New HTC Hero ROM leaked, Flash 10 already chugging along on a few lucky G1s

Step aside, JAC Hero, there's a new firmware in town. Fatal1ty (that Fatal1ty?) and nk02 have not only managed to obtain the HTC Hero's new (and almost final) Sense UI-infused firmware, but have spruced it up for consumption by HTC Magic / Dream users. There's naturally a bit of glitchiness -- apparently WiFi and Bluetooth don't work at the moment, and the camera is all funkified, but the real treat here is the first implementation of Flash 10 on Android, even if it is a bit "laggy" on the RAM-starved G1. The widgets are also on display, and other than Flash the general experience is apparently pretty snappy. Naturally, the xda-dev folks won't be leaving well enough alone, and we should be seeing refined versions of this and future Hero firmwares leading up to and after the release of the actual device.

[Via xda-developers forum; thanks Jeremy W., screenshot by johnnylicious]

[PhoneGeek @ Jun 30th 2009 10:45AM]

cool

[Nick @ Jun 30th 2009 4:35PM]

If you don't want to flash your phone, here's all the wallpapers from the new HTC Hero build. Amazing! http://htcsource.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=604&Itemid=47#josc1016

[ratchetnclank @ Jun 30th 2009 10:50AM]

XDA dev's i choose you!

[james @ Jun 30th 2009 11:15AM]

I just wish someone wiul dhurry up and get a good build of android onto Winmo phones..
cant stand 6.1 any more..

[Sarig @ Jun 30th 2009 2:00PM]

Why aren't you using 6.5 then? ;)

[dobe2049 @ Jul 1st 2009 1:30PM]

can you get 6.5? if so link?

[James @ Jul 1st 2009 12:28AM]

I tried a few winmo 6.5 roms on my tilt and they worked great for the first day or two but became very glitchy and laggy after that. Once phones start launching which actually support it i believe it will be a great mobile OS. But what i am looking forward for even more is to see what they come up with in winmo 7 since it will be an entirely new OS and not a fancy new UI on an old platform. All in all winmo has everything you could want in a mobile OS, it just needs to be packaged in a more user friendly way.

[Arnold @ Jun 30th 2009 10:51AM]

Anyone care to try this on their G1?

[Sharma @ Jun 30th 2009 9:39PM]

ahh its a pain to try to get this on
im stil trying though

[Zole2112 @ Jun 30th 2009 10:51AM]

Time to flash back to Hero again! XDA here I come!

[Mark @ Jun 30th 2009 10:53AM]

JACHero uses this release version of the Hero firmware as well(as of yesterday afternoon)

[Aaron @ Jun 30th 2009 10:56AM]

I think HTC is behind the game. They need to start making phones with the arm cortex processor and OLED screens if they expect to compete with Apple and Palm. And a 3.5mm headphone jack would be great too.

[Dking @ Jun 30th 2009 10:58AM]

uumm... they are getting there.... just wait little more... the have the 3.5mm headphone jack in Hero... and probably will have it in next models... and about screens and cortex processors.. (I have no idea about that) but I assume they might have a contract with some kind of company so they can't really change them... (just a guess)

[bethel03 @ Jun 30th 2009 11:09AM]

I somewhat agree... But with their virtually unlimited degree of tweaking and personalizing through android. They are way ahead of the game. I love my G1!

[Dking @ Jun 30th 2009 11:27AM]

look at this this way... People complain about WinMo6.1 they get Android (I would like 6.5 though), people complain about 3.5mm Headphone jack and they get it.. I think HTC is doing their best. .
and engadge's comment system is not-__-..

[Fernando @ Jun 30th 2009 11:42AM]

They need the snapdragon.

[Lazarpandar @ Jun 30th 2009 12:54PM]

I have a G1 and owned an iPhone before that.

I'm waiting for the first tegra powered Android phones before I purchase my next phone, once that happens we'll truly see what mobile gaming is about.
Hopefully the UI is as buttery smooth as the iPhone too, that's the only thing I miss.

[Mark II @ Jun 30th 2009 1:29PM]

The Hero has a 3.5mm jack. As for the rest, since neither the iPhone or the Pre have an OLED screen and there is little difference for all intents and purposes between the Cortex 8 and the MSM7200a it's really down to personal preference.

[loosely_coupled @ Jun 30th 2009 3:04PM]

Exactly...

New HTC Android phones should have a MINIMUM of 256MB RAM and a 500mhz ARM Cortex-A8 or ARM Snapdragon equivalent. (Snapdragon is a custom ARMv7 core with better performance and power efficiency than Cortex-A8).

The G1/G2 are far to slow compared to the 3GS and Pre.

[newjaruz @ Jun 30th 2009 5:52PM]

Android has been using Qualcomm MSM chips, importantly and almost quietly it has been expanded to MIPS. This opens up Android to a wide variety of processors such as Godson, Tegra, Snapdragon, among others. These processors not only expand the speed of Android but are extremely battery efficient and robust to handle FLASH.... even though currently android does not outspec the competition at the moment... by the end of the year we shall see who outspecs who... with what was 18 android sets left minus the 3-4 that have been or are about to be released... there is a lot more phones to come with a lot more capability.. not to mention the ones that come stateside might be different configurations than their European siblings...

[SOOPERGOOMAN @ Jun 30th 2009 10:57AM]

Sounds like Mortal Kombat levels, hee hee...

[ryan @ Jun 30th 2009 10:57AM]

wish the whole carrier/subsidy thing wasn't such a huge hassle here in the states. can't just buy a phone and use it. it's ridiculous.

i'm unwilling to bog down my G1 with this heavy UI, but i would love to just pay the money and pick up something with more horsepower and not get locked in by subsidy.

just pay 600$ get a phone then throw a sim in. why can't it be that simple? oh no, if you want a non-carrier specific unlocked non subsidized phone we're going to charge you 900$.

ridiculous. phones don't cost 900$. i've had enough of your shenanigans.

[ryan @ Jun 30th 2009 10:59AM]

and mind you, 600$ is being EXTREMELY generous. we've taken these things apart, we know what they cost to make

[Dking @ Jun 30th 2009 11:19AM]

it would probably make around 200bucks if not less... but software and so on,, and they go to make profit...

[chefgon_ign @ Jun 30th 2009 12:50PM]

The problem is that we have four major carriers and none of them have fully cross-compatible technology. You can pretty easily get an unlocked phone from Europe and run it on AT&T or T-Mobile without carrier approval, but you'll be limited to EDGE data speeds.

[paul @ Jun 30th 2009 3:52PM]

Um... the developer HTC G1 is $400. Quit yer bitching.

[ryan @ Jul 1st 2009 12:33AM]

that's what i have. and from a hardware perspective it is a lump of coal :|

i yearn for something AMOLED and Snapdragon with my android.

for about 600$

[bachviet @ Jun 30th 2009 10:58AM]

Flashed my Google Ion with Fatal1ty's v1 Magic-compatible ROM. It's much more stable than the SuperHero v2 I tried a week ago. However it's still slow and my custom ringtones didn't work. I haven't tried the latest ROM yet (v1.1).

[rafa @ Jun 30th 2009 10:58AM]

What are the chances we can get some of the widgets without the full OS?

[Mark @ Jun 30th 2009 11:01AM]

Pretty much 0, they use the proprietary libraries(and sometimes each other) so taking out one of those libraries breaks everything.

[Tanku @ Jun 30th 2009 2:17PM]

Actually pretty high, the htc hero's music already working great in JF's build.

http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=530572

[darkmax @ Jun 30th 2009 11:00AM]

"funkified"??

[Shawn @ Jun 30th 2009 12:07PM]

Can you dig it?

[Brian from Texas @ Jul 1st 2009 12:23PM]

Somebody said you had to flip between video and camera then it started working normally. Others said it's just horrible looking.

[Alan Strangis @ Jun 30th 2009 11:00AM]

XDA rocks! Can't wait for it to make its way into some non-Android phones to do some testing. Android really needs a better interface than the stock UI.

[huh @ Jun 30th 2009 11:07AM]

I have zero interest in Flash on my handheld. HTML is designed for all kinds of devices, and it's the real hypertext web. Most Flash-only web sites were created thoughtlessly and wouldn't be usable on a small device. Google's strong support for HTML 5 will make Flash unnecessary.

Multitouch would be nice, if only so the iPhone users don't look so silly trying to use the phone, though I prefer on screen controls so you can use the device with one hand.

What I'd rather see than this is constant optimization for the G1/Dream, which will benefit all devices. It would be a travesty if the G1/Dream were made obsolete by required new features before a few years pass.

[ryan @ Jun 30th 2009 11:11AM]

kinda ridiculous to say most stuff wasn't written with hand held internet devices in mind so let's blow off the whole thing.

as if people can't make new content for the platform anymore... nope. can't be done.

[huh @ Jun 30th 2009 11:29AM]

ryan, my point is I don't want Flash in the future. HTML (for all its growing pains) is a thing of beauty, it emerged with the Internet disruptively and creates open, linked data as it goes along. Flash is a blob of goo from Adobe that is a short term solution to the problem of needing more dynamic, canvas level toolkits. There are so many entertainment and restaurant sites that are done entirely in Flash, where they're trying to create an "experience" when I just want to find out where they are or who's playing tonight, and can't or it is aggravatingly more difficult because some Flash designer, who for many purposes couldn't be bothered to figure out how to do it in HTML, made something that should have been handed out on a CD-ROM in 1995 and has no place on the modern web. Android getting Flash is a fail. I hope the iPhone never gets or needs Flash.

[Dking @ Jun 30th 2009 11:30AM]

So flash is useless?
How about:
Flash games?
Hulu?(megavideo...)

You know it would really helpful for developers too. For instance some games for iPhone are just Flash converted games.. so you won't have to sit and convert them..(if it is free it is good, if not then rewrite it)

[huh @ Jun 30th 2009 11:36AM]

Dking, then they would lose all the platform level features. The game would be bigger, slower, and eat more battery.

Anyway all this will be done with HTML 5 in a year. It has full support for the canvas and media. That's where everyone is heading - Google, Palm, WebKit (Safari/etc). We will see some level of cross-device compatibility for dynamic apps that use local features like location. But it will be based on standards and preserve the advantages of HTML.

If you were Apple, Palm and Google, would you optimize for an Adobe controlled Flash where you're constantly contributing to your competitor, or a multiparty developed Web standard where you can be a leader.

[Dking @ Jun 30th 2009 11:44AM]

sorry not that geeky about all this stuff...

[fashionista @ Jun 30th 2009 11:45AM]

Re: huh
Dude, do you actually work in web programming? I've been building sites for over 10 years. I am an ActionScript developer now, and know intimately the strengths and limitations of the Flash Platform. To say HTML is "a thing of beauty" is absurd, and you really undermine your credibility saying dumb shit like that. HTML is friggin hoax. JavaScript in the browser would be even funnier if it weren;t so sad. The one thing Flash has going for it over its browser-dependent ancestors is a relatively stable VM that runs on all target platforms as expected. Does Flash have issues? Of course. Are there dumbasses out there writing terrible Flash applications? Of course. But the market has proven that Flash is a robust and viable medium for online apps, especially video. You need to get your head examined if you think the people working with HTML 5 have a clue about the intricacies of video. Putting video on the internet as a business venture is a hell of a lot more complicated than you may know. I do it all day, every day.
By the way, Adobe enabled "view source" in the Flash Player to further adoption of the language (and mimic one of the key strengths of HTML), but unfortunately it is not often used by developers.

[Dimitri @ Jun 30th 2009 11:47AM]

@Huh
While I agree that most Flash sucks, it is still the de facto way of streaming music and videos on the web. Until a fully streamable audio/video codec comes along that works (AND is adopted) on all major platforms, Flash will continue to reign supreme.

It sucks, because I too hate Flash with a passion, but there you have it.

Also, don't confuse markup languages (HTML, XML, etc) with multimedia technologies. HTML is not going to replace Javascript or Flash or whatever else comes along. For now, and in the foreseeable future, that will simply not change.

[huh @ Jun 30th 2009 11:51AM]

fashionista, that's interesting, and I might even take you seriously if you weren't such a potty mouth and obviously biased. The could have/should have info about what most Flash designers don't do is particularly impotent. For sure HTML has had some issues over the years as standards bodies and individuals struggle with its intricacies and failings. We'll see in a few years, or we can just look at the Web today and see how much important content is Flash (zilch, aside from a few video players). The good news is your skills will transfer as what you talked about is not unique to Flash.

[huh @ Jun 30th 2009 11:57AM]

Dmitri, quite right, Flash is the most suitable media player on the Web today, but that's a single role really, and is done as a single facet of an HTML site. I could imagine a very interactive Flash video player scooping HTML 5, but one of the goals of HTML is to make Flash unnecessary, as the Web should be entirely multi-party standards based. With the huge growth of mobile devices like the iPhone, Androids, Palm, etc, for the foreseeable future, it is not sensible to code essential elements of a site in Flash, and videos are best streamed today via a link to YouTube.

[Dimitri @ Jun 30th 2009 11:58AM]

@fashionista

While I agree that Huh didn't really understand what he was talking about, I also think that your calling HTML a "friggin hoax" reveals an ignorance unsurpassed by Huh or anyone in recent memory.

[fashionista @ Jun 30th 2009 12:00PM]

Well la-di-da

[huh @ Jun 30th 2009 12:08PM]

Dimitri, maybe you should take a deeper look at what is happening with HTML 5 before calling others ignorant. I certainly do understand what I'm talking about. While I've very intentionally eschewed Flash, aside from the occasional embedding of Flash video, I have developed many interactive sites and follow the main direction of web standards, with experience of how the heel-dragging, meddling and inabilities of various players interacts. I'd like to see a future with no Flash, and it's likely to happen within a few years outside the playground/commercial aspects of the web, unless Adobe really pulls up its socks and forces Flash developers to do things properly in the way that xHTML forces sites to be more compatible and accessible.

[Dimitri @ Jun 30th 2009 12:09PM]

@huh

Your heart is in the right place. Really. But your understanding of the web is more wishful thinking than reality (with no disrespect intended).

You wrote: "one of the goals of HTML is to make Flash unnecessary".

That is demonstratively false. Not mostly false, or matter-of-opinion false, but absolutely, 100% false.

Where did you get that idea? Who said that? Certainly not the W3C organization; I guarantee you that.

Anyway, I fully agree with you, in principle, that Flash generally sucks, but that is where our agreement ends.

Cheers.
D

[Tsing Tao @ Jun 30th 2009 12:38PM]

@fashionist So AJAX web development is a hoax? Ill make sure to let the web 2.0 devs know. Ill bet they get right on closing down Facebook, twitter, linkdin and al the other HTML+Js hoax sites.

"Hai guys, shut it down, fashionista says that everything your working on is a hoax, yup just like area 51 and the cold war. I know it doesn't make any sense, but i read it on the internetz from a professional FLASH developer, so you know its true".

A 1 armed monkey could put flash video on the internet, its not hard and certainly not something i would go around bragging about while downplaying the language that makes it even possible to put it on the internet. Of course to even try to defend a closed source plug-in while calling yourself a "Web Developer" pretty much invalidates your whole argument.

Sure there is a place in this world for flash, but that place is getting smaller and smaller and if we are all lucky it will one day disappear into nothing like what flash did to the open source SVG.