GSM-Forum (
-   Nokia Hardware & Hardware Repair (
-   -   Wich Is the good for nokia from these tools (

TheBrain 01-15-2009 17:08

To all of you! It`s true that all of these boxes has different advantages and I have all of them, but JAF outmatches other three, it`s No1! Why!? Because, JAF have all the extras of MT-Box, but long time ago I refused to use MT, because of it`s cable types. All the problems with remaking the cable, adding the TX2 line, 10pin RJ connector - all this innervous me! I can use it only via USB ok........The JAF have all these add-ons but no problem with cables! UB is also good as JAF, but JAF is more comfortable for me!...personal choice ;) UFS+HWK doesn`t support emulation for phoenix, or USB interface flashing, I don`t like support`s with torrents, and DCT4+ unlocking supports only some version, but JAF patches directly the CPU flash file! I hope I`ve been helpfull for all of you! :)


rapmad 01-16-2009 01:30


Originally Posted by Afzaal (Post 4057915)
if u have started unlocking biz just now then 1st u must get
ufs hwk before than any other flasher.

Hello all,

Can u plz explain to me, (this is my case),
I've not bought anything, just studding, learning so i know what to decide.


puneet14884 01-16-2009 12:22

each one has its advantages....but being honest...ufs+hwk is the must one have it......old&trusted......(jaf is unique too)


parag111 09-03-2009 11:06

i think jaf & hwk better then other tools........

parag111 09-03-2009 11:11

i think jaf & hwk both r gud for nokia phones.

kbengdaen 07-19-2010 07:13

Ub is more advance tan others

kashantariq2002 07-20-2010 19:20

jaf is the best tool

mlife1999 07-21-2010 06:47

which box is so good that its suitable for your pocket money mxkey

asifawan 07-21-2010 06:59

jaf was best but now mx-key best tool...........

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 15:00.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
- GSM Hosting Ltd. - 1999-2017 -

Page generated in 0.20462 seconds with 5 queries