Hello,
I’m going to step across the NDAs and explain the issues behind the Android Froyo update to Samsung Galaxy S phones in the United States. I think most of you have come to this realization yourself now: the withholding of the Froyo update is a largely political one, not a technological one: Froyo runs quite well on Galaxy S phones, as those of you that have run leaked updates may have noticed.
To explain the political situation, first, a primer on how phone firmware upgrades work for carriers. When a carrier decides to sell a phone, a contract is usually written between the phone manufacturer and the carrier. In this contract, the cost of updates (to the carrier) is usually outlined. Updates are usually broken into several types: critical updates, maintenance updates, and feature updates. Critical updates are those that resolve a critical bug in the phone, such as the phone overheating. Maintenance updates involve routine updates to resolve bugs and other issues reported by the carrier. Finally, feature updates add some new feature in software that wasn’t present before. Critical updates are usually free, maintenance updates have some maintenance fee associated with them, and feature updates are usually costly.
In the past, most phone updates would mainly consist of critical and maintenance updates. Carriers almost never want to incur the cost of a feature update because it is of little benefit to them, adds little to the device, and involves a lot of testing on the carrier end. Android has changed the playing field, however – since the Android Open Source Project is constantly being updated, and that information being made widely available to the public, there is pressure for the phone to be constantly updated with the latest version of Android. With most manufacturers, such as HTC, Motorola, etc. This is fine and considered a maintenance upgrade. Samsung, however, considers it a feature update, and requires carriers to pay a per device update fee for each incremental Android update.
Now, here’s where the politics come in: most U.S. carriers aren’t very happy with Samsung’s decision to charge for Android updates as feature updates, especially since they are essentially charging for the Android Open Source Project’s efforts, and the effort on Samsung’s end is rather minimal. As a result of perhaps, corporate collusion, all U.S. carriers have decided to refuse to pay for the Android 2.2 update, in hopes that the devaluation of the Galaxy S line will cause Samsung to drop their fees and give the update to the carriers. The situation has panned out differently in other parts of the world, but this is the situation in the United States.
Some of you might have noticed Verion’s Fascinate updated, but without 2.2 : This is a result of a maintenance agreement Samsung must honor combined with Verizon’s unwillingness to pay the update fees.
In short, Android 2.2 is on hold for Galaxy S phones until the U.S. carriers and Samsung reach a consensus.
Some might wonder why I didn’t deliver this over a more legitimate news channel – the short answer: I don’t want to lose my job. I do, however, appreciate transparency, which is why I'm here.
Interesting.. thank you for that
Sent from my GT540 using XDA App
this has been an issue since the Samsung Omnia (SGH-i900) came out. Promises of updates to no avail. No updates, just do it yourself!
Finally something that makes sense to me. I do have 2.2 on my phone thanks to the folks here on XDA.
I work for Sprint at a service and repair store. We had a memo that the Epic was suppose to get Froyo on Dec 26th, but that they pulled it because it bricked half their test phones and needed more work. I do know that the Intercept had an official update go out for Froyo that bricked roughly 10% of customer's phones and we were instructed to put them back on 2.1, I do know someone who has a legitimate carrier copy of Froyo on their Intercept, its not a Galaxy phone but its still Samsung. What you're saying Samsung is doing(which sounds right/true) is pretty petty. HTC released an update to Froyo for the Evo about 2 weeks after the phone launched. That's what manufacturers should do IMO.
In regards to the Epic, i'd like to remind people that originally, it was marketed as having 2.2. Then, closer to release, they changed it to 2.1 "with 2.2 coming soon after." Well, "soon after" has come and gone.
I bought the Epic partly because it suited me better than the Evo, but also because of 2.2. I knew that i would have a current version running. Froyo was part of the basis of my bargain. At this point I'm fed up with samsung. We've been getting teased with 2.2 almost every month for literally 5 months now, and at least for 1-2 months prior to the phone being released (which makes it upwards of 6 months). It is ridiculous.
People who have this phone should just return it when something new comes out. Samsung has breached their promise. Im sure there will be people here who will comment about the fact that you can always root your phone or that they are happy with eclair; that's fine. I bought this phone with the assumption it would perform on par with 2.2, and not have any annoying lags and bugs.
If everyone complains and ditches boycotts samsung phones, then maybe they will change their ways. From everything i have ever read, i never see anyone mention the fact that samsung marketed this device as having 2.2 and subsequently, promising it within a short period of time.
Just my .2 cents
This is one major reason that I am contemplating trading my Epic out for an Evo, I am tired of Sammy's bull****.
I am realizing that even though it is a good phone, it will soon be "out of date" with the lack of support from every one.
All this is bull****. Us cell carriers suck.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk
samsung
personally after owning a moment i will never own a samsung phone again. thank got i got an evo shift
Interesting. Kinda contradicts with Samsung's marketing agenda during launch of the Galaxy S line in the States. During the launch event in NYC it was clearly stated by Samsung that all variants of Galaxy S line will receive Froyo firmware update, no where it was mentioned that if you are on a US carrier the device upgrade will be subject to terms and conditions set between the manufacturer and the carriers http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wf3uGTAeQy4
FF to 4:45
I think it's pretty god damn egregious that they'd charge large sums of money for code thats open source and freely available. I'd also think it has to be against some sort of law or license.
Hot_Hands said:
I think it's pretty god damn egregious that they'd charge large sums of money for code thats open source and freely available. I'd also think it has to be against some sort of law or license.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Disclaimer: I am not defending Samsung. Upgrading an embedded platform (regardless is the software is open source or not) is an extensive process that takes the time of engineers and testers...so it does cost Samsung money. I think the argument that just because Android is open source, Samsung has no reason to charge carriers for updates is off-base. This type of R&D cost money....maybe not a whole bunch, but some investment dollars are still allocated.
With that said, if Samsung led the public to believe that US Galaxy S devices would be upgraded to Android 2.2, then they need to absolutely hold up their end of the bargain. A lot of these corporate types lack long-term thinking. Samsung could begin to build a good fanbase if they pickup the slack in the customer support department by providing timely upgrades, fixes, and other types of support. This fanbase will continue to buy their products and recommend others to do so. This is why Apple consistently ranks highest customer satisfaction, they provide software support for their products for at least a year, mostly two.
At this point, their public image (in my eyes) has taken a dive. I own the Captivate, a Samsung monitor, and digital camera. But these will be my last three Samsung products forever and I will not recommend any others Samsung products.
Great post. Makes me dislike Samsung even more now!
Thanks for bringing this side of the story to light, and risking your job to do so. If this story holds any bearing, Samsung is an entirely terrible company who hold zero care for their customers. They are only concerned with profits and pushing out new products instead of making their current customers happy and possibly turning them into repeat customers. Pitiful.
Great OP, which leads to three comments / thoughts.
First, if a carrier, such as T-Mobile USA decided to carry the rumored Vibrant 4G, this would suggest that either 1) they have renegotiated their contract with Samsung or 2) that they don't care about their customer base - given what their existing Vibrant customers have experienced. We will know, in due course, what path T-Mobile USA has chosen to walk.
Second, it sounds like the iPhone has an advantage over Android based products because Apple is in a position to update the operating system without involving the carrier. If this is the case, then financially, one would expect carriers to start pushing the iPhone to their customers. I don't see this happening yet as many carriers have really built up their Android lines. But it will be interesting to see what happens now that other carrier(s) start to carry the iPhone.
Third, it seems like this is an area where Google really needs to step in and set expectations - with carriers, manufacturers, and consumers. Right now, we are witnessing a growing dissatisfaction with Samsung. However a recent report showed that the best manufacturer for pushing updates - HTC - only had a 50% track record. Consumers, who are locked into a 2 year contract, will grow frustrated if their only means of getting the latest operating system (including some "non-critical" bug fixes) is to purchase another phone at full price. This will affect how Android and Google are perceived.
Seriously, why do we need to keep telling people this:
Never
Ever
Ever
Buy a phone for promised future updates.
You buy it for what it can do now, if it can't do that, then you have zero right to complain when it doesn't.
Yet in all seriousness, what does it matter to anyone on this forum? We all have the capabilities to upgrade our devices to the latest roms. Yes, pushed out updates give us updated drivers, packages and all around system fixes, but seriously guys, even with a N1 I don't even wait for OTAs.
OP, can you maybe link to some official documentation on this? Not that I doubt you for a second, but putting out some dox would light a serious fire under Samsung's ass...
So does this have anything to do with the fact that AT&T was/is(?) dumping the Captivate on the marketplace?
Last July, it was giving away Captivates. I have heard rumors that some folks are STILL able to procure free Captivates.
Is this the beginning of a falling out between Samsung and AT&T?
Awesome, thanks for the news. This article explains a lot but on a different note, I'm not sure about "effort on Samsung’s end is rather minimal" is 100% accurate. Have you seen how crazy TouchWiz is integrated into stock Android OS, it is pretty ridiculous when comparing to to Motorola's Moto Blur...
No update - No problem
No worries. The lack of update to Froyo forced my hand. I found the wonderful world of XDA and also taught myself how to choose custom ROMs, tweak features, and remove Sprint bloatware that I never wanted anyway.
So this little spat of theirs has actually provided great benefit to me. I've learned how to customize my phone and I've learned that Samsung is a ****ing nitwit of a company. The Galaxy S is my first and last Samsung phone. I'm very happy with it, currently, with my custom ROM. However, when the time for an upgrade comes, so long Sammy.
I hope your extra fees for open source software covers your future losses from me and others jumping ship.
Oh wait, no I don't.
Related
Take it with a grain of salt. But it sounds mildly legit.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=913045
edit: actually i call b.s.
whiteguypl said:
edit: actually i call b.s.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why? I have no firm opinion one way or the other, but just saying "bull****" really doesn't mean much unless you're playing the card game.
How could Samsung charge for an open-source project update? Obviously they must make some modifications to make it fit their phones, but at its core, its still an open source program.
Billabong81 said:
How could Samsung charge for an open-source project update? Obviously they must make some modifications to make it fit their phones, but at its core, its still an open source program.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Open source doesn't mean free.
I'm inclined to believe it. It makes more sense than trying to say they have been testing it for months. I've had my captivate for 6 months, almost 5 of them running FroYo thanks to the awesome devs here. Has the froyo always been stable and fast? No. But the devs don't work for Samsung with all the resouces, they are doing it in their spare time. I would bet Samsung had a fairly stable, almost complete version of FroYo ready before the phone released.
I am really getting tempted by the Atrix, apart from the awesome hardware and webtop app, Motorola devices get updates. But, they sound harder to flash custom ROMs, so its a give and take. Based on what I saw on the CES coverage, going with only official software may not be so bad.
Sent from my SGH-I897 using XDA App
Makes no sense. Regardless if Samsung charges for feature updates or not, terms of the upgrades would have been set between carrier and Samsung prior to the first handset even being made. Thus outside of any major surprises (which there are none here) the carrier knows from day one what upgrades will be offered, when and at what cost. It's not like Samsung turned around weeks after the devices shipped and said, "Hey. That Froyo upgrade is gonna cost ya, buddy!" That would have been known long before contacts were signed.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
Even if thus is true, both AT&T and Samsung have all ready made too many mistakes. Both will lose some business. Yes it won't be enough to hurt either but maybe all the pestering will make them rethink their business models. Probably not. My last Samschmuck phone on AT&T for sure.
Sent from a phone somewhere in the universe
ianwood said:
Makes no sense. Regardless if Samsung charges for feature updates or not, terms of the upgrades would have been set between carrier and Samsung prior to the first handset even being made. Thus outside of any major surprises (which there are none here) the carrier knows from day one what upgrades will be offered, when and at what cost. It's not like Samsung turned around weeks after the devices shipped and said, "Hey. That Froyo upgrade is gonna cost ya, buddy!" That would have been known long before contacts were signed.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is the same point I tried to make on the thread. While Samsung may have been the ones to state that Froyo would come to Galaxy S, it may be that the carrier(s) decided to balk on the 2.2 update due to extra cost as probably stipulated by whatever contract they negotiated with Samsung.
If Froyo is already on Canadian carriers' devices (officially) why not U.S. carriers. Something reeks here.
While Samsung should have kept their mouths shut about the update, I'm sure a part is being played by the American carriers here.
Billabong81 said:
How could Samsung charge for an open-source project update? Obviously they must make some modifications to make it fit their phones, but at its core, its still an open source program.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are mixing up open source with free software. Ask Richard Stallman the difference
Also, I would imagine that they would not be paying Samsung for the software itself but more so the software development to tailor it to the carriers needs.
This sounds good in theory, but I think it has holes.
this would be the case for all phones on all carriers, but it isn't the same situation.
iphone updates are coming out all the time. With at&t subsidized out the butt on the iphone, I fail to believe they osu for all those updates.
I had a samsung blackjCk, and we went through the same thing with winmo, meanwhile other at&t phones got the updates.
Id have to say honestly in my personal opinion based from facts from an inside source... At&t is so obsessed with the iphone anything that costs them money or time that doesn't increase profits is going to be set on the backburner... Att has a time of year called "Iphone season" where they push the new versions and updates of the iphone to customers.... Seeing as how froyo itself was already released for almost every device on OTHER carriers and att has yet to push a single update aside from the eclaire update i doubt it will ever be coming.
Not to mention if anyone has noticed att removed ALOT of stuff from the captivates before they were able to ship them to customers... for example the third party apk allow button is completely gone from the stock phones due to att and their restrictions and the market having apps that just don't show up becuase of the way att wants to now start locking down phones like apple. (not trying to bash anyone or brands but from what ive seen from someone who loves to customize and believe anything i pay for is mine and i should be able to do as i wish with said product that's how it is in my eyes)
I think that since they have the rage over the iphones (another reason they try to sell them harder then any other phone is because of the "vast amount of accessories" ) it feels like they fell on the band wagon of the craze instead of actually worrying about ALL of their customers. It just seems like since iphone updates are pushed to phone and att doesnt have to deal with them, not to mention if the phone messes up it goes to an apple store and not att.
I've also heard rumors from att employees stating that something was signed with apple to put restrictions on android updates and phones in order to allow exclusivity for the iphone when it was first released. As to the truth behind this, anyones guess is as good as mine. Just seems funny how No att phones have gotten the froyo update unless they've (the customer) installed it themselves.
I wouldn't be looking forward to any updates from what i've seen on my end.
A.VOID said:
This sounds good in theory, but I think it has holes.
this would be the case for all phones on all carriers, but it isn't the same situation.
iphone updates are coming out all the time. With at&t subsidized out the butt on the iphone, I fail to believe they osu for all those updates.
I had a samsung blackjCk, and we went through the same thing with winmo, meanwhile other at&t phones got the updates.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
AT&T has nothing to do with iPhone updates. Matter of fact, AT&T has nothing to do with iPhones at all, except sell them. All iPhone updates are done through iTunes and all iPhone support is handled by Apple. This is not a good comparison.
Even comparing WinMo doesn't really work. I had a Wizard on AT&T, and there was exactly one firmware update, even though there were other versions that were available later. Plus, Windows is not free and not based on open source code. So, carriers would expect to pay for updates with closed source operating systems.
Xaviorin said:
I've also heard rumors from att employees stating that something was signed with apple to put restrictions on android updates and phones in order to allow exclusivity for the iphone when it was first released.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If that were true, then Apple and AT&T would be facing some serious litigation. This is similar to the deals that Intel made with computer manufacturers, forcing them to slow leak AMD sales in order to sell more Intel chips. Intel paid quite a hefty fine and suffered a serious PR black eye. That type of practice stifles competition and is very, very illegal. So, I doubt that Apple and AT&T would even consider doing that.
Xaviorin said:
Id have to say honestly in my personal opinion based from facts from an inside source... At&t is so obsessed with the iphone anything that costs them money or time that doesn't increase profits is going to be set on the backburner... Att has a time of year called "Iphone season" where they push the new versions and updates of the iphone to customers.... Seeing as how froyo itself was already released for almost every device on OTHER carriers and att has yet to push a single update aside from the eclaire update i doubt it will ever be coming.
Not to mention if anyone has noticed att removed ALOT of stuff from the captivates before they were able to ship them to customers... for example the third party apk allow button is completely gone from the stock phones due to att and their restrictions and the market having apps that just don't show up becuase of the way att wants to now start locking down phones like apple. (not trying to bash anyone or brands but from what ive seen from someone who loves to customize and believe anything i pay for is mine and i should be able to do as i wish with said product that's how it is in my eyes)
I think that since they have the rage over the iphones (another reason they try to sell them harder then any other phone is because of the "vast amount of accessories" ) it feels like they fell on the band wagon of the craze instead of actually worrying about ALL of their customers. It just seems like since iphone updates are pushed to phone and att doesnt have to deal with them, not to mention if the phone messes up it goes to an apple store and not att.
I've also heard rumors from att employees stating that something was signed with apple to put restrictions on android updates and phones in order to allow exclusivity for the iphone when it was first released. As to the truth behind this, anyones guess is as good as mine. Just seems funny how No att phones have gotten the froyo update unless they've (the customer) installed it themselves.
I wouldn't be looking forward to any updates from what i've seen on my end.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Conspiracy theory much? Like someone said, your theories border on anti-competitive in practice. AT&T is also not so obsessed with the iPhone given how much they've diversified their smartphone portfolio in the past 9 months (+2 WebOS devices, +2 BlackBerrys, +3 Windows Phones, +5 Android devices).
I'm usually skeptical about these things, but this is about the only rumor that makes sense.
For those comparing it to the iphone, its like comparing oranges to apples. Apple pretty much takes care of everything on their side.At&t just peddles their product. Apple has a 400 person call center just for the iphone, next door to where I work.
Apple makes the hardware and creates the OS.
Samsung just makes hardware which is a good thing considering how bad their software engineers are at coding.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
I'm more in the conspiracy theory side
Don't trust everything you read.
Thing about it deeply, what is more likely:
A Sammy employee risked his job, created an account just to create this post, and tell us the truth about the updates and how bad his employer is? seriously? What did he gain by doing this post? peace of mind? can he go to sleep now that he has revealed the truth of the US-only updates? Does really the Samsung employees care this much for only the US based users? This smells, and bad.
Now lets look at the conspiracy side. An AT&T employee notices our frustration against them. They see that seem to be more frustrated people are the non tech-savvy ones; that we got to admit they are more than us and represent a big number for them. On the other hand I bet they receive a gazillion calls from you guys on these subject.
Wouldn't be more likely than AT&T representative created that post to wash their hands and pass the blame to sammy? Isn't them who released a restricted phone and made a deal with Samsung saying that they will be in charge of this phone's updates? Samsungs cost in releasing an update of a phone that is almost equal to 6 other phones they released is null; whereas AT&T cost in updating their crap is high. Don't be blind. Carriers are the new tyrants. They will do anything in their power to get more money. If you could see what they are able to do in countries like mine you wont even doubt this. In my country of such a deal is made you can forget that you will ever get updates. There even is a carrier that, after 4 months passed that you have purchased a motorola's android based phone, charges you 10 uss monthly for MOTO BLUR, and this was written in the small print of the contract... seriously... I've seen carriers cancel their users contracts, saying they requested that, to bill them their contract-cancelation fee...
I could go on with this for pages... I've witnessed carriers lying, deceiving, and even more right in the people's face. If you want to check this, and know some spanish or use translators, just google "Claro hijos de puta" (sons of a...) or "claro estafa" (scam); both searches give more than 3 million results, and you wont imagine what you might find inside those pages...
This whole thing smells badly. And if I had to bet, I would say that post was made by a carrier to buy them time, or even to start making up an excuse so they wont ever release an update... after all, they would be the only ones that would benefit from such events...
I'm through waiting
This story was the final straw for me, whether it's true or not. I am tired of the drama and am no longer waiting for AT&T and/or Samsung to deliver what AT&T told me would happen when I bought the phone. If AT&T store staff said something incorrect it was corporate's fault for not guiding their staff correctly. I was told shortly Froyo was coming, but it never came. Samsung said on Twitter/Facebook we all would have Froyo last year. There is no excuse for what they have done, none. I've waded through the myriad of 3rd party ROMs and was leery of the leaked Froyo ones due to everyone seemed to have an issue here or there. The 9000 ROMs sounded exciting but came with issues I didn't want. I just want a working GPS and a stable phone, running Froyo, what I thought I was getting last summer.
Now that Rogers released a North American ROM and the talented coders have seized upon it, we seem to be approaching a new level of stability with Froyo. After reading up on the various Rogers ROM based images I installed Cognition (donation coming later tonight) and after 30 minutes of playing around, I am home with Froyo now. I am beyond tired of waiting for AT&T and/or Samsung to do the honorable thing for they are not honorable companies. I doubt another Samsung will grace my pocket and yet maybe it will be the 3rd party coders that will ultimately deliver what I have waited patiently for, for months. Wouldn't it be a wonderful environment if Samsung would just release the source to everything and let those out here, those infinitely more talented than Samsung staff, have access to the code they need to work pure magic.
Billabong81 said:
How could Samsung charge for an open-source project update? Obviously they must make some modifications to make it fit their phones, but at its core, its still an open source program.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
polarbee said:
Open source doesn't mean free.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Open source comes under GPL license. This isn't the one that is of cost, but the efforts involved in packing for a device, its extensive testing is what is costly.
In the most simplest of terms, the following people would be involved:
Business Team x 3 people
Development Team x 6 people
Testing/QA Team x 10 people
To take care of these people:
Project Manager x 1 person
Team Leads x 3 people (1 for each team)
Taking this to 23 people, to say the least.
On an average, if we pay each person say $ 50k for 6 months effort, it would be $ 50,000 x 23 = $ 1,150,000 i.e., $ 1.15 millions for 6 months.
Now see, this is only the minimal scale. For a phone so wide spread, I would assume a team of atleast 50 where managers charge more than 100-200k a year.
Now u see why Samsung doesn't wish to put this kind of money into a phone already sold, and is looking into marketing newer phones.
I think its all hoopla.
This "leak" of sensitive information on one of many android forums is only going to reach the eyes of a hand full of readers.
We (the brave souls wanting new updates for our gadgets and willing to hack them to get it) are very few in numbers compared to the vast amounts of consumers who own this phone, and usually don't give a hoot about a new update/upgrade for their phones ROM, IF they even know what the heck it is. They only care that their calls and texts go through, and they can browse the web on their lunch break.
The ONLY issue that most would care about is the GPS issues we have had. And I bet that AT&T, and Samsung have both received tens of thousands of customer complaints regarding Mr. Joe Average not being able to find his way on his family vacation. Again, we are but a small number compared to that. I would think that alone would motivate something to happen, at least an OTA update to fix the GPS issues. Nope.
So other than an intellectual debate on "why haves", and "why have nots" on a forum like this, there is nothing else this message could possibly accomplish.
The above thread, and this one will slowly slide down the thread list and be forgotten and nothing else will change.
The Bottom Line
Rumors aside, if it doesn't sell more phones, minutes or data plans and it can be avoided without seriously upsetting customers, they won't bother. Outside of our merry band of flash-a-holics, what percent of Captivate owners even know what Froyo is or care?
Also, judging by the JH7 OTA debacle, Samsung's OTA upgrade capability is decidedly unreliable. I'd bet that caused a mountain of returns. AT&T HATES returns!!! Costs them a fortune. The cost of paying Samsung for a Froyo upgrade is a drop in the bucket by comparison. So a bad OTA system is worse than none at all. If AT&T can get away with avoiding it, they will.
I think our best hope is to make A LOT of noise! Complain to Samsung, AT&T and Google. Do it publicly on FB, Twitter, etc. Do it often. A small vocal group of XDA readers can probably stir up a decent amount of attention at AT&T if they coordinated their efforts.
Thought i would share this with the rest of the XDA community who got scammed by Samsung.
A user revolt is starting among the tech blogs and on Twitter about Samsung's absolutely shameful lack of communication on updating its U.S. Galaxy S phones (including the Captivate, Epic, Fascinate, Mesmerize and Vibrant) to Android 2.2.
This is the first article i found posted 1-14.
Samsung Must Come Clean on Android Updates.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2375769,00.asp
Here is the second article i found posted on 1-17.
Samsung Forcing US Carriers to Pay for Android Froyo on Galaxy S?
http://www.phonenews.com/samsung-forcing-us-carriers-to-pay-for-android-froyo-on-galaxy-s-15151/#more-15151
Here is the third article i found posted on 1-18.
Samsung Galaxy S Froyo Coming in March?
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2375940,00.asp?kc=PCRSS03069TX1K0001121&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ziffdavis%2Fpcmag%2Fbreakingnews+%28PCMag.com+Breaking+News%29&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher
Here is yet another article.
Are Samsung Galaxy S Froyo Updates Being Held Back Because Of Cost?
http://www.androidpolice.com/2011/01/16/are-samsung-galaxy-s-froyo-updates-being-held-back-because-of-cost/
I don't know but there is only one way for them to please everyone and get users back on their side.....
Upgrade straight to Gingerbread. That would make all Galaxy S Users happy and probably keep a large % of them customers on their next phone.
Lets be honest, there were certainly issues when Samsung released their version of Froyo to select providers up here in canada. Rogers decided to wait it out and have them work out some bugs that were crippling other galaxy s phones. As you know FROYO is now available on Rogers and Canada being a smaller market, I believe it's being used as as testing ground for the firmware before it's released en mass to the much larger AT&T community. I've been using FROYO since it was launched on the Rogers network and haven't encountered any problems as of yet. I'm also not seeing an onslaught of complaining about phones being bricked or melted due to the release, so it would seem the AT&T update should be along rather soon. But what do i know?
http://pocketnow.com/android/samsung-not-charging-carriers-for-galaxy-s-froyo-updates
I certainly hope so and not because i would use the stock firmware but because it would provide a much easier base to dev on than what the captivate devs have to deal with at the current moment.
Reminds me of the **** Apple and Microsoft have done with updates in the past, only in reverse. "Let's update all the devices, but make the new software so robust that the old hardware can't run it!" Only Samsung's case is quite different. Our phones are very capable of new updates.
They've got us by the balls and I'm just about fed up because we're never going to see an update. It just doesn't make sense for them from an economic standpoint and AT&T doesn't want to shell out the money. If I were in business to make and keep as many billions of dollars as possible, I'd probably behave in a similar manner.
Lancez said:
http://pocketnow.com/android/samsung-not-charging-carriers-for-galaxy-s-froyo-updates
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's so arbitrary and conceited. Well, all of this is actually. But Samsung releasing that little utterance just to give us a glimmer of hope is just more hay in the barn and can't possibly be taken seriously. They've been saying the same **** since day 1. Anyone remember what happened with the boy who cried wolf?
upNsmokeAllDay said:
Here is the third article i found posted on 1-18.
Samsung Galaxy S Froyo Coming in March?
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2375940,00.asp?kc=PCRSS03069TX1K0001121&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ziffdavis%2Fpcmag%2Fbreakingnews+%28PCMag.com+Breaking+News%29&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This would make me the winner of the office pool. Check my signature, been saying it since November.
People think that by complaining loud enough they will get what they want. But honestly the people who are begging for froyo are a small subset of the total handset owners. People who are on xda are the die hard tech people who always want the latest and greatest.
It will happen when it happens
Sent from my SGH-I897 using XDA App
We may be a small subset, but we are the ones our friends and family come to for recommendations. All of a sudden, the impact is no longer small.
I have no idea if the rumors are true, I know Phandroid will help spread the rumors but the rumors make sense.
Samsung sold you a device if it does not work they will fix it, but yes Android 2.1 is a working OS and Android 2.2 is an upgrade. They like most manufactures add bloatware, it does take engineering time to take stock Froyo add the bloat and all the carrier customizations, why should Samsung bother? Makes economic sense for them just to sell a next generation Galaxy S .
I for one love the stock Froyo running on my Rogers Captivate but I will not hold my breath waiting for Samsung to deliver 2.3 or 2.4
I agree at the end of the day 95% of the people will never visit XDA, or run Kies.
The tech geeks do not speak for the majority, this is why there were not line ups for the Nexus One.
Captain Geezer said:
I've been using FROYO since it was launched on the Rogers network and haven't encountered any problems as of yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's been near perfect for me as well. The only complaints I have are:
1. The proximity sensor is screwed up. During a call, if the phone's screen is facing up the screen will turn back on. This means any time you hold the phone between your head and shoulder, your face starts mashing buttons. It's annoying as hell.
2. The contacts application never exits. It'll remain active in memory unless you end it. If you end it, your desktop disappears for several seconds before returning.
Gingerbread or bust.
Never again.
Sent from my Captivate.
AstroDigital said:
Samsung sold you a device if it does not work they will fix it, but yes Android 2.1 is a working OS and Android 2.2 is an upgrade. They like most manufactures add bloatware, it does take engineering time to take stock Froyo add the bloat and all the carrier customizations, why should Samsung bother? Makes economic sense for them just to sell a next generation Galaxy S.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We are not a bunch of whiners unhappy because we don't have the latest update and demanding something we have no right to. We are a group of consumers unhappy that we have been lied to and mislead. Samsung promised this update almost at the same time the phones were released. They promised a time frame in which it would be delivered. They have not followed through on their promises. They are selling accessories for these phones that have features that will only work with the promised updates. That right there is fraud. They have released this update everywhere but in the US, which says to me that it is not a technical consideration that is holding it up. Regardless of what may or may not make sense economically to Samsung, a company that does not keep its promises deserves to have that fact spread to consumers everywhere. Let's see how many next gen Galaxy phones Samsung sells after this debacle.
I've saved them the trouble and gone ahead and switched to T-mobile and a brand new G2 (no nexus s, because I will never buy another samsung device ever again, be it tv, blu-ray player, phone, microwave, toaster, blender, pocket knife, zipper, or plastic guitar pick).
As far as the $200 early term fee? Well, I've paid it, and I will be making a trip to the county courthouse on Friday to file against AT&T in small claims court for knowingly selling a malfunctioning device and breech of contract. Should they actually decide to show up instead of calling me to settle like I expect they will, I will be citing Cuomo v. Dell as a point of reference.
After 2 non-functioning replacements, I'm done with samsung, and to be honest, it really doesn't bother me to make AT&T pay for Samsung's mistake, because AT&T sold me the phone in the first place, and could have easily given me an Iphone as a replacement when I asked them to. Maybe next time they'll think twice about using a manufacturer with a history of repeating this exact same ****.
No class action because, well, let's face it, I don't have the money or the time to pursue a class action, and as a consumer, I know that I won't be putting up with their **** ever again. I just want the contract they conned me into gone, and the $400 for the phone and the ETF back. I would suggest that if any of you are unhappy with the phone that you don't sit around and just put up with it. You need to go get another phone with another carrier, cancel your contract, and file in small claims against AT&T. When word starts spreading of this money will talk and the carriers will listen. Then samsung won't be able to sell their devices to carriers.
Thanks for making that decision easy, Samsung and AT&T.
AstroDigital said:
Samsung sold you a device if it does not work they will fix it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From experience (2 returns are failures, 1 was DOA) that simply isn't true. Samsung is making users play russian roulette with refurbished phones.
Yup. This whole story just makes me all the more satisfied with my decision to go with the EVO over the EPIC on Sprint. We, EVO owners, were among the very first phones to be updated to FroYo. I've been rockin 2.2 for months now!
Go HTC and go Sprint!
P.S. I have other reasons why I would never by a Samsung phone. For some strange reason, there are way too many apps and mods that are 'not compatible with Galaxy S phones'.
Sent from my EVO rockin' MikFroYo!
leetpriest said:
Should they actually decide to show up instead of calling me to settle like I expect they will, I will be citing Cuomo v. Dell as a point of reference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cuomo v. Dell was about defrauding customers out of money by falsely advertising a 0% interest rate. I think you are going to have trouble convincing a judge that AT&T committed fraud because you would have to prove that they sold you your phone knowing that it had hardware problems that could not be fixed. Since there are thousands of people using Captivates without shutdown issues or other hardware related problems, fraud is a huge stretch, especially when the burden of proof is on you. If you seriously cite Cuomo v. Dell, AT&T may defend against it just to prevent any example from being set.
nkrick said:
Cuomo v. Dell was about defrauding customers out of money by falsely advertising a 0% interest rate. I think you are going to have trouble convincing a judge that AT&T committed fraud because you would have to prove that they sold you your phone knowing that it had hardware problems that could not be fixed. Since there are thousands of people using Captivates without shutdown issues or other hardware related problems, fraud is a huge stretch, especially when the burden of proof is on you. If you seriously cite Cuomo v. Dell, AT&T may defend against it just to prevent any example from being set.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So there isn't a press release dated Dec 20 out from Samsung instructing AT&T to "Sell through existing inventory" of faulty captivates? Citing that during a small claims hearing may not do much for me, but anyone that purchased a captivate after that press release now has a very real case against samsung and AT&T.
Alas, that's neither here nor there. I couldn't cite that case in the FILING process, or the SERVING process, only during the hearing, which precedes a settlement. You're telling me AT&T might be willing to pay a local attorney thousands, or pay thousands to fly a corp attorney down here to fight over $400?
I don't see it happening. But hey, I could be wrong. They could always attempt to countersue and not win. I didn't ask for your legal advice. I merely suggested that it may be worth everyone's time to send a message to the carriers that Samsung devices shouldn't be sold, that's all. It's not like it's any skin off your back if I win or lose a SMALL CLAIMS case, right?
leetpriest said:
So there isn't a press release dated Dec 20 out from Samsung instructing AT&T to "Sell through existing inventory" of faulty captivates? Citing that during a small claims hearing may not do much for me, but anyone that purchased a captivate after that press release now has a very real case against samsung and AT&T.
Alas, that's neither here nor there. I couldn't cite that case in the FILING process, or the SERVING process, only during the hearing, which precedes a settlement. You're telling me AT&T might be willing to pay a local attorney thousands, or pay thousands to fly a corp attorney down here to fight over $400?
I don't see it happening. But hey, I could be wrong. They could always attempt to countersue and not win. I didn't ask for your legal advice. I merely suggested that it may be worth everyone's time to send a message to the carriers that Samsung devices shouldn't be sold, that's all. It's not like it's any skin off your back if I win or lose a SMALL CLAIMS case, right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I applaud your efforts, and i would do the same thing. Small claims court should be an easy victory and here is why:
1. It probably will never get that far, as the cost of the lawyer is in excess of the $ amount - assuming you are only going after the early term fee - I don't think you have a case for anything else
2. There are laws on the books about "merchantability" or "fitness of purpose". I don't AT&T or Samsung engaged in outright, but the simple fact that the phone had defects is enough - it is not dissimilar to invoking the lemon laws for cars.
Cars have 0 day return guarantee, so lemon laws were necessary. As a consumer, you went through the proper process and let them replace your device 2 times yet defects persisted. By then your 30 day return was over.
Document your experience and you should be OK if it goes to court.
I am not a lawyer but i have filed in small claims court in the past and had very good success getting results.
I just think it is kind of weird right after at&t releases their two new android phones and new tethering plan, that our phone then the aria who have both waited for months get an update. Kinda seems like at&t was holding out on the updates. Anyone else agree this seems a little weird?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
+1
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
OK, this is just my opinion, but I believe that all the people that have been castrating Samsung about the updates are generally wrong, and that ATT was where things were being held up.
So, it's easy to castrate ATT for that but, really, it's easy for people that don't understand software/product support to pass judgement. Most people assume that ATT delayed things for commercial reasons so they could bloat/cripple the software. That may very well be true, but is it the only reason?
Assuming there are a couple million captivates out there, maybe ATT wanted to make sure they were able and ready to support the update of a couple million phones by generally retarded consumers that were going to create a huge demand spike for support when the upgrade was released?
Being in the software business, I know that software rollouts are not simply a matter of the software being ready. Having an infrastructure/ecosystem in place to support the software once it's rolled out is often as challenging as developing the software, and often just because the software is ready doesn't mean the business is ready to roll it out and support it. It may be as elementary as making sure you have enough capacity in your call centers to take the additional end-user support call volume generated by the update.
So, it's logical for me to believe that ATT set up an infrastructure and a plan that was implemented to support rollout of updates. It's also logical to assume that plan was intended so that the day it "went live" it enabled them to support multiple phone updates. The timing could certainly encompass dependencies/considerations on other elements of their business/infrastructure, including seemingly unrelated (to us) elements like support for tethering, etc.
I'm not necessarily defending all of these companies practices, and I really do think their communication could be better, but let's face it. Sometimes they are caught between a rock and a hard place. If they roll out something before they are ready they get berated because they released prematurely (see IPhones and network capacity and one reason so many people ***** about ATT). Or some updates fail and some phones get bricked and bloggers jump on them and try to ruin their reputation (see the recent WP7 first update). Or they try to communicate and people want specific dates and complain if they don't get them (see recent SamsungJohn/XDA debacle). If a date slips because of some unforeseen reason, people hold their feet to the fire over it.
So, is it coincidence that the Captivate and Aria updated at the same time, along with some other business elements like tethering? Probably not. Does it imply something insidious? Maybe, but I tend to believe it was along the lines of their project/implementation timelines based on the things they needed to put into place to support their customers and manage their business plans.
People, in general, VASTLY underestimate the amount of work that is required to set up an ecosystem to support end-users and roll out and release software/products.
Can Samsung and ATT do a better job of communicating? Absolutely, especially as it relates to the XDA audience. But consider this: maybe, from their business perspective, the number of people that ***** on the Internet are a miniscule (albeit very visible to us) percentage of their business/customers and although they are willing to spend some time to cater to that element, maybe their willingness only extends out a little bit because they think it only affects their business a little bit.
Just my $.02.
Bob
Hi all,
I study this stuff and just came across this article which might be of interest. It's not that you haven't heard of this idea, rather that this article is current and offers contribution to knowledge.
http://theunderstatement.com/post/11982112928/android-orphans-visualizing-a-sad-history-of-support
I came here to a great extent out of discovering the poor software support from my phone's manufactuer, in my case Sony Ericsson.
The single most critical aspect of this article in my two eyes (other people may find something else depending on your education, work and interest) is that this article argues that Cyanogen getting the latest OS working on even old devices shows the manufacturers are just being cheap but that is awful judgement on their part - because we move on to a different manufacturer.
What do you think?
The nexus series is okay, but the rest... For me it was sure that I'll go with custom roms from the very beginning because of this s**t.
Wasn't there some kind of contract that the manufactures provide support for a certain amount of time? I read about it somewhere.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA App
All i have to say it
WOW! thats crazy.
Personally I don't get why so many people are excited about the Samsung Galaxy S II. I have the Galaxy S. It came out at 2.1 when 2.2 had been out for months and finally got 2.2 about 6 months after it went on sale. NOTHING since.
For me, Samsung is a #neveragain product. ZERO support.
Yes, the manufacturers sometimes give clear support for some phones. My phone was launched around June 2010 on 1.6 (don't laugh lol) and I bought it that August. It was upgraded to 2.1. Around May/June 2011 an upgraded version was released instead of upgrading the 2010 line. Sony Ericsson said they 'give up to 2 years support and updates' for the phone. Most of the updates had negligible effect.
Any of you guys know your phone's support level?
Droidicus said:
Personally I don't get why so many people are excited about the Samsung Galaxy S II. I have the Galaxy S. It came out at 2.1 when 2.2 had been out for months and finally got 2.2 about 6 months after it went on sale. NOTHING since.
For me, Samsung is a #neveragain product. ZERO support.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
SGS update for GB has been out for several months everywhere except the USA for some models. That clearly makes this a USA carrier problem as Samsung has delievered timely updates outside of the USA.
The model for Android means the updates flow slowly through the system once they are announced and code is released. In BB and iOS, you get it all at once because its a closed system and RIM and Apple dont share anything with other companies.
Cooperation results in more variety and features but comes at the expense of slower implementation. This is seen in any situation, not just with mobile OS.
But it is the open source nature of Android which allows communities like Cyanogen and XDA to exist. We succeed where others fail.
Plus, while I like some Apple products like iPod, some of the rest of it is tremendously over-expensive clever marketing, where people show off their expensive goods to friends and pay for Apple's champagne parties in the process.
phoneyericsson said:
But it is the open source nature of Android which allows communities like...XDA to exist
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
XDA existed years before Android was released.
Perhaps but that doesn't mean that we don't benefit from systems like Android. With BB and iOS you begin with a closed system locked down.
The phrase is not mutually exclusive - that one point is true and the other false.
most app developers will end up targeting an ancient version of the OS in order to maximize market reach.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This doesn't bother me so much. I'm currently developing on a Rogers HTC Magic running 2.1 and I'm fine with that (ok not really, I'm getting the Galaxy Nexus in January). Anyway, the way I see it is targeting lower APIs just means there are fewer functions available for us to use, meaning we have to implement a few extra things ourselves. No big deal.
What is a big deal is the inconsistency of implementation of features by different manufacturers (eg Camera intent) That makes me rage.
---------- Post added at 06:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:33 PM ----------
phoneyericsson said:
Any of you guys know your phone's support level?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well keep in mind that your 2 year old phone may not be able to pull the greatest and latest version of Android. That could be one reason for a short support cycle.
As much as I would like rogers to update my phone to 2.2, it's not going to happen, because the hardware is not so good (by today's standards)
The author neglected the fact that there are hundreds of Android phones available and only 5 different iPhones (not counting the varying colors/storage spaces). It's far easier to provide and maintain updates for 5 devices than the 20+ Android devices each manufacturer has released within the previous two year period (minimum contract for subsidized pricing).
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using XDA App
Droidicus said:
Personally I don't get why so many people are excited about the Samsung Galaxy S II. I have the Galaxy S. It came out at 2.1 when 2.2 had been out for months and finally got 2.2 about 6 months after it went on sale. NOTHING since.
For me, Samsung is a #neveragain product. ZERO support.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Even the European Orange carrier branded Galaxy S is at 2.3.5. This non-support thingy is a US only problem (and probably some Asian countries).
American carriers are some blood sucking companies, of course they don't want to update their phones, because they must sell the next big thing.
And God, they fuc**d every good phone released there. That GNexus version from Verizon isn't even a google phone anymore.
US people should buy the international version if their network is compatible (like AT&T) and stop complaining. I only buy unlocked versions of the phones, and if I bought a low-end Android phone, I wouldn't complain about not getting updates. Seriously, you expect for your OEM to upgrade your 200$ (unlocked phone, I don't care how much is on contract) phone from 1.6 to 4.0 ?
I don't see my mom complaining about Android 2.3.3 version on her Galaxy Gio because he doesn't even know what an OS is. And even if the phone won't get updated anymore, the phone is perfectly working.
Now, if I do read tech blogs, I know what an OS is, and the most significant thing, I'm on XDA, is so hard to flash a custom rom on my almost out of warranty 18 months old phone ?
And what good is to update your phone if afterwards it will work like sh!t? 3GS is an example.
Some interesing points there...
- I agree that it wasn't really elaborated that the iPhone has a couple of variations whereas the Android situation involves many manufactuers so it is obviously going to work differently, watch Apple try fill those shoes. I don't really pay too much attention to Apple on that count though. While I think they do generally a good job looking after their own customers, take a look at their product portfolio - they have no interest in mass market generally, for quite a few years now they've moved away from iPods (companies which move away from their original core products have a struggle to survive) and into iPhones/iPads and now iTV incoming, which are, as we know, 'products of exlcusive consumption' which yield very high profit margins. That has nothing in common with the multi-manufactuer Android-approach, so I don't think very much about what Apple would do, simply, they wouldn't.
- Interesting note from the developer side there from that other person ^^^. And I hate throwing fuel in the fire, and I especially hate this term (it's a word pushed by Apple/Microsoft to spook Google's business partners in my opinion) but is fragmentation a problem?
- Also, this isn't an American problem. I'm European and we have the same problem. For you guys, contracts for 2 years -seems- to be normal there, but prepay is very popular here. The networks/carriers subsidise the handsets heavilly and you are not locked down really. There are some normally very expensive handsets in the shop now for €150 and I can use that for a year or whatever I want and switch next year. The network/carrier has paid a lot of subsidy to make it that cheap for me though. Contacts suit businesses perhaps more than consumers in this area. Secondly, minor point, but problems like Carrier IQ seem to be rampant in the US, whereas I've yet to find a company here using it. (there surely is, but they've yet to be named and shamed).
- Product support whether contract or prepay is usually defined. I just read another article point out that 2011 was the year of Froyo, which was released in 2010, it took so long for it to be rolled out. 2012 will be the year of Gingerbread, because it too is taking so long to roll out, yet we've just seen ICS come out...that Google strategy that some manufactuers signed up to...was it a joke?
I have not posted this in questions - as I feel it is more of a discussion topic.
Why does Samsung take so long to roll out OTA updates?
Oreo was released to some European countries, and yet almost two weeks later the UK is still without the update. To be clear, I am talking about unbranded, generic devices from Samsung, not carrier branded because we can always point the finger at the carriers for that. However, Vodafone in Spain has managed to start the rollout of Oreo too.
Does anyone have an actual reason for why 'Rollouts' of the same software take Samsung so long?
People may point to 'Server Strain', however the Galaxy S8 makes up a small % of Samsung handsets, if Apple can roll out an update to millions of devices, Samsung can roll it out to a % of it's user base easily.
People may point to they want to make sure there are no bugs - Sony roll-out software, however it is a much quicker process and most people have an update within a week. I believe they had to halt the Nougat update midway through, but quickly resumed.
How is it European carriers can release the Oreo update, yet Samsung themselves cannot release the update?
Does anyone have the answers, or any theories that go beyond what we already know?
Furthermore, I could flash the update. However, why should I? Samsung should be able to get this out of the door quick enough, it is becoming a joke.
As first timer with Samsung my gut feeling is that this is caused by a mix of being too prudential and the fact that the 99% of their user base really don't care.
I have to say, coming from years of custom Roms and having almost always the latest software, I don't mind a bit of "slowness".
It's annoying but at the end I don't have huge problems that needs to be fixed.
I wish they would publish more often security updates.
Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
It looks like, if you´re on international ROM, we´ll get monthly sec. updates -- https://security.samsungmobile.com/workScope.smsb
qpkqkma said:
It looks like, if you´re on international ROM, we´ll get monthly sec. updates -- https://security.samsungmobile.com/workScope.smsb
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
An extract from the disclaimer reads
"Please note that in some cases regular OS upgrades may cause delays to planned security updates. However, users can be rest assured the OS upgrades will include up-to-date security patches when delivered."
Based on that, Oreo rollout could be delayed again so that they can include the March update?
Maybe, so that next time you think of buying a Samsung phone, you will consider carriers (like Vodafone) rolls out update faster than the unlocked ones.
Which means the carrier gets another customer on their terms and conditions. Just a theory on business' perspective.
Carriers give deals to Apple. Samsung gives deal to carriers.
r0k3t said:
Maybe, so that next time you think of buying a Samsung phone, you will consider carriers (like Vodafone) rolls out update faster than the unlocked ones.
Which means the carrier gets another customer on their terms and conditions. Just a theory on business' perspective.
Carriers give deals to Apple. Samsung gives deal to carriers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is an interesting assumption, but based on what? The generic software rolled out to many countries (excluding some MAJOR ones) before Vodafone started rolling it out.
My argument is more about why roll it out in 3 or 4 countries, and not everywhere at once.
Also, surely it would not be in the interest of Samsung from a legal standpoint to be doing deals based on device security, which of course software updates include.
You guys sound like girls regretting life after a one night stand..
Thats just the usual shuffle of users to which you provide updates. You dont want to break things for everyone at once. Does not matter that it is stable release. It is the way big software providers work.
You may think of smaller companies that update everyone at once -> they also appear most frequently in news for things that are broken for all users.
Samsung sells device by advertising a curved screen and a good camera, not by advertising super fast android updates. Why spend money on something that can break your product, for the sake of a minor software change? The majority of samsung users do not even know what it means to update software, so why bother..
Thats a good businesses strategy, nothing else.
malimukk said:
You guys sound like girls regretting life after a one night stand..
Thats just the usual shuffle of users to which you provide updates. You dont want to break things for everyone at once. Does not matter that it is stable release. It is the way big software providers work.
You may think of smaller companies that update everyone at once -> they also appear most frequently in news for things that are broken for all users.
Samsung sells device by advertising a curved screen and a good camera, not by advertising super fast android updates. Why spend money on something that can break your product, for the sake of a minor software change? The majority of samsung users do not even know what it means to update software, so why bother..
Thats a good businesses strategy, nothing else.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well that sounds a bit harsh, but I generally agree with Malimukk. Look around you every second person you see is using a Samsung phone. They have to be super careful with every update. If they screw up, a lot more people will angrily stir up a ****storm on the internet, than if Sony or HTC would screw up an update.
Also I personally think it's totally fine if it takes up to 6 or 7 weeks for an update to hit all the devices. As long as Samsung releases the kernel sources quickly.
80% of Samsung users really do not care what softwareversion they are running and I'm sure Samsung will implement a working "check for updates"-Feature in the near future for the 20% like us.
Again these threads go no where but to arguments about this topic....
As stated many many times if you want timely updates buy google....
Thread closed