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

Bought A NC Last Night And..


Jan 29, 2011
I bought a Nook Color (NC) last night and was talking with the Nook guy at B&N. We were chatting about the Android 2.2 update and he mentioned it's being stalled over what are likely political reason with Adobe. He also mentioned something in passing about a special store for the Nook (which I might have misunderstood what he meant...it's been a very bad week).

Then he mentioned a B&N rumor message board to Google that is run by B&N that I promptly forgot the name of. If anyone knows what it is, would you mind letting me know so I can Google it?

I need to do some more reading on rooting before I actually try to do that. I'm new to rooting but comfortable around computers. If I can open up my computer to install new hardware, I figure I can root the NC with the proper directions and understanding of the terms.
He might be referring the the nookcolor developer boards where developers post for help.

I could very much see it being a political spat between BN and adobe. Basically what adobe has to do is write a version of flash that uses the nookcolors SDK which is on top of the android sdk and it may pose technical and monetary issues.

As far as the 'nook store', he is probably referring to what is known as 'nook boutiques'. Basically in the high volume, busy stores first and rolling out to most of them eventually, there will be a much bigger digital 'area' with white tables with four nooks each on display. The ones ive seen are very apple-store-ish.

As far as rooting, you will be fine
Upvote 0
Thank you both.

I thought he meant an online app store like the Google app store. It would be nice but I'm sure very limited.

I have decided to try Nookie Froyo...the SD card option for rooting my NC. I'm little afraid of bricking my NC. Probably the same reason I've never jailbroken my iPhone. I really need an Android phone but I'm waiting for LTE to hit AT&T before I upgrade. It seems silly to buy an HSPA+ phone when LTE will roll out, hopefully, in July and I'll just need another new phone.

The NC is my little experiment to get comfortable with rooting. Better on a $245 device with no contract.
Upvote 0
HSPA+ is often much faster than LTE.

Remember: the nook is virtually unbrickable outside of hardware damage because it is hardwired to boot of the SD card so worst case scenario, boot off a clockwork SD and repair the damage (though it may not be easy depending on what you've done)
Upvote 0
No, its a quality of LTE, a 3.5G technology. its going to get 6-12 mbits down, spiking at 20 in some cases. HSPA+ is a 3g technology that gets 20 to 40.

To truly be 4g, it has to get 1 gbits down while stationary and 100 mbits down while mobile.

Not true anymore.

ITU updated thier definition of what 4G is. 1st gen LTE and HSPA+ are now all covered under the 4G moniker, which is why all the companies are now advertising 4G speeds. That's why T-mobile can legally claim 4G, so can AT&T, and even Sprint can as well, even though WiMax is slower than both.

As for LTE, theoretical speed is faster than HSPA+ by a long shot. Verizon testing in some areas is spiking to 60mbps. Once fully deployed it won't even be close.
Upvote 0
the ITU threw them a bone after US carriers had been lying to the public for months. yea, they 'said' they can be considered 4g now but basically anyone who watches that sector knows that is bunk. if what we got is 4g, then we might as well call 1xrtt a 3g signal, pickles fall upwards and im the easter bunny
Upvote 0
Easter Bunny,
I'd like some candy, and a big chocolate bunny. And please don't hide those damn eggs so hard. And stop making pickes fall up. :D

I completely agree with you on the shady backward approach the ITU went with.

But on the flip side, 4G never should have been defined the way the ITU did. No technology is even close to being implemented that will reach the original definition of 4G. Probably 4 years before we see 1gbps wireless.

Carriers needed a way to differentiate thier services between 720kbps-3mbps and 7mbps-30mbps, and I do think the ITU made the correct decision in calling that service 4G.

Then again, what's in a name? I'll take 60mbps 3G over 4mpbs 4G any day. Just another marketing trick for those who need the wifis and bigger GeeBees.
Upvote 0
But on the flip side, 4G never should have been defined the way the ITU did. No technology is even close to being implemented that will reach the original definition of 4G. Probably 4 years before we see 1gbps wireless.

The problem is that the carriers wanted to use a technical (albeit cool sounding) term (something with a very specific meaning) in marketing. The lesson here for the ITU is stop giving things cool names. Instead of 4G, how about "Wireless Bandwidth for the Future (WBF)". Let's see anybody bastardize THAT into a marketing campaign. Or do what IEEE does...can you see ATT/Verizon/Sprint building an ad campaign about their new "3441.535/43r Provisional 73.2~3 Network?".

The ITU should name things like engineers, letting the marketing people name things like marketing people. Problem solved.

And 4G was SUPPOSED to mark a significant advancement (read SEVERAL years) in wireless bandwidth/technology. So it doesn't MATTER that nobody is close to deploying a true 4G network. It's not about naming the next technology, it's about naming the next be class (change by order of magnitude) of technology.
Upvote 0
Regardless...the 4G data networks, whether it's "true 4G" or not is much faster than the 3G networks we are all used to. They gotta have something to call it right?

Personally, I like the term 4G being used instead of something like "Next Gen 3G" or HSPA+...and obviously, from a marketing perspective you can see why they would want to use the name 4G as it looks like the next step up in speed (which it is).
Upvote 0
you all raise good points.

im suspecting that a lot of the issue is coming from the convention of assigning natural numbers to it. i cant say how they should have done it, but it shouldnt have been 2G, 3G, 4G, etc because all along there has been intermediate technologies that give us "2.5G", "2.75G", etc

Theres also a confusion between the technology and speed. Sprint's WiMAX is absolutely different than their 3g. But TMobile's 3g can beat the pants of wimax in a lot of places. Its all messed up. As a gadget geek with a business education, I still cannot figure out how to get to a clear, unified picture for consumers. Perhaps the existing situation is the best one, where HSPA+, LTE, WiMAX get to be "4g" because its 'better' than the previous 3g.

*throws hands in air*
Upvote 0


We've been tracking upcoming products and ranking the best tech since 2007. Thanks for trusting our opinion: we get rewarded through affiliate links that earn us a commission and we invite you to learn more about us.