Re: Logo on Ericsson W800i

Taylor wrote:

> It's surely more likely to be firmware customisation?! In
> which case, the answer is yes :-) You can 'unbrand' your
> handset using da vinci http://www.davinciteam.com - and use
> your w800 usb cable (or another cable) to unbrand it.

Could be firmware, but it's been done with STK in the few cases
I've seen.

John

In message <3t4h1iFr2343U1@individual.net>, John Henderson
<jhenRemoveThis@talk21.com> writes
>Could be firmware, but it's been done with STK in the few cases I've
>seen.

You don't really know do you? It _IS_ a firmware function and can only
be removed by debranding.
--
Pete Devlin
[{//////news03//////at\\\\\secondrow/////co\\\\\uk}]
"And the devil in a black dress watches over"

pete devlin wrote:

> You don't really know do you?

Yes, that's exactly what I said.

> It _IS_ a firmware function and can only be removed by
> debranding.

You're very confident. But as I said, extra logos, key
assignments and menu items can be implemented using SIM
Application Toolkit, and that's the way I've seen it done by
some telcos. And I've done enough STK programming myself to be
sure about the capabilities.

Please have a good look at GSM 11.14 for the technical details.

John

In message <3t729lFr14i4U1@individual.net>, John Henderson
<jhenRemoveThis@talk21.com> writes
>pete devlin wrote:
>
>> You don't really know do you?
>
>Yes, that's exactly what I said.

Then why make a complete guess at the rest?

>
>> It _IS_ a firmware function and can only be removed by
>> debranding.
>
>You're very confident. But as I said, extra logos, key
>assignments and menu items can be implemented using SIM
>Application Toolkit, and that's the way I've seen it done by
>some telcos. And I've done enough STK programming myself to be
>sure about the capabilities.

Someone has already told you how it is done. If you do actually know
different now would be a good time to prove it. Thinking out loud over
usenet is pointless and potentially embarressing.

>
>Please have a good look at GSM 11.14 for the technical details.
>
Why? I know how to do it. I have a phone in my hand with exactly the
result that the OP asked for. It is one of many that I have debranded.
It is nothing top do with GSM, it is a firmware function. Can we stop
wasting bandwidth over a trivial point now?
--
Pete Devlin
[{//////news03//////at\\\\\secondrow/////co\\\\\uk}]
"And the devil in a black dress watches over"

pete devlin wrote:

> Then why make a complete guess at the rest?

My sincerest apologies, but the OP asked a question, which I
jumped in and answered to the best of my ability.

> Someone has already told you how it is done.

They've pointed out that it _can_ be done in firmware, and I'd
be silly to dispute something so obvious. But have not I
personally seen that sort of thing done with firmware. Now it
may well be that's because I buy phones outright, unlocked,
without SIMs, and without any tethering to a particular
carrier. Perhaps it's also because we operate in different
world markets.

> If you do actually know different now would be a good time to
> prove it.

Prove what? Under discussion is exactly the sort of task STK
was put into the GSM standards for. My proof of the
alternative mechanism is my reference to GSM 11.14, QED.

> Thinking out loud over usenet is pointless and potentially
> embarressing.

I'm not even a little bit embarrassed.

> Why? I know how to do it. I have a phone in my hand with
> exactly the result that the OP asked for. It is one of many
> that I have debranded.

I'm not denying that, and I'm happy to take your word for your
"debranding" activities.

> It is nothing top do with GSM, it is a firmware function.

In many cases, apparently yes. But what about the telco selling
SIMs, and controlling aspects of the display and menus on
_whatever_ phone it's put into? They do achieve that you know,
and without write access to phone firmware. And you could
unsuccessfully try to "debrand" one of these phones until the
cows come home.

> Can we stop wasting bandwidth over a trivial point now?

I'm not the one who escalated this debate. To the extent that
it's trivial, you'll hear no more from me. What I hotly
contest however is the claim that any phone with visible
telco-specific functionality must be running "branded"
firmware.

John

Secret Squirrel wrote:

> No, it isn't anything to do with the sim card, it is in the
> new phone. It is irritating on two counts, one I don't really
> want to see the telco's logo every time I look at the phone,
> and two, they have pre empted a useful shortcut, the one that
> brings up the main menu and replaced it with a logo that logs
> onto the company's web site. I can use the menu button without
> looking at the phone i.e., while driving, but cannot reliably
> use the joystick to obtain the same result. The slightest
> directional movement on the joystick will put it into another
> menu area.
>
> I used to be able to navigate to any menu function with key
> presses, now, by being forced to use the joystick, I have to
> be watching the screen to do the same thing. It distracts
> while driving, not a good thing to do.
>
> I have discovered software that will remove it it but it only
> runs on a Windows platform - I am Mac based. I am returning
> the phone and going with another telco. I have instructed my
> credit card company to reverse the transaction and they have
> agreed to do so.

Hopefully it all works out for you. Some of us learned
something in the process, and that's always a good thing.

It's irrelevant to your situation now, but for the record 2 of
my 5 active SIMs behave in a similiar manner when put into a
pristine STK-capable handset. The others don't.

cheers,

John

pete devlin wrote:
> In message <3t729lFr14i4U1@individual.net>, John Henderson
> <jhenRemoveThis@talk21.com> writes
>
>> pete devlin wrote:
>>
>>> You don't really know do you?
>>
>>
>> Yes, that's exactly what I said.
>
>
> Then why make a complete guess at the rest?
>
>>
>>> It _IS_ a firmware function and can only be removed by
>>> debranding.
>>
>>
>> You're very confident. But as I said, extra logos, key
>> assignments and menu items can be implemented using SIM
>> Application Toolkit, and that's the way I've seen it done by
>> some telcos. And I've done enough STK programming myself to be
>> sure about the capabilities.
>
>
> Someone has already told you how it is done. If you do actually know
> different now would be a good time to prove it. Thinking out loud over
> usenet is pointless and potentially embarressing.
>
>>
>> Please have a good look at GSM 11.14 for the technical details.
>>
> Why? I know how to do it. I have a phone in my hand with exactly the
> result that the OP asked for. It is one of many that I have debranded.
> It is nothing top do with GSM, it is a firmware function. Can we stop
> wasting bandwidth over a trivial point now?

How could a sim, something that can be used in any model or type of
cellphone, interact with the various operating systems and hardware that
it could potentially encounter and still replace a specific function on
a specific phone? I would be more inclined to agree that it would be in
the phone's firmware.

Curious though, as I also have a W800 although mine is not "branded" in
any manner. What I find intriguing is the possibility of reassigning a
dedicated function key to another single keypress function, say
switching Bluetooth on and off.

Have you done this?

Regards

David

--

To email me, please include the letters DNF anywhere in the subject line.

All other mail is automatically deleted.

In message <2NKcf.133$mM1.3478@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au>, J. David Anderson
<jdavidanderson_@hotmail.?.invalid> writes
>How could a sim, something that can be used in any model or type of
>cellphone, interact with the various operating systems and hardware
>that it could potentially encounter and still replace a specific
>function on a specific phone? I would be more inclined to agree that it
>would be in the phone's firmware.

Of course it is.

>
>Curious though, as I also have a W800 although mine is not "branded" in
>any manner. What I find intriguing is the possibility of reassigning a
>dedicated function key to another single keypress function, say
>switching Bluetooth on and off.
>
>Have you done this?

No. It would involve modifying firmware and loading it. I just know how
to replace one with another. Way beyond me. The shortcuts function gets
you there in 2 clicks - that's almost there!
--
Pete Devlin
[{//////news03//////at\\\\\secondrow/////co\\\\\uk}]
"And the devil in a black dress watches over"