D-Link Forums
The Graveyard - Products No Longer Supported => DIR-655 => Routers / COVR => Beta Code! => Topic started by: pbodq on August 13, 2009, 06:58:31 PM
-
http://www.dlinktw.com.tw/temp/dk2Support_Firmware/831/DIR-655A4_EA_release_notes.txt
I find that the build date and publish date are more recent than 1.32NA. Also, the history logs are different.
Are there 2 different groups of developer excluding the language localization part?
Also, my buddy tested that this 1.30 beta4 can rollback to 1.20EA, build 01.
http://www.dlinktw.com.tw/temp/dk2Support_Firmware/831/DIR655A4_FW130EAB04.bin
-
But if you have installed 1.3xNA firmware you can't change to this firmware.
The router will not accept it.
Only up to version 1.22 you may try this one and can roll back to your old version.
But sounds interesting for those who want to use 3G.
-
But if you have installed 1.3xNA firmware you can't change to this firmware.
The router will not accept it.
Only up to version 1.22 you may try this one and can roll back to your old version.
But sounds interesting for those who want to use 3G.
So am I reading this right - the non U.S. firmware allows rollback from 1.3x and D-Links USA 1.32na release which apparently was designed to cripple us and ensure buisness suicide for them doesn't?
What kind of one-sided customer murder / buisness suicide scenerio is this? "Smrt" (ala Homer Simpson).
I guess there was valid reason for everyone in the IT department I work in to cringe when I mention "D-Link..."). Due to the lack of any response from D-Link on this matter and my own sad "try changing your MTU" tech support call I'm not shopping for a new Cisco/LinkSys unit.
-
So am I reading this right - the non U.S. firmware allows rollback from 1.3x and D-Links USA 1.32na release which apparently was designed to cripple us and ensure buisness suicide for them doesn't?
What kind of one-sided customer murder / buisness suicide scenerio is this? "Smrt" (ala Homer Simpson).
I guess there was valid reason for everyone in the IT department I work in to cringe when I mention "D-Link..."). Due to the lack of any response from D-Link on this matter and my own sad "try changing your MTU" tech support call I'm not shopping for a new Cisco/LinkSys unit.
that's simple, the 1.3 NA version is based on a new SDK/kernel/whatever, and that makes the downgrade impossible, for now.
Those 1.30 chinese is based on the old one, so is possible to downgrade.
-
that's simple, the 1.3 NA version is based on a new SDK/kernel/whatever, and that makes the downgrade impossible, for now.
Those 1.30 chinese is based on the old one, so is possible to downgrade.
V 1.30EA, build 04, 2009/07/10
1. Ubicom SDK 7.6.1 build 124, 2009, JULY 07 UBICOM_7_6_1_B0124
Firmware Version: ver1.32NAb03
Firmware Date: 2009/07/09
ipVersion(Date): 7.6.1b0124 (2009, Jul 07)
ipOS SDK Version: 7.6.3 P (1134)
ipOS version is the same - just SDK is newer.
-
I want to DOWNGRADE!!!!
I HAVE FLASH MY FIRMWARE FROM 1.22EA TO THE NA s***!!!
AND I WANT MY EA FIRMWARE BACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
I want to DOWNGRADE!!!!
I HAVE FLASH MY FIRMWARE FROM 1.22EA TO THE NA ****!!!
AND I WANT MY EA FIRMWARE BACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I guess you can read?
a. the changelog included
b. the post on the forum abbout the release
You had you're choice, gambled and now blaming everybody but yourself?
-
I guess you can read?
a. the changelog included
b. the post on the forum abbout the release
You had you're choice, gambled and now blaming everybody but yourself?
How is he blaming everybody else?
Let me quote the dlink firmware page.
"There may be new firmware for your DIR-655 to improve functionality and performance."
No one's fault but Dlinks, he did not update to a beta he updated to 1.32NA! which should provide improved functionality and performance.
Nice try at trolling. Go sit back down.
-
How is he blaming everybody else?
Let me quote the dlink firmware page.
"There may be new firmware for your DIR-655 to improve functionality and performance."
No one's fault but Dlinks, he did not update to a beta he updated to 1.32NA! which should provide improved functionality and performance.
Nice try at trolling. Go sit back down.
Down boy.
He is complaining about not being able to downgrade. Just read his lines.
-
Last version SDK - v7.10 23-January-2009 http://developer.ubicom.com/wiki/index.php/IpOS
-
7.10 IpOS changelog:
"Increased the number of simultaneous Bit Torrent connections by accelerating connection recycling under heavy router loads. "
With this IpOS changed, I hope the next version of firmware will be more resilient to BT download. I have encounter running out of resource problem with this router after nearly 4 days of BT. It can't create new connections (logs say so). I wonder if it's the same lockup problem ppl say turning DNS relay solves but by doing it that somehow my DIR-655 A4 with 1.32NA firmware works with lower performance. Hump.
-
7.10 IpOS changelog:
"Increased the number of simultaneous Bit Torrent connections by accelerating connection recycling under heavy router loads. "
With this IpOS changed, I hope the next version of firmware will be more resilient to BT download. I have encounter running out of resource problem with this router after nearly 4 days of BT. It can't create new connections (logs say so). I wonder if it's the same lockup problem ppl say turning DNS relay solves but by doing it that somehow my DIR-655 A4 with 1.32NA firmware works with lower performance. Hump.
I hope not. Torrents are a pain in the arse, cause headaches, and ignorance to the other people the use the internet. Though it's not dlink's fault so I'm not blaming them. I blame the people that don't understand how to setup their clients so they don't saturate the network with their illegal torrents, leaving no bandwidth for legitament traffic.
-
I see, you got torrent kicked you in the ass, make you have headache and then turn ignorance too. Poor guy. For me torrent works wonder to dl a lot of things, from illegal as in not available in my country to legal like linux distro for example.
To be honest I have no problem if I use the routing feature of my ADSL modem, a rusty but trusty Speedtouch 530v6, just that I like to use the Dlink router as it has other features I like. IOW performance wise this DIR-655 with Ubicom processor and 16MB RAM works worse than the Speedtouch with Broadcom BCM6348 and 4MB RAM. I hope it a firmware issue and you get on my case. For what I wonder? Besides, the new IpOS does only improve on that.
-
Has anyone tried the new firmware? 1.30 Beta 5? Is it still downgradable?
http://www.dlinktw.com.tw/temp/dk2Support_Firmware/902/DIR655Ax_FW130EAB05Beta.bin
-
I know the whole SDK explanation that prevents us from downgrading. It's logically possible but I can't help to think the real reason that we cannot downgrade is probably because they don't want us to get the 3G tethering feature back.
-
I know the whole SDK explanation that prevents us from downgrading. It's logically possible but I can't help to think the real reason that we cannot downgrade is probably because they don't want us to get the 3G tethering feature back.
Why would they deny the tethering feature? I'm curious as to the reson you have in mind.
The reason why Dlink will not make older fimrwares downgradeable is quite simple IMHO:
- They need to take extra Ubicom lcences for adapting the older firmwares with the new SDK
- They need to put a lot extra effort in firmware design: some basic features will need to be rewritten from scratch due to new SDK and kernel.
From a econmic point of view this will be killing for their earnings. So I don't blame them for not doing all this. Customer satisfaction is great but if it kills your company it won't do much good...
-
Why would they deny the tethering feature? I'm curious as to the reson you have in mind.
The reason why Dlink will not make older fimrwares downgradeable is quite simple IMHO:
- They need to take extra Ubicom lcences for adapting the older firmwares with the new SDK
- They need to put a lot extra effort in firmware design: some basic features will need to be rewritten from scratch due to new SDK and kernel.
From a econmic point of view this will be killing for their earnings. So I don't blame them for not doing all this. Customer satisfaction is great but if it kills your company it won't do much good...
Very insightful and I must say I agree with you on both points. I read from some other forums that D-link removed 3G support primarily due to cell phone operator pressures (because most US/NA operators forbid tethering) -- thus my thoughts.
I don't need 3G tethering and so I'm not trolling, but if it's really not for that reason that they won't let us downgrade, then at least consider re-enabling 3G support -- it would make a lot of people happy (again). And that feature alone shouldn't require any ubicom license and I suppose adopting the previous 3G code to support the latest kernel should involve none to minimal effort.
Anyway, I've been using consumer routers of many brands and I don't remember seeing the removal of otherwise perfectly working features from newer firmwares. I like the DIR-655, and except wireless bridging, I don't really use or want to use the other features they removed. But I probably won't buy any more d-links in the future due to the experience with this router's firmware incidents.
Not to mention my two DIR655's sharethe same LAN MAC address. And apparently some other guy in DSLreports reported his d-link switch (not DIR655) got flashed to the same MAC address after upgrading his firmware. Buyer beware.