not official bad blocks????

[Tomthumb]

After Sending my Technomate NanoOE box back for repair, and the motherboard having to have been changed. I spoke today with someone dealing with this for me, who made some quite interesting statements that i feel i must question and ask for further information on.

I had been using openvix 3.0.793

I believe that as my last log was showing bad blocks my box was suffering from a bad nand chip,

Jan 1 01:00:58 tmnano user.debug kernel: Bad block table Bbt0 found at page 0001ffc0, version 0x01 for chip on CS0
Jan 1 01:00:58 tmnano user.debug kernel: Bad block table 1tbB found at page 0001ff80, version 0x01 for chip on CS0
Jan 1 01:00:58 tmnano user.debug kernel: nand_read_bbt: Bad block at 0x0ef40000
Jan 1 01:00:58 tmnano user.debug kernel: nand_read_bbt: Bad block at 0x0ef60000

I was more than alarmed, when today i was informed that as i wasn't using the officially supported 4d image, I had been using an unofficially supported image openvix 3.0.796 and that it has been known that incorrect flashing of this had been known to CAUSE bad blocks.

This raises two rather serious questions.
1. Is VIX really safe to flash to flash to my nano box. With this being an "unofficial image" it was implied i had done something wrong by using this?? I was under the assumption that as technomate are part of the oe alliance it was perfectly ok to use vix images???

2. why/how would bad blocks possibly be being created, purely by flashing an image correctly.(and it completing fully with no issues) as an image is only software that resides on the Nand and a bad block is marked in the bad block table, (which i believe is normally mirrored) surely the only way is if the bad block is being erased and thereby losing the bad block information from factory. surely that would be a BOOTLOADER/image issue and certainly not my fault?

Curious to here thoughts on this please??

Thx

[Rob van der Does]

Technomate is not a partner in the OE-alliance.

Bad blocks are normal. When reading the bootlogs, they show on all my boxes.
Flashing ViX is safe. All my boxes have been flashed literally hundreds of times, with ViX and other images. There is no difference from flashing any 'official' image.

[Tomthumb]

Thx for reply rob,

Apolagies Though. you do give me another question. the oe alliance wiki (sorry its german) lists technomate as a member?

h**p://wiki.gigablue-support.com/index.php?title=Hauptseite

also listing technomate is

http://www.world-of-satellite.com/showthread.php?19666-OE-Alliance-and-openVix

so does that make vix official or un official supported firmware for the nano oe??

[Larry-G]

I was more than alarmed, when today i was informed that as i wasn't using the officially supported 4d image, I had been using an unofficially supported image openvix 3.0.796 and that it has been known that incorrect flashing of this had been known to CAUSE bad blocks.



I'm sorry mate but who ever told you that is talking a load of crap, in fact if it were not for ViX there would likely be no working images for these receivers. even the 4D image is not a official image as it's a clone of the Pli image with a few tweeks here ant there.

[abu baniaz]

Someone is talking out of their rear end. If you wanted a receiver which only uses "their" software, you would have bought a closed source one.

On several of their images, they have had Vu receiver pictures for their web interface. When challenged, "it is not our image, it is a third party image" they say.

They still don't know how to code properly. Why are their images 30 megs larger than VIX or OpenTV.

[Tomthumb]

Thanks Pheonix..

As i believe pli are an e2 team, but not part of the oe alliance as i understand things.
I found the statement made to me to be weird, almost as weird as the fact the boxs come delivered with 4d images installed and not an oe-a image lol

which still leaves the question ....what is the officially OK to flash images.. i Assumed these to be Any OE-alliance images released for the particular model as they are all based from the same core? but after todays chat.......feel REALLY CONFUSED!

This was not Technomate saying this.. the store i purchased it from who have been dealing with the return!

[abu baniaz]

Open PLi don't support TM receivers. The Korean coders hack the image to work on TMs. What image will you use then? The Nano does not have an alternate software!

Ignore them and use what image you like.

You should report the shop to TM.

[judge]

Yes, it's perfectly safe to flash a ViX image on this box.
TM were even involved in our testing of the images for their current supported range.
Whoever's telling you this is full of shite.

[Larry-G]

As abu says who ever told you that is plain old lying at best, or just plain old incompetent . Several OE-Alliance teams offer full support for the TM-OE models and i have personally flashed my Three ( Twin, 2T, Nano ) many hundreds of times with ViX all without issue.

[Tomthumb]

Spoken to Technomate technical about Vix image being installed on my box, Was informed nothing wrong warranty wise with having a vix image installed. This should also NOT cause bad blocks by installing this.

Thank you all, for confirming what i already knew 100%.

I do not wish to name this dealer here, although I do hope he reads this, I just wanted to get the information out there to anybody else being mislead by dealers, who I believe to be attempting to get out of being liable for return postage costs for FAULTY goods (the law). By shamefully lying, trying to make out YOU have caused the issue. Goods not faulty..you have caused it..no return postage liability for them!

To top it all off...box i sent had two usb ports at the rear. Having recieved it back "repaired", it still says on the metal casing 2x usb 2.0. it has in fact 1 usb and just a hole where the other usb should be. :mad:

Apparently this is an "official" repair :eek: (i checked with technomate, who confirmed this with me)

[Larry-G]

Spoken to Technomate technical about Vix image being installed on my box, Was informed nothing wrong warranty wise with having a vix image installed. This should also NOT cause bad blocks by installing this.

Thank you all, for confirming what i already knew 100%.

I do not wish to name this dealer here, although I do hope he reads this, I just wanted to get the information out there to anybody else being mislead by dealers, who I believe to be attempting to get out of being liable for return postage costs for FAULTY goods (the law). By shamefully lying, trying to make out YOU have caused the issue. Goods not faulty..you have caused it..no return postage liability for them!

To top it all off...box i sent had two usb ports at the rear. Having recieved it back "repaired", it still says on the metal casing 2x usb 2.0. it has in fact 1 usb and just a hole where the other usb should be. :mad:

Apparently this is an "official" repair :eek: (i checked with technomate, who confirmed this with me)

I have spoken to the dealer in question and it seems you got the wrong end of the stick when he was trying to explain the possible causes of your problem, as for having two USB ports at the rear of the receiver thats a manufacturing flaw on Technomates side as the Nano only has one but they for some reason produced a number with two and it's these units that seem to be the buggy ones ( going by posts here and else where ). The dealer would have had to send the unit to TM for them to do the repair so he would have no control over which motherboard they fitted back into the case.

[Tomthumb]

The dealer in question was the one, who told me that i had been using an unofficial image!
When I said i believed it possibly had more to do with a bad nand chip, due to my last logs showing some bad blocks that did not show up on first logs. I was told that can be caused by flashing unofficial image? I'm sorry but I really do fail to see how I was getting the "wrong end of the stick" he was very clear and if I may say seemed a little ....irritated. If i am to be accused of getting the "wrong end of the stick" only the information he gave me could lead to that situation.

The dealer in question would indeed have no control over which motherboard was fitted, My point in regards to that...Just sloppy from technomate. As this unit from the back does not look as if from factory. It just looks wrong with a hole where a usb port should actually be.....replacing the Back plate at the same time during repair...or a complete new replacement unit would have been preferable to the frankenstein box i now have in my posession.

[judge]

Please upload images of the 'frankenstein box'.

[Tomthumb]

2 port case.... with one port motherboard

Really not what i expected!

pretty sure that it would affect any future resale value.. "box has been messed with" or "not original" would be my first comments to a seller ...reducing its resale value instantly!

[judge]

Looks like a TM issue, please contact them & point them in the way of this thread.

[Tomthumb]

I have contacted Technomate again with regards rejecting this as an appropriate repair. I have indeed pointed them to this thread. Waiting to hear back from them now. Thx

[abu baniaz]

By phone is better than email. Speak to Richard or Matt.

[Tomthumb]

Many thanks to Technomate for the call. System going back to them. Assured they will sort my issue's