Android 9 for Amlogic S912

[Jancales]

Nop theirs not!

I always read here that they are the manufacturer, and I can't get any other boxes from them, so i thought they were genuine.

Do you know who the manufacturer is, then I'll change supplier?

So the Tanix TX9S is also not the real thing?

https://www.gearbest.com/tv-box/pp_009329759547.html

[superceleron]

I always read here that they are the manufacturer, and I can't get any other boxes from them, so i thought they were genuine.

Do you know who the manufacturer is, then I'll change supplier?

So the Tanix TX9S is also not the real thing?

https://www.gearbest.com/tv-box/pp_009329759547.html

hmm also Tanix? very weird...

[superceleron]

Anyway i just a quick talk just now with someone( does not matter who he is, cant tell anyway lol )
And i can say this, just be very suspicious of all s912 that says it have android 9 for sell.

[Jancales]

Anyway i just a quick talk just now with someone( does not matter who he is, cant tell anyway lol )
And i can say this, just be very suspicious of all s912 that says it have android 9 for sell.

Suspicious in which way please.

Should we stay clear of this boxes for some reason, like they are of substandard quality, or just be aware that it's a gimmick they use to sell more boxes.

I had a look at the Tanix-box website and the TX9S is not listed there, but so has the M8S Max never been listed on the Videostrong website.

You know a reason for that?

[superceleron]

Suspicious in which way please.

Should we stay clear of this boxes for some reason, like they are of substandard quality, or just be aware that it's a gimmick they use to sell more boxes.

I had a look at the Tanix-box website and the TX9S is not listed there, but so has the M8S Max never been listed on the Videostrong website.

You know a reason for that?

I think you heard of clearing stocks?!
Their quality... can be good in hw, but bad in soft... or just bad in both... now they also can be good but is a gamble!
About some boxes never get to their sites dunno really...!

[RiCkLaR_atvX]

I always read here that they are the manufacturer, and I can't get any other boxes from them, so i thought they were genuine.
Do you know who the manufacturer is, then I'll change supplier?
So the Tanix TX9S is also not the real thing?
https://www.gearbest.com/tv-box/pp_009329759547.html

The Gearbest website info for the Tanix TX9S is just a mistake by Gearbest, I saw a couple YouTube videos on the TX9S and everything looked normal Nougat firmware, none of the crap about trying to change device files to have the appearance of Android 9 like the devices you got from Videostrong.

Any particular reason why you want to stick with buying Amlogic_S912 devices? I still am a fan of the S912 devices, but the new and cheap Amlogic S905X3 is a really good chip for the money.

As far as manufacturers go, I am a fan of Tanix and have already ordered their new TX6S with new Allwinner Chip and Android 10 firmware.

[Jancales]

The Gearbest website info for the Tanix TX9S is just a mistake by Gearbest, I saw a couple YouTube videos on the TX9S and everything looked normal Nougat firmware, none of the crap about trying to change device files to have the appearance of Android 9 like the devices you got from Videostrong.

Any particular reason why you want to stick with buying Amlogic_S912 devices? I still am a fan of the S912 devices, but the new and cheap Amlogic S905X3 is a really good chip for the money.

As far as manufacturers go, I am a fan of Tanix and have already ordered their new TX6S with new Allwinner Chip and Android 10 firmware.

Definitely not a Gearbest mistake, because if you enter TX9S Android 9 in Google you get plenty of results from sites not related to each other, including this one from Geekbuying

https://www.geekbuying.com/item/TANI...GB-420055.html Specification

General	Brand: TANIX Model: TX9S Type: TV Box
Hardware	OS: Android 9.0 CPU: Amlogic S912 Octa-core ARM Cortex-A53 GPU: ARM Mali-T820MP3 GPU RAM: 2GB RAM ROM: 8GB eMMC5.0 Extended Storage: SD CARD Support 1~32GB

The reason that I want to stay with S912 are also plenty.

Processor reviews show that there is no real advantage with S905X2 and X3

When I read reviews on this forum from those boxes I see a lot of issues mentioned. S905X2 is discontinued in the mean time.

For S912 quite a few good working custom roms are available from Superceleron and Magendanz, but the same can't be said about the newer processors.

I'm actually not a proponent of Android 9, and I wasn't informed that the new lot would have this operating system, because there are still plenty of bugs and no custom rom that has no issues as of yet.

On the M8S Max the Magendanz rom for the Pro L works really a charm, so why change a winning team?

In the mean time I have been playing a bit with the Max " Android 9 " box and it is very snappy.

I also notice that apps like Antutu benchmark are not available in Playstore, though they were available on the 7.1 OS, and can also not run when side loaded.

The Antutu Benchmark Beta is available from Playstore.

[Jancales]

As far as manufacturers go, I am a fan of Tanix and have already ordered their new TX6S with new Allwinner Chip and Android 10 firmware.

I'm sure you will have noticed that I sell Android boxes.

I have tried the Tanix TX92 and The Vorke Z6, which are actually the same box only different supplier, in small quantities.

Both brands have had a large percentage of total loss ( more than 20%), much larger than any other brands i have ever sold, so I don't touch them with a barge pole any more.

From the 4 different Mecool models I have sold only 3 boxes in total have failed, and 2 of them were replaced under warranty.

Tanix and Vorke have refused warranty however each and every failure was well within the warranty period. There is a topic somewhere on this forum about my issues with the Vorke Z6 and Geekbuying of which Vorke is a subsidiary.

Reason may be that I live in a tropical country, and both the Z6 and TX92 overheat very quickly, but actually every budget box runs pretty hot here.

[Jancales]

superceleron I noticed something strange with this new lot of boxes.

I flash them with a 7.1 custom rom using the latest burning tool.

All previous boxes I have flashed take 2.27 min to complete the burn.

These boxes take 2.41 minute to complete with the same rom. Especially the formatting phase ( 7% ) takes extremely long, something like 22 seconds

I have flashed 4 boxes and the processing time is exactly same. The first box burning tool actually crashed during the formatting phase, and i was afraid the box would be bricked

I then flash them a second time with the same custom rom and then the process is the usual 2.27 minutes with the formatting also just a few seconds.

The extended time to format indicates something of course. Could it be that this is because there is a different operating system than the one i want to flash?

The previous version went from 7.1 to 7.1 obviously, and on the second flash it also goes from 7.1 to 7.1

Your opinion on this will be much appreciated.

[superceleron]

superceleron I noticed something strange with this new lot of boxes.

I flash them with a 7.1 custom rom using the latest burning tool.

All previous boxes I have flashed take 2.27 min to complete the burn.

These boxes take 2.41 minute to complete with the same rom. Especially the formatting phase ( 7% ) takes extremely long, something like 22 seconds

I have flashed 4 boxes and the processing time is exactly same. The first box burning tool actually crashed during the formatting phase, and i was afraid the box would be bricked

I then flash them a second time with the same custom rom and then the process is the usual 2.27 minutes with the formatting also just a few seconds.

The extended time to format indicates something of course. Could it be that this is because there is a different operating system than the one i want to flash?

The previous version went from 7.1 to 7.1 obviously, and on the second flash it also goes from 7.1 to 7.1

Your opinion on this will be much appreciated.

That can be a slower EMMC was used!
Also take to account the size of the emmc, a 16gb emmc of course it formats faster than a 32gb and the 32gb faster than a 64gb etc etc..

[Jancales]

That can be a slower EMMC was used!
Also take to account the size of the emmc, a 16gb emmc of course it formats faster than a 32gb and the 32gb faster than a 64gb etc etc..

Thanks for your response and a Merry Christmas.

I get your point, but did you notice my remark that I flash each box twice, and only the first flash the formatting part takes like 22 seconds, the second flash the formatting takes just a few seconds.

Obviously emmc is same size during second flash, and is 32 Gb by default with the M8S Max.

It's also only the format part that is extended, all the writing of the new firmware takes normal progress times.

With the previous ( 7.1 ) boxes the formatting part would only take a few seconds from the first flash, never needed to flash twice.

[superceleron]

Thanks for your response and a Merry Christmas.

I get your point, but did you notice my remark that I flash each box twice, and only the first flash the formatting part takes like 22 seconds, the second flash the formatting takes just a few seconds.

Obviously emmc is same size during second flash, and is 32 Gb by default with the M8S Max.

It's also only the format part that is extended, all the writing of the new firmware takes normal progress times.

With the previous ( 7.1 ) boxes the formatting part would only take a few seconds from the first flash, never needed to flash twice.

Merry xmas to you to
Ye i notice what you wrote, what i can tell you is ... quality... when you cant get consistent time flashing the SAME build,

[Jancales]

Merry xmas to you to
Ye i notice what you wrote, what i can tell you is ... quality... when you cant get consistent time flashing the SAME build,

I do get the same consistent time, so it is not a quality issue.

The total time of 2.41 minutes with formatting of 22 seconds happens ONLY during the first flash, after that I can flash 5 times if I want and get each and every time the same 2.27 minutes as with the previous lots.

To me it looks that if you flash a 7.1 build to a box that already has a 7.1 OS, or same kernel as the build you gonna flash, the formatting needs less time.

So clearly on first flash the formatting has to remove/ replace some files that are not need replacing when the box already has a 7.1 OS or the same Kernel as the build you gonna flash.

The new boxes have a kernel dated November 2019. If they just change the settings to Android 9 as was said here, does that involve updating the kernel?

[superceleron]

I do get the same consistent time, so it is not a quality issue.

The total time of 2.41 minutes with formatting of 22 seconds happens ONLY during the first flash, after that I can flash 5 times if I want and get each and every time the same 2.27 minutes as with the previous lots.

To me it looks that if you flash a 7.1 build to a box that already has a 7.1 OS, or same kernel as the build you gonna flash, the formatting needs less time.

So clearly on first flash the formatting has to remove/ replace some files that are not need replacing when the box already has a 7.1 OS or the same Kernel as the build you gonna flash.

The new boxes have a kernel dated November 2019. If they just change the settings to Android 9 as was said here, does that involve updating the kernel?

if you flash the same build, it takes less time because it erased only the data, since the partitions size are the same on the rest!
So it does not need to format all partitions to the size since its the same it only flashes on top of the other system/etc... partitions, but it does format data and cache!
Kernel date it means when it was compiled, and only that!

[Jancales]

if you flash the same build, it takes less time because it erased only the data, since the partitions size are the same on the rest!
So it does not need to format all partitions to the size since its the same it only flashes on top of the other system/etc... partitions, but it does format data and cache!
Kernel date it means when it was compiled, and only that!

Thanks for taking the time to explain, I think we are getting there. :-)

It was clear to me from the beginning that the extended format is caused by some extra " actions "

So when the boxes came with the 7.1 firmware, it didn't have to format certain partitions, because I flashed a 7.1 build which had the same partitions.

Now that the boxes come with 9.0 firmware, which everyone claims is actually nothing more than 7.1 with some settings changed, it is obvious from the extended formatting time that it has to format some partitions that are different from the 7.1 build.

So the question is which partitions would that be, and since it is claimed that it's actually a 7.1 firmware instead of 9.0, why are those partition different?

Does sticking the Android Tv settings in a 7.1 build change the partition size?