot method that roots via the eng bootloader. That makes no changes below the bootloader like unrevoked does.

In pure theory, there shouldn't be anything wrong with updating one things at a time like we ultimately end up doing via flash ROMs and radios. But you certainly may be on to something.
 
akazabam said:
Mr. Ed, I wonder if some of the issues you and others are having are due to the fabled problems that are caused by the unrevoked s-off method. It hasn't come up much recently, but there used to be some controversy as to whether or not s-off via unrevoked caused weird problems, especially when it came to flashing things. Personally, I've never had *that* many problems other than inexplicably getting stuck at the splash screen on a normal reboot. I've considered fully unrooting, and rooting again via the universal autoroot method that roots via the eng bootloader. That makes no changes below the bootloader like unrevoked does.

In pure theory, there shouldn't be anything wrong with updating one things at a time like we ultimately end up doing via flash ROMs and radios. But you certainly may be on to something.
Click to expand...

true ... though everything was fine after unrevoked 2-3 updates ago..why the issues now... my thought is back on the variables. unrevoked's method of s-off had not changed through all of those flashes. that variable was constant.

I am rooted again via unrevoked now. I couldn't find a working dload for the things needed to do the eng bootloader method.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom