Froyo for all - CyanogenMod 6 brings Android 2.2 to the masses, a video duel between an EPIC 4G and an N1 ensues
If you have already rooted your device, and want to try the Froyo experience, head over to the forums from the link below. Apart from improved speeds and battery life, the mod brings some additional features compared to the stock Android 2.2. A cool one is the browser color invert (saves battery life on AMOLED screens, such as the one on the Incredible), and there are also some music player enhancements, bringing along support for the lossless audio format FLAC. The mod is not without bugs, though, some users report installation problems, which might brick your device, as well as problems with Google services, so use at your own discretion.
In a battle of the operating system versions, the folks over at PocketNow have pitted a Samsung EPIC 4G, running a stock Android 2.1, against a Nexus One running the latest CyanogenMod 6 Froyo build. The authors ran the Quadrant full benchmark test and examined Wi-Fi and 3G download speeds, but we won't spoil the fascinating battle for you.
source: CyanogenMod & PocketNow
1. AppleBerry (unregistered) posted on 20 Oct 2010, 01:48 0 0
2. cellgeek82 posted on 30 Aug 2010, 10:32 0 0
Froyo advantages??? I beg to differ. I have the original Moto DROID and the Froyo has made it worse! Cosmetically it made it better but functionally it made it worse. My battery has actually got worse. I can't even go half a day without it completely dying. This may be because since the Froyo update my apps keep turning themselves on. I know this because every time I go to my App Killer the same apps keep showing as active, I'd kill them, a few minutes later they're all running again! YouTube has become very glitchy. The OS itself has gotten alot slower with these new updates. I loved it when it was still on 2.0, but now I can't wait to get an iPhone even if it means going to crappy AT&T. And don't call me a iFanboy, you all should know from my past posts that I was a major advocate of Android but now I'm going to the dark side lol. I know the Apple experience would be better because my 2 year old iPod Touch works better than my Droid now. I was at a Verizon store checking out the newer Droids thinking about just getting a new one, well the Droid 2 crashed and restarted while doing basic things on it and also found that the OS is real choppy. I tried the Droid X and liked it more than the others but when exiting a program it one time took several seconds for the home screen to load back up, OS is also not as smooth as advertised. I looked at my wife and said, whether it be with Verizon or AT&T...iPhone here we come! She agreed with me, and she was like me and once loved the Droid.
3. networkdood posted on 30 Aug 2010, 11:09 0 0
Are you referring to the real official 2.2 or this MOD??
4. PapaJay224 posted on 30 Aug 2010, 11:16 0 0
Yeah, my Droid Inc. has this CyanogenMod 6.0 RC3 and its amazing, I was almost tempted to take the OTA since it was the "lagit" 2.2 but this offers so much more. Included I have the 720p video and Vanilla overlay so I've rid of sense UI on my phone completely, and I dont miss it at all, especially with Launcher Pro Plus layer over the top. It runs smooth overclocked to 1.2GhZ battery is a little more "controllable" still runs out in a day with moderate heavy use but the experience isnt laggy and is mucho worth it to do this, not to mention but my highest benchmark was 1475...so you be the jusge Cyanogen or OTA..they're both worth it 2.2 FTW
7. networkdood posted on 30 Aug 2010, 13:42 0 0
1475 is the highest benchmark?? Wow, I've had my Captivate with 1.2 Ghz overclocked using setCPU at over 1900+, but I changed to a diff ROM as there was an issue with wakeup lag - may have been fixed by now...
5. cellgeek82 posted on 30 Aug 2010, 12:27 0 0
I'm talking about the official 2.2. I know this mod is different but Froyo itself just made me hate my phone.
11. SI (unregistered) posted on 01 Sep 2010, 18:28 0 0
2.2 itself isn't bad. It's Verizon and Motorola who decided to run MOTO BLUR on top of their 2.2 devices which causes the phone to bog down. Stock 2.2 in all cases makes all Android phones perform better, faster, and have better battery life. T-Mobile is releasing the G2 which is a stock Android 2.2 device has a QWERTY and a next gen processor compared to any other android phone clocked anywhere from 800mhz to 1Ghz. It is also going to be HSPA+ compliant which is t-mobile's 21MBPS network so you should see real world speeds of 10-11MBPs on it and they don't charge you extra for it. This crush's Sprint's WiMax speeds which have users at 3-5MBps max
6. madbohem (unregistered) posted on 30 Aug 2010, 13:11 0 0
I am rather impressed with the latest stable release. http://madbohem.com/technology
8. Froyo (unregistered) posted on 30 Aug 2010, 14:42 0 0
This just proves that benchmarks dont mean shit. The epic finished way faster, the graphics ran smoother and it still got a lower score.
10. cythe (unregistered) posted on 31 Aug 2010, 06:25 0 0
Yes. Why did Epic get a lower score, in spite of the graphics being much smoother than N1? Care to explain that?
9. networkdood posted on 30 Aug 2010, 15:15 0 0
I got around 1.5Mbps and 400 kbps download with under 200 latency - various so much as it uses a settle server and yet with speedtest.net I get 2+Mpbs with a server much closer to me, so I question the accuracy of the FCC app used to measure speed on this video....Sprint phone should be a better phone than NEXUS as it is newer with a better processor.
13. ExploreMN (unregistered) posted on 04 Sep 2010, 14:55 0 0
Well...better processor depends on your definition of better. It does have better GPU, but similar CPU in the processor (yeah...on these phones the GPU and CPU are in the same chip). But I agree which is why I posted that I am a bit confused on the benchmark...the Samsung pounds the Nexus in actually running the tests yet it reports results showing its slower? That doesn't make much sense to me and makes me question the accuracy of the benchmark. In addition, I ran the FCC test from Minnesota and connected to a Texas server and showed only 128, 134, and 126 latency in 3 consecutive tests and I have 4G disabled since its not in my area yet and only drains the battery with no benefit at this time.
12. ExploreMN (unregistered) posted on 04 Sep 2010, 12:59 0 0
Okay, I'm confused. You launched the benchmarks at the same time and the Epic left the Nexus in the dust and performed all the tasks much faster. So how is it that the "numbers" show it to be slower? Could it be that the benchmark results are not calculated correct? Based on the numbers, the Nexus should have done everything much faster.
14. drkgouki (unregistered) posted on 05 Sep 2010, 08:13 0 0
Your "testing" method and logic are incredibly flawed. Are you really a phone reviewer? Obviously the Epic was the faster phone in the Quadrant testing, despite the number at the end. Hence the reason most synthetic benchmarking is not a good judge of real world performance usage. You also fail to compare "apples to apples". Neither phone is running under the same condition, you said yourself that the phones were operating at their fastest network speed during the bandwidth test (3G) yet once during the testing,you say that the Epic found 4G and that affected the performance of the test you were running. Why was the 4G radio even on if you couldn't get a steady signal? Not to mention that Sprint and T-Mobile route their data traffic different, through different servers. You fail.
15. Phonaholic (unregistered) posted on 14 Nov 2010, 01:28 0 0
How can you say that the nexus one is faster when it finished last. Does it matter what the numbers say or what you actually see happening right in front of your face. 4g does not switch to 3g and vice versa unless it is on. You either put it on to make the epic look bad since you do not have a good 4g reception in your area or you just do not know what the hell you are doing. Either way it proves you are a moronic idiot like half of the U.S. population these days. Kiss my ass loser.