PlayStation 3 Controller On Android Devices 133
An anonymous reader writes "You can now use the PS3 Sixaxis Controller on Android phones and devices. This requires your phone to be rooted, however it is incompatible with most HTC devices and some newer Samsung devices due to the need of specific Bluetooth protocol. It can sync four controllers at once with buttons completely configurable."
What is it with BT? (Score:4, Interesting)
I understand that, when one or both devices communicating are likely to be embedded ones for which driver update is impractical or impossible, the specification of assorted "Protocols" is desireable(and extremely convenient, as in the case of USB's "Classes"). What I don't understand, though, is why the various BT protocols seem to be so device/driver dependent. Some dongles support protocol X, others don't, others do with a cracked copy of BlueSoliel Y or higher...
Why is it up to the bluetooth device, or to its driver, to support high-level protocols(even on PCs) rather than just handling the low-level link stuff and letting the OS or userspace handle the clever stuff? It seems vaguely like discovering that your NIC is handling SIP in-driver, and if you happen to buy the wrong one, VOIP just won't work. I can understand why a maker of embedded chipsets might produce an IC combining a NIC with some VOIP-centered DSP stuff and an application processor, for the convenience of people building VOIP handsets and such; but encountering such a thing in a PC would be a bit of a shock.
Why is BT so weird?
I've never understood... (Score:4, Interesting)
... why people just accept that in order to do anything cool with an Android phone you have to jailbreak it first.
Among my friends there's about a 25/75 split between Android users and iPhone users (disclaimer: I've got an iPhone). Honestly, I don't really get the fanboy fuelled 'hate-dom' that seems to flare up whenever we get into a debate about the respective merits of our devices, especially because we're arguing about the superior brand of telephone. Really...?
I do find it strange, though, that despite Android phones having superior cameras, consumer-friendly features including the ability to replace your battery, better and faster processors, more ram and physical keyboards (in all ways, physically, superior to iPhones), whenever a debate comes... it's inevitable that one of the main arguments (usually the first one) that's bought out by the Android users is "It's open and it's free as in freedom", usually said with this smug grin, as though the iPhone is not. They're right, of course, but...
But then I ask something like, "Can I replace the 'telephone' app freely then?" and they nod eagerly and say, "Yep, you totally can, you just jailbreak it like this and-" ...
I can accept that Android has a great deal many superior features to the iPhone, but I eventually went with iPhone because it had the best user interface, painless upgrade process, everything about it 'just works' (unless it doesn't, such as 3GS wifi-access-point-mode), and the app-store is by far the best. Some people say, "If you're not willing to tinker with your devices you're not a real geek", at which point I tell them that it's just a telephone and I expect it, and its apps, to just work, all the time. It should not need to be tinkered with.
I just don't understand why when the inevitable fanboy war comes, that the very first feature that seems to be produced is "It's open if you jailbreak!". I mean, isn't that the very definition of jailbreaking? Making something closed open? (and yes, iPhones can do it to...)
My second question is...
Awesome! Is there an iPhone port of this?