Related
Samsung Vibrant to start getting Froyo on Jan. 21 -- as in tomorrow!
That's right folks... the Vibrant's party has just about started.
Hopefully we'll be within the next 6 months.
Sweet, can't wait to see if we get it too! Hopefully not within 6 mo like you say!
Still betting on St. Patrick's Day for Craptivate and AT&T.
modmyphone said:
Samsung Vibrant to start getting Froyo on Jan. 21 -- as in tomorrow!
That's right folks... the Vibrant's party has just about started.
Hopefully we'll be within the next 6 months.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where did you hear this from?
EDIT: I'm a moron.. didn't realize that was a link.
Cog > stock
xiaoali said:
Where did you hear this from?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Click the link in his post maybe?
I'm not gonna hold my breath, although I am taking my phone in today for a replacement of the random shutdown issue. Hope I don't get one with a bad GPS, mine works fine now.
I think we need to start a betting pool for the day they roll out 2.2 across all the Samsung Captivate forums we can find. send a daily update to some sales wonk at Samsung and AT&T.
my bet is "never"
cappysw10 said:
Click the link in his post maybe?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
why would you want to do that?
I found the most interesting section to be
So what was the hold-up? It was purely technical, Brodman said—it wasn't about marketing, payments or sales. Samsung sent its base 2.2 upgrade to T-Mobile in late November, and with the holiday season, it's taken until now for T-Mobile to work out the kinks and integrate its own features.
"It was a quality control and timing issue," Brodman said. "The biggest challenge is integration and customization."
In the future, T-Mobile aims to update all of its phones to new versions of Google's Android OS within 3-5 months after Google makes the OS version public, Brodman said. The delay comes from having to integrate manufacturer skins and T-Mobile's own features, such as Wi-Fi calling.
How long does it take to lock down the market, install and lock down bloatware, and take away tethering?
stoobie-doo said:
I found the most interesting section to be
So what was the hold-up? It was purely technical, Brodman said—it wasn't about marketing, payments or sales. Samsung sent its base 2.2 upgrade to T-Mobile in late November, and with the holiday season, it's taken until now for T-Mobile to work out the kinks and integrate its own features.
"It was a quality control and timing issue," Brodman said. "The biggest challenge is integration and customization."
In the future, T-Mobile aims to update all of its phones to new versions of Google's Android OS within 3-5 months after Google makes the OS version public, Brodman said. The delay comes from having to integrate manufacturer skins and T-Mobile's own features, such as Wi-Fi calling.
How long does it take to lock down the market, install and lock down bloatware, and take away tethering?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So i guess this means we should be blaming AT&T? At least T-mobile being more open about things.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
xiaoali said:
So i guess this means we should be blaming AT&T? At least T-mobile being more open about things.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i would agree...i think AT&T has had it and trying to "fine tune" "bloat" it.
Also the have probably been hesitant to release it without a way to lock/disable the Tethering and Mobile AP stock features of 2.2.
trekie86 said:
I'm not gonna hold my breath, although I am taking my phone in today for a replacement of the random shutdown issue. Hope I don't get one with a bad GPS, mine works fine now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Most people that report recent replacements have said GPS works fine. Never hear if this this the normal GPS works for 2-3 days after a fresh flash or they actually did anything to the phone.
Seems like Russian Roulette to me. Sucks your phone has the shutdown. Mine is within the range but only happens on I9000 roms. Good luck.
qwertyaas said:
Cog > stock
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea, after using Cog and Perception, not so sure if I really want stock 2.2 from AT&T or not. You know it'll be loaded up with bloatware and have useful stuff stripped out from it, such as wifi and usb tethering.
But at least then DG will have an official ROM to start doing mods to.
derek4484 said:
Yea, after using Cog and Perception, not so sure if I really want stock 2.2 from AT&T or not. You know it'll be loaded up with bloatware and have useful stuff stripped out from it, such as wifi and usb tethering.
But at least then DG will have an official ROM to start doing mods to.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
its not so much that we want stock froyo for our phones...we want the developers at XDA to have their hands on the final build release to make new custom roms with.
cappysw10 said:
Most people that report recent replacements have said GPS works fine. Never hear if this this the normal GPS works for 2-3 days after a fresh flash or they actually did anything to the phone.
Seems like Russian Roulette to me. Sucks your phone has the shutdown. Mine is within the range but only happens on I9000 roms. Good luck.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I got mine replaced yesterday. Gps was working better than ever on stock firmware. Successfully navigated me 10 miles around turns and stops with accurate tracking. I flashed cog 3.03 and now I can't even get a lock. Maybe I'll keep trying.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
qwertyaas said:
Cog > stock
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree. I put Cog on my gf's Captivate and she's much happier. Smoother, faster, and the bloatware is what irritated her most of all. The more I learn about this phone the more pissed off I am with Samsung.
Looks like the 2012 rumours are true.
curious if gps will start working ... not holding my breath
Hey guys I own a vibrant and I'm just here to give encouragement. You have to get mad. Get involved. Make your voice heard. We did it over in the vibrant section, start a twitter feed, spam the hell out of att. Apply pressure. Good luck GS bros!
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
It looks like March 3rd/4th is the next rumored drop date for the TB. BGR is reporting an insider at VZW was at an event held last night with TB launch details etc.
http://www.bgr.com/2011/02/24/htc-thunderbolt-may-launch-on-march-3rd-or-4th-4g-lte/
-Lil'
I saw that in the Android Central forums, it's quite possible. If the date holds I can hold on another week. Of course it'd be nice for Verizon to say something.
I actually beleive this may really be the date, Im kind of relieved..
My local Verizon corp. store took down all their TB signs. They are only flying the iP4 signs now. There for a while the walls were plastered with TB ads and signs.
Which "MARCH MADNESS" are we going to watch the NCAA BASKETBALL or the VERIZON /HTC Thunderbolt madness ???????
It might be even later if they can't get the FW more stable. It looks like they are going to just release the device and then push a couple OTA after release.
I've had the Incredible since May of 2010(one of the lucky ones) and am amazed at the recent rom development for this phone. I am also eligible for an upgrade as I am the primary line account.
That being said, I am excited for the Thunderbolt; but I can wait for the release. Chances are Verizon may lower the price after 30 days or so, depending on how well its received.
Sent from my ADR6300 using XDA App
Yeah , having my Inc and a good rom makes the wait easier. Still want the Tbolt soon.
Sent by my Droid Incredible
need bb said:
It might be even later if they can't get the FW more stable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I must have missed that info. Has anyone with credibility actually stated that, or is that just another rumor being thrown around? I would assume if they already shipped out plenty of units, the FW would be plenty stable.
Would you please post a link to the source of that concern.
rednoved said:
I must have missed that info. Has anyone with credibility actually stated that, or is that just another rumor being thrown around? I would assume if they already shipped out plenty of units, the FW would be plenty stable.
Would you please post a link to the source of that concern.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I work for Qualcomm, and the device went gold since January. The Network is being fine tuned to handle the LTE devices, and iPhone traffic, but the firmware is not the reason. There were numerous tentative release dates, but Verizon publically stated 1Q. Iphone 4 was the first priority, but that's my opinion.
http://www.androidcentral.com/asus-says-bootloader-unlock-tool-coming-gps-hard-yall
so, I know I personally am absolutely 100% enraged to read about this, since we still haven't heard anything about an official ota for NS4G.
Google is ****ing up big time, and they may lose a LARGE chunk of nexus users over this. I may be one of them, too, if they can't fix this problem asap!!
Ya, it is a bit disturbing.
Well, the work week just started back up for them, so maybe we will hear something in the next couple days?
hp420 said:
http://www.androidcentral.com/asus-says-bootloader-unlock-tool-coming-gps-hard-yall
so, I know I personally am absolutely 100% enraged to read about this, since we still haven't heard anything about an official ota for NS4G.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sprint says we'll be "among the first" to updates, not "the first".
hp420 said:
Google is ****ing up big time, and they may lose a LARGE chunk of nexus users over this. I may be one of them, too, if they can't fix this problem asap!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd be amazed if this is Google's doing.
Sprint's website says "It runs Android™ 2.3 (Gingerbread) the latest version of Android for smartphones." They're the ones that are clueopenic, not Google.
Don't get me wrong: I'm plenty annoyed at not getting OTA ICS. It's just that I don't actually expect Sprint to live up to their promises, since this is not something they've ever tended to do in the past. Sprint users go through this with every software update for every platform on every phone.
mstevens said:
Sprint says we'll be "among the first" to updates, not "the first".
I'd be amazed if this is Google's doing.
Sprint's website says "It runs Android™ 2.3 (Gingerbread) the latest version of Android for smartphones." They're the ones that are clueopenic, not Google.
Don't get me wrong: I'm plenty annoyed at not getting OTA ICS. It's just that I don't actually expect Sprint to live up to their promises, since this is not something they've ever tended to do in the past. Sprint users go through this with every software update for every platform on every phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The update does come directly from Google. Sprint works with Samsung to create proprietary hardware drivers that contain everything you need to access Sprint's cell phone network. These drivers are then made available in binary only form to Google. Google then adds these drivers to their official build. The final product is then delivered directly from Google to your Nexus S 4G phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
this quote came from sprint community forums. http://community.sprint.com/baw/message/380145#380145
Sprint does NOT provide our update...google does. Google is falling behind, and they need to be held accountable for their screw-ups. Just because they didn't say "NS4G will be the first" does not make it acceptable for 3rd parties to get an update before they can even get off their lazy asses just to push a button for their OFFICIAL FIRST-PARTY USERS. Everything we need is on their server for download, and if devs here can get off their asses top compile this rom, google sure as hell can do the same!!!
No. Google is waiting on Sprint, not the other way around.
In addition to providing CDMA drivers, Sprint has to approve the final package that is pushed, and they haven't yet done that.
mstevens said:
No. Google is waiting on Sprint, not the other way around.
In addition to providing CDMA drivers, Sprint has to approve the final package that is pushed, and they haven't yet done that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Source or GTFO. And we've already got the drivers, I'm using ICS on my NS4G right now. 4g and everything.
mstevens said:
No. Google is waiting on Sprint, not the other way around.
In addition to providing CDMA drivers, Sprint has to approve the final package that is pushed, and they haven't yet done that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lol...is that why every single file needed to build a FULL ics rom is already on the server??
I'm not saying you're wrong, but in my opinion, it does not look like it's sprint's fault. It looks like Google is either lazy about releasing it, or they are too dumb to build a rom that's working properly so it's stuck in pre-release testing. However, this is just my opinion....but as far as actually building/releasing the OTA, that is 100% on google's end. whether or not the authorization is coming/has to come from sprint is another story entirely....the point is, if that is the case, google isn't doing their jobs and telling them to screw themselves so they don't look like the bad guy in this!! It's not sprint who will have the damaged reputation after this is all said & done.
jesusice said:
Source or GTFO. And we've already got the drivers, I'm using ICS on my NS4G right now. 4g and everything.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
<shrug> it's the way it's always worked.
This worked in our favor earlier when Sprint okayed deployment of Google Wallet on our devices and GSM users were foaming at the mouth to get it. In those cases, too, it wasn't Google (which has excellent reasons for getting Wallet into as many hands as possible) but the carriers which held up release.
---------- Post added at 02:02 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:59 PM ----------
hp420 said:
lol...is that why every single file needed to build a FULL ics rom is already on the server??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No.
What is the connection between having all the files on the server and Sprint's approval of a final release version?
In your earlier quote lifted from another site, the poster was saying the updates are pushed from Google's servers, not Sprints. That's correct. However, they can't just start pushing updates without carrier approval. This is why, for example, T-Mobile got ICS before ATT.
mstevens said:
<shrug> it's the way it's always worked.
This worked in our favor earlier when Sprint okayed deployment of Google Wallet on our devices and GSM users were foaming at the mouth to get it. In those cases, too, it wasn't Google (which has excellent reasons for getting Wallet into as many hands as possible) but the carriers which held up release.
---------- Post added at 02:02 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:59 PM ----------
No.
What is the connection between having all the files on the server and Sprint's approval of a final release version?
In your earlier quote lifted from another site, the poster was saying the updates are pushed from Google's servers, not Sprints. That's correct. However, they can't just start pushing updates without carrier approval. This is why, for example, T-Mobile got ICS before ATT.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that was a result of carriers' investment in other companies that developed very similar software to google wallet....exactly the same as when the GN was delayed for verizon because google wanted wallet on their official device and verizon had a coronary about it because they had already backed another company's software that does exactly the same thing.
as for carrier approval, google can only wait so long before they just snap and push the update anyway. carriers can not make the rest of the world wait for an update just because they don't want it released to their devices yet. Google needs to just ***** slap sprint, tell them to shut the hell up, and push the update before this damages their reputation any more than it already has. Like I said, it won't be sprint whose rep is damaged from all of this, just like no one looks towards verizon for the GN delay...the world will blame google, and they aren't even standing up for themselves.
hp420 said:
lol...is that why every single file needed to build a FULL ics rom is already on the server??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sure, they could build ICS for the NS4G but the 4G radio wouldn't work. Drivers aren't part of AOSP.
Also, didn't Google pulled the ICS update for the (tmobile) Nexus S? If that's still true, they're clearly working out the issues with ICS before releasing it to the NS4G, etc.
It is most likely *not* Googles doing. I don't know where half of you get these crack pot ideas from that Google or any other OEM is in control over how and when they push an update.
- OEM builds ROM
- OEM submits ROM to carriers (i.e. Sprint branded phone would require Sprint to approve the update).
Carriers can be total dicks about updates and providing OTA. I've seen it all first hand from when I had a Motorola Milestone (Motorola telling us the 2.1 has been built and has gone through testing but they are waiting for carriers to approve them on their networks) we had to waiting months for the updates due to some carriers.
nside said:
Sure, they could build ICS for the NS4G but the 4G radio wouldn't work. Drivers aren't part of AOSP.
Also, didn't Google pulled the ICS update for the (tmobile) Nexus S? If that's still true, they're clearly working out the issues with ICS before releasing it to the NS4G, etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Driver binaries are on Google's servers for nexus devices. 100% built from source and 4g works just fine.....
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using xda premium
we are waiting for sprint to approve the new radio that will come with the ota. That is what causes the holdup.
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using xda premium
maybe Google is still fixing what does not go to ics now and then....maybe xD we can see ics on all nexus ^^
hp420 said:
that was a result of carriers' investment in other companies that developed very similar software to google wallet...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Precisely. I'm glad you finally see my point that Google can't just push out an update because they want to, but are hampered by needing carrier approval.
---------- Post added at 02:33 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:28 PM ----------
hp420 said:
carriers can not make the rest of the world wait for an update just because they don't want it released to their devices yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When did this start being true?
It's absolutely true that carriers CAN prevent official release of an update for any reason, or for no reason. They've done it many times before and they'll do it again. Sprint has a long track record of doing exactly this.
hp420 said:
Google needs to just ***** slap sprint, tell them to shut the hell up, and push the update
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You have an awfully lot to learn about how contracts work.
If I run a massive business and another massive business violates my contract with them (for example, pushes an unapproved update to what I think of as "my" devices irrespective of the beliefs or desires of my subscribers), many lawyers are going to be fed and I will expect a massive transfer of assets from that other company to mine.
mstevens is dead on. Sprint will not allow the push of an ota until they can be sure this update won't toast peoples phones, and for the people in the world that have a nxs4g and don't do modding, if the update is broken, they can't just fix what Google's update did. My brother has the GSM version, and received the update, and honestly were not missing anything. The user made roms are already becoming superior builds anyway. We will eventually get the update, I for one am glad sprint said no at the moment though, I would hate to waste my time on a broken ota lol
Sent from my Nexus IcS 4G using xda premium
lol...too many people to quote you all, so I'm gonna do my best to answer everyone
Ok, I understand how contracts work. My point is this: yes, google has a contract with sprint (or any other carrier, for that matter) to provide radios, wimax drivers, what-have-you, and I understand that if sprint won't sign, there's not much the manufacturer can do...I get that. But my biggest concern with all of this is that google is not flexing their muscles. They have made a guarantee to their customers (not explicit, but still implied) that they would provide ALL NEXUS UPDATES in a timely manner. Sprint is now holding google back from seeing this implied promise carried through, and the fact that other manufacturers are already pushing full ota updates now makes google look bad (grounds for a lawsuit).
I understand that if google were to break that contract by circumventing sprint by releasing the update anyway, they could be sued...I get that. However, google could also counter-sue for making customers wait an unreasonable amount of time for an update that is, by all rights, a "god-given right" to all nexus users prior to anyone else getting it.
Now let's talk about how many people use an NS4G to develop software that they get paid top develop. By sprint not releasing an official update, they are now inhibiting developers from doing business, and therefore they are taking money out of people's pockets. Yes, I know this last example is far-fetched a little bit, but honestly, it's really not all that far off. Yeah, people can just compile aosp themselves, and if they are truly developers, they should know how to do that....but let's say they are working on one particular app that is exclusive for sprint users, and they want to make sure it will run properly on sprint's network via an ICS handset....oh, wait...they can't because sprint are a bunch of lazy pieces of **** who won't sign. This is grounds for class-action, IMHO.
I may not be a lawyer, but it's blatantly obvious to me that if sprint holds out long enough, they are absolutely 100% vulnerable to class-action suits...and maybe even a suit from google, as well. Let's face it, no one but sprint & google execs really know the terms of the contract, but for all we know, it IS in the contract to provide timely updates. If this is the case, I hope someone gets sued like a SOB for this delay, because it's unacceptable!!!!!
hp420 said:
Google is ****ing up big time, and they may lose a LARGE chunk of nexus users over this. I may be one of them, too, if they can't fix this problem asap!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I suggest that this LARGE chunk of nexus users may be better served by one of the many other smartphone mfrs who provided a pure ICS update (i.e. no BS extra UI layer and no bloat) over the holiday. Which one will you choose? Oh, wait.
hp420 said:
I hope someone gets sued like a SOB for this delay, because it's unacceptable!!!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really. You want a lawsuit, because a bunch of software developers wouldn't work at your whim over the nation's biggest holiday?
The111 said:
I suggest that this LARGE chunk of nexus users may be better served by one of the many other smartphone mfrs who provided a pure ICS update (i.e. no BS extra UI layer and no bloat) over the holiday. Which one will you choose? Oh, wait.
Really. You want a lawsuit, because a bunch of software developers wouldn't work at your whim over the nation's biggest holiday?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
actually, since the drivers, kernel, etc. was all pushed to google's update servers WELL over a week before christmas, they wouldn't have been working during the holiday at all to get it pushed to NS4g...they just had to click a few buttons....something I've done a few hundred thousand times in the last 5 minutes.
BTW, no need to be a smartass about it. if I want to switch from nexus to get a pure android ui, I can always just root and modify the ota to have a stock theme. So now what do you have to say about that, smartass??? Oh wait...
tool.
hp420 said:
actually, since the drivers, kernel, etc. was all pushed to google's update servers WELL over a week before christmas, they wouldn't have been working during the holiday at all to get it pushed to NS4g...they just had to click a few buttons....something I've done a few hundred thousand times in the last 5 minutes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're making multiple assumptions. You assume that by the existence of particular source files on a particular server, you know what Google's stance as to the public release candidacy of a compiled package is. Please explain why you believe this. There are only two ways we could know such a thing:
1) Google publicly declares it (i.e. this compiled package IS ready for public use... or vice versa)
2) Google actually pushes the compiled package (in the absence of such an action, the logical assumption to make is that they are not ready to do such a thing yet, for their own reasons... i.e. there is still something else they need to do. NOT that they are "too lazy/stupid to push a few buttons")
hp420 said:
BTW, no need to be a smartass about it. if I want to switch from nexus to get a pure android ui, I can always just root and modify the ota to have a stock theme. So now what do you have to say about that, smartass??? Oh wait...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're right, the sarcasm is 100% optional. It's an option that I quite enjoy though. I won't, however, stoop to personal attacks.
How about this. Sarcasm removed for you, I will ask the question that was clearly evident in my last post. If you decide to "leave Google" because of your discontent, which handset vendor will you turn to? Who do you believe is a better option? Who will give you a pure Android update in a shorter timespan? I am genuinely (no sarcasm) interested!
As Galaxy S owners, we are all united. As Android users we are all united. As far as Samsung is concerned we are all NOT created equal. Our device, the Vibrant (SGH-T959), is now being left to the wayside for any future updates from Samsung even though our core specs are extremely similar to the Google Nexus S, which has already received the ICS update. The CyanogenMod team has left us due to the on-going issue of 911/e911 and the lack of the proper code from Samsung to alleviate a potentially fatal result of a custom ROM. It is our intentions to serve Samsung with a petition asking for the update to ICS, which will in-turn, alleviate the 911/e911 issue as well.
We are asking all Galaxy S users to sign this petition to get Samsung to reconsider giving all top end Galaxy S devices the ICS update. Please help us with our goal and sign the petition. If you are on a Galaxy S phone, this affects you too.
Thank you for reading this and please see this link for more details and this link to sign the petition.
Ok, since it was explained a bit better to me, I'm allowing this to be reopened, however, I'll be keeping an eye on it. Keep it civil.
Thank you, Ann.
thanks for the update..hope things look up !!
I plan to sign this petition, but I'm a bit confused about how it includes all SGS devices. The entire letter speaks specifically to the Vibrant. Is a new letter still being written? Or how is it being conveyed that all SGS owners are signing this?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using Tapatalk
The issue with the 3rd paragraph about how the Vibrant was released with 2.1 and then we fought for 2.2 only to be denied GB/ICS is in there to paint the picture of how consumer support has failed. It is specific to the Vibrant but the picture is for all Galaxy S users.
The CM team portion leaving the Vibrant is a problem (911/e911) that effects us all. For some reason they just dropped ONLY the Vibrant from their supported devices list b/c of this issue.
Still, we want to thank you for your support and help with this and hopefully they will at least listen to us.
Links to Samsung Twitter/Facebook/Google+:
Twitter:
- twitter.com/samsungtweets
- twitter.com/samsungmobileus
- https://twitter.com/SamsungJohn
- https://twitter.com/DigitalTrends
Facebook:
- www.facebook.com/SamsungUSA
- www.facebook.com/SamsungMobileUSA
Google+:
- https://plus.google.com/114303379611712597260/posts
let's be honest guys. Samsung did a logical thing by NOT giving us ICS update. I mean come on now.. even if they do decide to give us ICS, chances are it will be buggy as gs1 doesn't have enough memory to have ICS and TW... so really there is no point in giving us ICS, not only Samsung won't make any profit from doing this they might get flamed even more for making the phone slower buggier .. etc and
some people are saying they want stripped version of ICS on gs1 then why don't you just go buy yourself a nexus phone? Why would people buy nexus over galaxy when they're the same thing ? I could go on and rant about how samsung would have to meet terms with google, service providers and etc but ill stop here
Gingerbread from Samsung has been released. Rogers released it AGES ago.Gingerbread from AT&T has NOT been released.
your problem for Gingerbread is with AT&T. NOT SAMSUNG. Samsung released gingerbread to the carriers.
and to the post above, its not about buying an SG1 over a nexus, its about ALREADY OWNING SG1... and not enough memory for ics and touchwiz?? thats a propaganda lie. it would run fine. touchwiz consists of a launcher and a second (TW)framwork-res.apk and a few code changes to other system files. every rom has a laucher, so no loss there, wow extra 7mb framework... ohhh.. noo!
POST 3000!!!!!!
xriderx66 said:
Thank you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Signed even though I don't own one. you guys should get updates too!!
Sent from my Nexus S using xda premium
TRusselo said:
Gingerbread from Samsung has been released. Rogers released it AGES ago.Gingerbread from AT&T has NOT been released.
your problem for Gingerbread is with AT&T. NOT SAMSUNG. Samsung released gingerbread to the carriers.
and to the post above, its not about buying an SG1 over a nexus, its about ALREADY OWNING SG1... and not enough memory for ics and touchwiz?? thats a propaganda lie. it would run fine. touchwiz consists of a launcher and a second (TW)framwork-res.apk and a few code changes to other system files. every rom has a laucher, so no loss there, wow extra 7mb framework... ohhh.. noo!
POST 3000!!!!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just curious how do you know Samsung released GB to the carriers? Any sources?
EDIT: it is just me who finds big size fonts very irritating and irrelevant?
viny2cool said:
Just curious how do you know Samsung released GB to the carriers? Any sources?
EDIT: it is just me who finds big size fonts very irritating and irrelevant?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All carrier control the release of the updates, manufacturers create the updates for the phone, except for the Nexus line which is controlled by Google. The new exception to that might be the Verizon Nexus. The evidence is that the I-896 and I897 are the exact same phone, except one says ATT on the front.
Can someone explain this 911 issue? I mean how can you dial 911 and it won't work? IT seems like any number would work! I'm a bit confused by it, am I missing something? Thats seems like a phone being unable to dial, well Pizza hut, I dunno. It doesn't make sense.
Oh and I signed the petition.
Cor-master said:
Can someone explain this 911 issue? I mean how can you dial 911 and it won't work? IT seems like any number would work! I'm a bit confused by it, am I missing something? Thats seems like a phone being unable to dial, well Pizza hut, I dunno. It doesn't make sense.
Oh and I signed the petition.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think its related to dialing 911 when u don't have any network. I mean when u don't have sim card you can still make emergency calls.
sent from my cappy rocking ICS
popfan said:
All carrier control the release of the updates, manufacturers create the updates for the phone, except for the Nexus line which is controlled by Google. The new exception to that might be the Verizon Nexus. The evidence is that the I-896 and I897 are the exact same phone, except one says ATT on the front.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree that they control it. But we don't know if Samsung actually gave it to ATT yet. Also there is no need of those kind of statements like in the post above my first post. No one is forcing him to sign the petition.
sent from my cappy rocking ICS
GB update (using KIES) for captivate:
http://www.samsung.com/us/support/SupportOwnersFAQPopup.do?faq_id=FAQ00024051&fm_seq=24219
viny2cool said:
I agree that they control it. But we don't know if Samsung actually gave it to ATT yet. Also there is no need of those kind of statements like in the post above my first post. No one is forcing him to sign the petition.
sent from my cappy rocking ICS
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I support this, samsung should definitely take some initiative in regards to their previous devices.
Signed!
Sent from my SGH-I897 using xda premium
I will always be your side.But is it useful?
http://pocketnow.com/2012/06/18/htc-modifying-one-x-construction-to-improve-wifi-reliability/
That’s good news for future One X owners, and current owners affected by the problem should be able to get their phones replaced with one of these re-engineered models under warranty.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know my AT&T HOX is definitely affected by the wifi problems. I don't want to replace it but it seems like the only solution.
The hardware problem being fixed is on the international version isn't it? Our phone doesn't have antenna connection in the same place.
gunnyman said:
The hardware problem being fixed is on the international version isn't it? Our phone doesn't have antenna connection in the same place.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I asked HTC support on twitter to clarify if it's hox xl. Nobody seems to have any clarity on which versions are affected. I know my AT&T version has a lot of wifi problems (even after the update).
http://www.theverge.com/2012/6/18/3094567/htc-one-x-wi-fi-hardware-connectivity-issues
I get full Wi-Fi all the time...att version
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
In the article linked in the op. The info from htc is coming from the European division of the company so I think they're only talking about the international phone.
gunnyman said:
The hardware problem being fixed is on the international version isn't it? Our phone doesn't have antenna connection in the same place.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My HTC one X AT&T version has wifi connection issue. It cannot pick up wifi signal at some spots of my home while my laptop has no such problem. I hope HTC will fix the issue for my phone.
karan1203 said:
I asked HTC support on twitter to clarify if it's hox xl. Nobody seems to have any clarity on which versions are affected. I know my AT&T version has a lot of wifi problems (even after the update).
http://www.theverge.com/2012/6/18/3094567/htc-one-x-wi-fi-hardware-connectivity-issues
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It seems AC was able to reach someone at HTC and (semi-)confirmed its the Tegra-3 variant of the HOX.
http://www.androidcentral.com/htc-wifi-glitch-so-far-only-seen-tegra-3-one-x
live4nyy said:
It seems AC was able to reach someone at HTC and (semi-)confirmed its the Tegra-3 variant of the HOX.
http://www.androidcentral.com/htc-wifi-glitch-so-far-only-seen-tegra-3-one-x
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have no issues on my HOXL so this definitely seems to be the case.
Sent from my HTC One XL using Tapatalk 2
mobilehavoc said:
I have no issues on my HOXL so this definitely seems to be the case.
Sent from my HTC One XL using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Also, as @gunnyman has pointed out, the LTE(XL, S4) variant's antenna contacts are in a completely different place.
The best thing I take from this information is comparing Apple's "You're holding it wrong" to HTC's "It's hardware and we're fixing it"
I think I'm betting on the right horse here.
Frid_Hephaestus said:
My HTC one X AT&T version has wifi connection issue. It cannot pick up wifi signal at some spots of my home while my laptop has no such problem. I hope HTC will fix the issue for my phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Every WiFi device has a different antenna configuration and signal strength. You can't expect every device to behave exactly the same. More importantly than whether another device gets good signal, are the locations your One X is having trouble not very far from your WiFi router, and without a lot of solid objects between the router and your phone?
Its only a tegra 3 issueeeee
Sent from my HTC One X using xda premium
I'm not convinced we all have the same issues....
So far i've found there to be 2 main problems with the WiFi.
1, Soft case depression,
2, bluetooth interference
(Very common, which plagues many other devices, Iphone & Ipad are all over Google with this issue, its to do with sharing the 2.4ghz frequency. flip off the bluetooth and the problem goes away.)
After testing I can confirm that i do not have the WiFi soft case depression problem, I reckon that's the sort of problem that could easily develop. You could create this issue by doing the very squeeze test suggested, crushing the contacts, laying them down as proposed is happening... don't accidentally sit on your phone!
The problem i and many have is the bluetooth interference preventing the WiFi from picking up signal and connecting, this is resolved by killing the BT.
I have been testing for 2 weeks, very disappointed with HTC. however the BT problem i have seems fixable with software, I think i have just solved my BT problem by swapping out the rom until i found one that works ok. I believe i have, and will keep testing.
It is certainly nice to have something in print from HTC, i'd like to see the guy in the shop try to squirm his way out off giving you guys your money back now!!
gunnyman said:
The best thing I take from this information is comparing Apple's "You're holding it wrong" to HTC's "It's hardware and we're fixing it"
I think I'm betting on the right horse here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ain't that amazing?
Sent from my HTC One X using xda premium
Is this information even correct......
What the hell....
HTCpedia is not the official website of HTC, who the is Athanasios Zarkadas?. IN the about section for HTCpedia, they say the are just a group of people that like HTCs
i dont even know that this is an official HTC press release...
I followed the links.. its suggesting this is an HTC release, the basis for Pocketnow running the story is because they have visited XDA-developers and are quoting bunch of us!
the story makes this statement...
A statement from the company’s European division explains, “we have taken immediate steps to implement a solution in our production process to prevent this issue from happening in the future.”
Where's the official statement reference link??
There's been no recall, there's nothing from HTC to enforce your warranty in the store.
Maybe it gets released over the next few days, who knows. a little skeptical for now though.
Tseven_HTC said:
What the hell....
HTCpedia is not the official website of HTC, who the is Athanasios Zarkadas?. IN the about section for HTCpedia, they say the are just a group of people that like HTCs
i dont even know that this is an official HTC press release...
I followed the links.. its suggesting this is an HTC release, the basis for Pocketnow running the story is because they have visited XDA-developers and are quoting bunch of us!
the story makes this statement...
A statement from the company’s European division explains, “we have taken immediate steps to implement a solution in our production process to prevent this issue from happening in the future.”
Where's the official statement reference link??
There's been no recall, there's nothing from HTC to enforce your warranty in the store.
Maybe it gets released over the next few days, who knows. a little skeptical for now though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good ole internet "journalism"
gunnyman said:
The best thing I take from this information is comparing Apple's "You're holding it wrong" to HTC's "It's hardware and we're fixing it"
I think I'm betting on the right horse here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol that still upsets me to this day that they would say something like that to the consumers who buy their products. What were they thinking? Did they really think we'd buy that response?
SkizzMcNizz said:
Lol that still upsets me to this day that they would say something like that to the consumers who buy their products. What were they thinking? Did they really think we'd buy that response?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
dude so many of them did. I have so many iSheep friends who argued that there was no hardware problem.
I like Apple, they build quality hardware, but the degree to which Jobs utilized his Reality Distortion Field was obnoxious.
I sincerely hope it died with him.
Just spoke to HTC tech support over the phone. He didn't give me an exact date but he was very furious at AT&T because they're clearly the ones holding the software update for our phone back. He must have mentioned AT&T and "other players in the pot" atleast 5 times in our 20 minute conversation.
The best i got out of him "it's at the very end" and "just wait a few weeks".
karan1203 said:
Just spoke to HTC tech support over the phone. He didn't give me an exact date but he was very furious at AT&T because they're clearly the ones holding the software update for our phone back. He must have mentioned AT&T and "other players in the pot" atleast 5 times in our 20 minute conversation.
The best i got out of him "it's at the very end" and "just wait a few weeks".
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So this is confusing, is HTC correct in telling you that a software release is coming to fix this, or is pocketnow correct by stating its hardware(Not confirm by anyone else except pocketnow)
We keep referring to this "WiFi issue" as one topic, but like I speculated earlier, there's 2 issues going on here, antenna conection which is hardware, & 2.4ghz frequency clash with blue tooth.
These are to unrelated problems.