Search the Community

I have a Galaxy J8 (SM-J810Y) phone from 2018 which has been updated to Android 10 but it really feels so slow so I decided to that I want to downgrade it to it's stock android 8 but it got some problems. As I flash the Android 8 firmware using Samsung's Odin, I always got an error of SW_REV_CHECK_FAIL [aboot] fused 6, binary 2. I tried everything even voiding the Samsung Knox which sacrifices my Secure Folder, Samsung Health, Samsung Internet's private mode, and Samsung Pass which I really regreted doing. Currently i'm running on Android 9 with the security patch level of February 1, 2020 which is already obsolete. Is there any trick that can fix or atleast bypass this issue? Do you guys also know any custom rom for this model? Any tip will be apprecieated

I was wondering if any apps or setting could allow the same type of minimized calls and notifications in One UI 3.1, on Stock Android 12/Google Pixel?

tl;dr (Adding this here since people can't be bothered to read carefully or research on their own): Pixel System usage is around 17 GB. Samsung's is roughly only 4 GB more than that at 21 GB. (Apparently if you don't round everything, it actually comes out to a difference of around 2.6 GB ) Yes this accounts for A/B System partitions. That ArsTechnica article is full of misinformation, gross overexaggerations, heavily biased language, and actual lies about how much evidence supports their claims; and the update they tacked on is loaded with errors as well. I know how this sounds, but if you disagree with this, you're probably wrong. Take a moment to actually understand what's going on and ask questions to better understand instead of assuming I can't do basic math. I can't believe that bullshit ArsTechnica article is still causing issues this long after people have debunked it into the ground and straight through to the other side of the earth, but here we go. Honestly, I've typed so much about this already, so the bulk of this will just be copy pasted from my comments on other articles. There's another post over in the phones section that is a bit more technical, but they also missed a big part of the issue, so I'll be covering everything again. Much of the below is copy/pasted from my own comments elsewhere, with additional notes added by me in superscript: The original ArsTechnica article (which is the source for all this misinformation that every other news outlet ran with) claims to have gathered the evidence from responses to a tweet by Mishaal Rashman: There are multiple issues here, beyond the GB to GiB conversion issue, which is actually something all Android phones(Turns out not every, but many. See below.) do, not just Samsung. In fact this is a rather well-known practice and you can find posts about it dating back years. This is probably the most disappointing thing. Not only did someone try to inform you about this in chat—which you instantly dismissed rather than looking into it, because you thought they were talking about gigabits for some reason when Luke said "GB vs. GiB"—but this is one of the most widely known and discussed aspects of Android phone storage reporting, and a quick search would have yielded answers going back YEARS regarding this. (Edit: Here's a Reddit post from eight years ago discussing this happening on a 32GB phone.) EVEN WORSE, the notebookcheck article you pulled up explains all of this, but instead of looking at their explanation in the VERY NEXT PARAGRAPH, all you read is the "it couldn't be true because x" section and stop there. Well here's the explanation: Android (as almost everything else with storage) advertises storage capacity in decimal GB. I believe that's actually law in some places including the US. However, like Windows, the OS measures it in binary GiB, but uses the symbol GB (for which we can blame JEDEC's asinine standards). Many vendors quickly got fed up with users complaining that their X GB phones were only Y GB, so they started adding the numerical difference between the capacity measured in decimal GB (gigabytes) and the capacity measured in binary "GB" (actually GiB/gibibytes) to System, so that the measured total capacity adds up to the advertised decimal capacity. The difference for each capacity tier is as follows and needs to be subtracted from the reported System utilization on affected phones: 68.677 GB for 1 TB phones 35.163 GB for 512 GB phones 17.581 GB for 256 GB phones 8.791 GB for 128 GB phones 4.395 GB for 64 GB phones etc . . . In case this wasn't clear the first time, no, you are not losing any space. The "advertised capacity" vs "real world capacity" terminology (which the update added to the ArsTechnica article uses) is nonsensical and misleading. You might as well argue that you lost distance because the 1 kilometer you measured is only 0.621 when measured in miles. That space never existed and only exists imaginarily. It's like trying to measure 1 km in miles, but you start at .379 mi at the 0 mark so that it ends at 1 mile. That first .379 mi never existed. Many Android phones do this, and it's disappointing that you didn't consider this when you noted that the reported System utilization scales with capacity. There are exceptions, and while many vendors do this, some don't. Notably, Pixel devices do not do this (Adding the fake "difference" that is. The OS still measures in gibibytes while using "GB".), as numerous screenshots exist of stock 512 GB and 256 GB Pixel devices with well under 35.16 GB and 17.58 GB (respectively) of reported System usage (the value that would be added for those respective capacities as mentioned before). That would leave no room for the OS itself, if you subtracted those amounts from the reported System usage. This doesn't change that discussion about manufacturers who do add the difference has been ongoing for years. However this does make the "correction" that ArsTechnica added to their article (see below) even more laughable. If you go to Twitter and check the responses to Mishaal's tweet, focusing specifically on screenshots from Samsung devices, you'll notice the vast majority of them have an "i" icon next to the section that is supposed to measure user apps. That's because the Samsung My Files app (which is used to measure storage within the Settings app) does not have the permissions necessary to measure this by default. As the device is aware that something is using this space, it gets added to System by default, until the user gives the My Files app the necessary permissions. As it's impossible to know how much storage a user has taken up with user apps, any screenshot with the "i" icon is therefore useless as a data point. If you look at the remaining screenshots, they all fall in line with what's expected at their storage tier (after accounting for the GB to GiB issue) and not a single 128 GB device ever approached the kind of scenario this suggests: Honestly, this might just be me, but that "i" icon sticks out like a sore thumb, and it is surprising to me just how many people don't even think twice about it and try pressing it. It's basically second nature for me to press something like that if it comes up while I'm checking something important. But I guess even other tech geeks look right past it. But it gets worse still. If you search Twitter for image responses to Mishaal that include the string "s23", ignoring whether or not the screenshot has the "i" icon, there are only five screenshots of unique S23 devices (the sixth is the same device again, after the owner gave the correct permissions to the My Files app), and only two of them approach anything near 60 GB (one other is under 50 GB, and the rest are under 40 GB). Of the two, only one of the screenshots are taken with the correct permissions, but let's assume the author was ignorant and put that aside for now. That still doesn't excuse this line in the article: As any statements without screenshots can't be assumed to be true, this is either seriously negligent journalism at best, or at worst, a blatant lie about how many sources supported his claims. Beyond these two factors (which are by far the most impactful) any other discrepancy with true System usage can probably be attributed to partitioning, file systems, reserved spaces, and whatever else Android likes to add on to System to make everything add up to the decimal total. One final note here because you mentioned A/B system partitions: Google has been using virtual A/B since Android 11, so no, Pixel devices aren't carrying two full system partitions. Edit: One FINAL (for real) thing I'm adding here. Enough people keep hearing "gibibyte" and immediately start going off about how that doesn't make any sense, since converting 57 or whatever GB or GiB to the other unit doesn't result in nearly enough of a change to make up for the difference (despite my warning at the top of this post). Obviously, anyone who has actually read this understands that at no point did I ever claim it would, since it wasn't ever suggested to convert the reported system usage. Nevertheless, these doorknobs keep going off about it, so I'm adding this here to quote later when people want to make fools of themselves. (End of copy/pasted section) Summary: this is absolutely not a "developing story". Most of this has been discussed ad nauseam the last 10 years, and the rest is due to people not bothering to press "i" icon and give My Files full permissions. Furthermore, anyone who did read the original article can easily see just how biased the wording of the article is throughout nearly its entirety. They did add an update at one point, but it only addressed half the problems, and it did so in (yet again) a very poorly-worded way. Since I don't want to give them any more traffic, I'm copying the whole article down here for anyone to read:

Ive been seeing people on the internet using the new one ui with S8s im wondering how would one do that and what are the risks of doing so [warranty voids?]

So, I got the new Android 9 update and One UI for my Samsung Galaxy S9. And I have some questions about it. First, how do I make the navigation bar go away when I'm in an app (first picture). Is there a way to make it black perhaps? Using the other navigation bar (second picture) also gives a white bar. Second, is there a way to make the recents (third picture) go away with a slide to the side, instead of sliding up like it used to be? Third and last, how do I get rid of Bixby? I don't want Bixby to show up when pressing the Bixby button. I hope there is a solution to all my problems

I live in the United States, Pennslyvania, my carrier is Verizon Wireless, I am currently waiting for the S9+ to update to Android Pie. I've heard most devices are getting it but does anyone know when Verizon will be updating there phones?

I want to download One UI 2.0 BETA based on android 10 for my US at&t varient of the s10e. Does anyone know how I can do this, and do i need to root my phone?

I recently received the One UI update for my Samsung S9+. I read up on many blog posts and online articles on the new features, tricks and tips for the software. One important feature that many have failed to notice (some may have, not to my knowledge) is the Dex functionality. We no longer need to buy the Dex pad to enjoy that experience. Like the Note 9, just a type-c to HDMI does the job. Kudos to Samsung for this.