Related
Just posted a pretty lengthy message on the T-Mobile forums... Post replies there if possible.
http://forums.t-mobile.com/t5/T-Mobile-G2/T-Mobile-Why-I-m-returning-my-G2/m-p/502593
Dear T-Mobile,
I thought I would write you this little note to explain why I have returned my G2. You see, Google created the Android Operating System to provide an Free, Open-Source alternative to proprietary Smart-Phone Operating Systems such as Windows Mobile and the iPhone. Google has done this to untangle the Smart-Phone ecosystem from the likes of Microsoft and Apple. The mantra of Open-Source software is: "If you don't like something, you can download the source and change it yourself!" Evidently, you do not understand this concept.
In case you were somehow unaware, the Linux kernel is protected by the GNU Public License (version 2). You can read the full license here: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html
By selling a locked-down device (such as the G2), you defeat the capability of developers to contribute to the Android platform. Many features in the mainline Android project have come from the "modder" community. Furthermore, your supplier, HTC, refuses to comply with the GNU license. Numerous attempts to contact them about this violation are met with the following form response:
"HTC will typically publish on developer.htc.com the Kernel open source code for recently released devices as soon as possible. HTC will normally publish this within 90 to 120 days. This time frame is within the requirements of the open source community."
This is not acceptable. Read the license - it is clearly states that source code must be made available to those who ask for it.
Adding insult to injury, you have also misrepresented the device by being less-than-honest about its specs and capabilities. Many users are surprised to find they only have 1.3GB available on a 4GB phone. Say what you will about "reserved space" - this is not the case on *any* other Android handset. Meanwhile, you have taken cash on the side to pre-load certain "useful applications" (crapware such as Photobucket) - which cannot be removed by the user. And to no one's surprise, you have removed built-in features of Froyo (such as Tethering.)
It's unfortunate that you have chosen this path for your Android handsets. Neither HTC nor T-Mobile own Android, Linux, or the numerous other software components contained therein. You cannot simply do with them as you please. Hopefully you will release future handsets without these restrictions - until then I will continue to support the efforts of those who unlock your software protection.
Regards,
An ex-G2 owner
Personally, I think you are blowing this "anti-root" debacle out of proportion.
G2 will be rooted, just give it time.
I will give you the 4GB w/ 1.3GB free space argument. No argument here.
SuperFly03 said:
Personally, I think you are blowing this "anti-root" debacle out of proportion.
G2 will be rooted, just give it time.
I will give you the 4GB w/ 1.3GB free space argument. No argument here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So wait... They should put all phones on read-only lock-down, refuse to provide source when obligated to do so by the GPL, mislead customers with specs (not just the 4GB), tear things out of the OS, fill my limited memory with useless applications that I dont' want, and cannot delete, etc....
I think it's safe to say, root aside, that they have failed on all these fronts. I'm not expecting them to just hand over persistent root - but it's my goddamn device. **** Tmo and HTC for all of the above.
How do you REALLY about htc and t-mobile?
I'm sure they're all getting out their tissues for you.
You can get off of the soapbox now.
HamNCheese said:
So wait... They should put all phones on read-only lock-down, refuse to provide source when obligated to do so by the GPL, mislead customers with specs (not just the 4GB), tear things out of the OS, fill my limited memory with useless applications that I dont' want, and cannot delete, etc....
I think it's safe to say, root aside, that they have failed on all these fronts. I'm not expecting them to just hand over persistent root - but it's my goddamn device. **** Tmo and HTC for all of the above.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The requirement is 90-120 days after release right? We are 5 days into release.
The 4GB, as I said, I have no argument against because it is a bit misleading but then again there is an 8GB SDHC card.
The useless applications can be removed when rooted. Until then, I haven't seen an Android phone not come with at least a few useless applications. They suck but they can be removed eventually.
I agree with you that is your device that you paid for... I'm not a fan of content protection. I, in fact, hate it but the 1000 people who don't buy a device because of it don't compare to the 2million people who do buy the device so I don't get too worked up about it.
I think you are being a bit dramatic.
I totally agree with this letter root is my deciding factor on wether I'm purchasing this phone. And I'm purchasing it out rite. The whole 500. It irritates me I'm told what to dob with something I spent so much money on. I purchase a mts because I assumed I could root and write to system and what not because I wanted a phone with a keyboard and this was all that was out but I hated the espresso ui. Granted I can change roms but the lack of system writeable acess and no kernel has killed our mts development. The forum is a ghost town. I have a rooted g1 and let people use it as a loaner. Not one person has ever messed it up with root acess. Who is anyone to tell me what I can do with something I purchas. Would you buy a house and let someone tell you you can't changes the drapes or carpet. If your into cars or motorcycles you wouldn't purchase one and be told you can't upgrade the parts. I've never bought a computer I couldn't change my os on. And wasn't jailbreaking and unlocking made legal. So technically aren't anti root methodes illegal
Phone just came out dude give it time... there will be updates
Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using XDA App
HamNCheese said:
So wait... They should put all phones on read-only lock-down, refuse to provide source when obligated to do so by the GPL, mislead customers with specs (not just the 4GB), tear things out of the OS, fill my limited memory with useless applications that I dont' want, and cannot delete, etc....
I think it's safe to say, root aside, that they have failed on all these fronts. I'm not expecting them to just hand over persistent root - but it's my goddamn device. **** Tmo and HTC for all of the above.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Misleading specs = bad, and possibly illegal
Bloatware = effing annoying
Not providing source = annoying, but the source requirement is worthless unless someone higher up in the chain enforces it
Removing things from the OS? Guess what: that's the other side of open source.
The G2 has its issues, and I don't fault people for returning it. I also personally prefer open hardware - the freedom to break what I have bought. But I agree with SuperFly03 that you are blowing things out of proportion. T-Mobile and HTC also have a right to make money and protect themselves from perceived customer abuses.
I like your letter and agree with you, if you were to create an electronic petition I would sign it as a 7+ year T-mo user paying $140+/mo for the last 3yr. I did sign such a petition 2yr ago after the g1 release, "keep android open" as I recall. Truth is your only other options are much more restrictive outside of the android OS. So much focus of Devs is on keeping android free and open that nothing the coperations do can stop them IMHO. Just keep the Devs beer/coffee coffers full and rejoyce in all that android was meant to be. BTW "Bandit Splash"
Buy a Moto Razr and call it a night.
- Fly like a G2
I would agree with you. Bloat ware is becoming popular with htc. I moved to the G2 from the EVO because of the non sense ui. Further more I think your letter is appropate for tmo. I decided to buy the phone out right from my work (Radioshack) without any service and running on wifi I have no disappointments yet. Besides spending the $500+ for the phone...
Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using Tapatalk
ezcape said:
Buy a Moto Razr and call it a night.
- Fly like a G2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Or, never buy this bull**** from a carrier again. Instead, buy un-subsidized, or un-locked phones direct. Like my Nexus One.
I don't doubt that it will be rooted within a month... That's not the point. Hell, if it is, I might just buy it again. But I won't support either T-Mobile or HTC with this crap as-is.
SuperFly03 said:
The requirement is 90-120 days after release right? We are 5 days into release.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wrong. There is no specific time requirement (this was addressed in GPLv3, which has some other issues.) The GPL went into effect the moment the executable code was "distributed" (technically late September, when the first people got their deliveries - maybe earlier - depends on definition of "distribution"...)
I don't expect a next-day turn-around, but HTC pulled the 90-120 days out of their ass. If I ask for source, and they do not provide it, they are non-compilant. Period. End of story.
The point of all this? Call attention to the fact that they are abusing the GPL. All of the Android manufacturers see Android as a cash-cow. They are taking Linux and doing whatever-the-**** they want with it.
It's wrong, and I'm calling them on it. Nothing more.
I'm disappointed (and fairly angry) that I had to sign a 2 yr contract & pay cash out of pocket just to get a Device that has been been falsely advertised and has Disabilities...
T-mo always comes out w/ BS devices that suck, ones no-one else wants, and it seems they shafted us with their flagship Android successor.
HamNCheese said:
Or, never buy this bull**** from a carrier again. Instead, buy un-subsidized, or un-locked phones direct. Like my Nexus One.
I don't doubt that it will be rooted within a month... That's not the point. Hell, if it is, I might just buy it again. But I won't support either T-Mobile or HTC with this crap as-is.
Wrong. There is no specific time requirement (this was addressed in GPLv3, which has some other issues.) The GPL went into effect the moment the executable code was "distributed" (technically late September, when the first people got their deliveries - maybe earlier - depends on definition of "distribution"...)
I don't expect a next-day turn-around, but HTC pulled the 90-120 days out of their ass. If I ask for source, and they do not provide it, they are non-compilant. Period. End of story.
The point of all this? Call attention to the fact that they are abusing the GPL. All of the Android manufacturers see Android as a cash-cow. They are taking Linux and doing whatever-the-**** they want with it.
It's wrong, and I'm calling them on it. Nothing more.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They can do what they choose with Android, Google backs them as they did officially state that limiting Android to a vanilla, untouched build would essentially violate the fundamentals of having an 'open' OS.
Its up to the consumer to decide what they like and they don't.
Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using XDA App
SmartHat said:
I'm disappointed (and fairly angry) that I had to sign a 2 yr contract & pay cash out of pocket just to get a Device that has been been falsely advertised and has Disabilities...
T-mo always comes out w/ BS devices that suck, ones no-one else wants, and it seems they shafted us with their flagship Android successor.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To be fair, you didn't HAVE to sign a 2 year contract. It's really not worth it to save a couple of hundred bucks off the initial cost of the phone. Heck, I've seen unopened G2s on craigslist for around $400 already...
That being said, I still have until tomorrow to decide if I'm going to return this POS. I bought it outright, and my money is on this phone never being rooted. I know it hasn't been long yet, but it's not gonna happen.
EDIT: if this rumored OTA includes wifi tethering, I'll be happy. Also supposed to have a radio update...I guess I will wait and see!
seancneal said:
To be fair, you didn't HAVE to sign a 2 year contract. It's really not worth it to save a couple of hundred bucks off the initial cost of the phone. Heck, I've seen unopened G2s on craigslist for around $400 already...
That being said, I still have until tomorrow to decide if I'm going to return this POS. I bought it outright, and my money is on this phone never being rooted. I know it hasn't been long yet, but it's not gonna happen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HamNCheese said:
Or, never buy this bull**** from a carrier again. Instead, buy un-subsidized, or un-locked phones direct. Like my Nexus One.
I don't doubt that it will be rooted within a month... That's not the point. Hell, if it is, I might just buy it again. But I won't support either T-Mobile or HTC with this crap as-is.
Wrong. There is no specific time requirement (this was addressed in GPLv3, which has some other issues.) The GPL went into effect the moment the executable code was "distributed" (technically late September, when the first people got their deliveries - maybe earlier - depends on definition of "distribution"...)
I don't expect a next-day turn-around, but HTC pulled the 90-120 days out of their ass. If I ask for source, and they do not provide it, they are non-compilant. Period. End of story.
The point of all this? Call attention to the fact that they are abusing the GPL. All of the Android manufacturers see Android as a cash-cow. They are taking Linux and doing whatever-the-**** they want with it.
It's wrong, and I'm calling them on it. Nothing more.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good god... the phone has been out less than 6 days and there is so much negativity.
Wow... this is sad.
Please read this license page:
http://source.android.com/source/licenses.html
under which Android is licensed. Android is released under the Apache Software License 2.0. Some parts may be GPL, such as the Linux Kernel, but overall the "Android" parts are covered by ASL v2.0 not GPL.
Clackamas said:
Please read this license page:
http://source.android.com/source/licenses.html
under which Android is license. Android is released under the Apache Software License 2.0. Some parts may be GPL, such as the Linux Kernel, but overall it is covered by ASL v2.0.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When I refer to the GPL, I'm referring to Linux - the kernel. The Android license does not cover the kernel. I could care less about the source of dashboard and all that. The Apache license allows some bits to be closed. But Linux is the problem here - the kernel source does not fall into that category at all.
Good god... the phone has been out less than 6 days and there is so much negativity.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're entitled to your opinion. And I'm entitled to mine - which should be clear by now.
The time issue has to do with the 14 day "buyer's remorse" return period. My tracking number has to be visible by Thursday to be accepted, as I got the phone 2 weeks ago Friday.
HamNCheese said:
When I refer to the GPL, I'm referring to Linux - the kernel. The Android license does not cover the kernel. I could care less about the source of dashboard and all that. The Apache license allows some bits to be closed. But Linux is the problem here - the kernel source does not fall into that category at all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And like many, you don't understand the GPL either.
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/COPYING
As Linus points out: Software using the standard interface and derived works are excluded. So, companies such as NVIDA and ATI can release drivers for the kernel without having to release the source to their "derived words". I am also unclear exactly where in the license it says source code must be immediately available. Surely it is a market disadvantage to require the release of such immediately with the product. That would be a significant liability to companies wishing to use GPL based code. 90 - 120 days isn't unreasonable. And the fact that the kernel version being used is publish means that > 90% of the source code is available at product release shows the spirit of intent.
Dear Forums,
As we all know, the key to having a truly customizable device is having the source for their builds, and as we also all know, Viewsonic has not released the source code for their Gtablet.
If we all find the correct email to contact, much like all other companies they will be pressured into releasing the source to the community.
Let's get this done.
LETTER
Dear Viewsonic,
We are aware your company has directed many customers calling for technical support to the gTablet sub-forum of xda-developers
http://forum.xda-developers.com/forumdisplay.php?f=841
Please consider listening to what the community as asking for.
By using the Linux Kernel in your device you are required by the Free Software Foundation's General Public License (GPLv2) to release the source code for the kernel. If there is any proprietary software involved in said code, then you have the right to protect your investment, and not include that with the source release.
We are entitled to the source to change our tablets in the way we see fit with the full understanding that when we modify our tablets software we remove ourselves from any sort of warranty you may offer.
Furthermore, we would like an open dialog between with your developers concerning the software which is shipped with the gTablet. It well known among the community that the return rate for the gTablet is unnaturally high. The version of Android developed by Tap n Tap does not provide a positive user experience for the average user. By this time you should be aware of such feedback coming from the main distributors of the gTablet, Sears and Staples. This situation will only continue to get worse as detailed professional reviews of this product begin to circulate around the Internet. One such review I am referring to will be posted to Anandtech.com in the next few days.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4054/first-look-viewsonic-gtablet-and-tegra-2-performance-preview
Barnes and Noble has released a Software Development Kit as well as source code to enable the community to make the Nook Color the best product it can be.
http://www.barnesandnobleinc.com/press_releases/2010_oct_26_nook_developer.html
Please follow their example. By working together we can make the gTablet a real competitor in the burgeoning tablet marketplace.
Sincerely,
The gTablet Community from xda-developers.com
I'll second that. Not sure what we can do, but they should be reminded.
Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using XDA App
Viewsonic's main website has a support tab that you can send inquiries. Do you think it would get to the right place if we used that?
The email avenue did not work for me
xmr405o said:
Viewsonic's main website has a support tab that you can send inquiries. Do you think it would get to the right place if we used that?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I tried using the email tech support method for the web site; got this response back:
Dear Mr. Walker,
Thank you for contacting ViewSonic Technical Support.
I apologize but as much as I wanted to assist you with it, the product that you are inquiring about is handled by a different technical department.
You may contact them by calling 1-866-501-6405 between 8am-5pm PST, Monday through Friday.
If you have other technical concerns, feel free to contact us again. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to assist you.
Sincerely,
Josef
ViewSonic Technical Support
(800) 688-6688 (USA)
(866) 463-4775(Canada)
[email protected] said:
I tried using the email tech support method for the web site; got this response back:
Dear Mr. Walker,
Thank you for contacting ViewSonic Technical Support.
I apologize but as much as I wanted to assist you with it, the product that you are inquiring about is handled by a different technical department.
You may contact them by calling 1-866-501-6405 between 8am-5pm PST, Monday through Friday.
If you have other technical concerns, feel free to contact us again. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to assist you.
Sincerely,
Josef
ViewSonic Technical Support
(800) 688-6688 (USA)
(866) 463-4775(Canada)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Go for it. it has to drop sooner or later. the more pressure from the community, the better. I'll drop them a line as well.
I get the feeling that instead of taking the time to lock the device down like is done with phones and other android devices, they decided they will just not release the code and hope to stall out mods that way.
TheMongol said:
I get the feeling that instead of taking the time to lock the device down like is done with phones and other android devices, they decided they will just not release the code and hope to stall out mods that way.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That'd work, except for the fact that it's against the GPL, and that'd be breaking the law. They have to make it available, it's just a matter of pressuring them into doing so sooner than later.
just sent off my second email to viewsonic regarding the gtablet (along with a note telling them to fwd the email accordingly). i will let you guys know if i get a response.
Just called in. They are taking people's contact info that say they are android developers (they started doing that today) and they said they are not doing it to track us or anything like that, but to contact us...like say...when the source is released.
Everybody, call. Emailing isn't going to get you anywhere.
I informed them that they will legally have to release source under GPL, he said he will be passing that up to the developers. It sounds like we may be getting somewhere, but we need to call...the more the merrier. It sounds like they have a small call center so its not how many times you call, but how many different people call at this point.
myndwire said:
That'd work, except for the fact that it's against the GPL, and that'd be breaking the law. They have to make it available, it's just a matter of pressuring them into doing so sooner than later.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh yes indeed. But that doesn't mean people won't try to get away with things from time to time. Perhaps they are not even aware. I know I am going to call and ask soon even though I just started developing on android.
I called them today, as well - good bunch of people over there and a pleasure to talk with them.
I'm serious - in a world of reps in third world countries speaking broken english and working off a script, the VS reps are a breath of fresh air and Viewsonic should be commended for that alone. I put in my usual request to please release the source and I was told that they will pass it onto the development team.
I don't expect anything to come from it, but they do know who I am and who we are, so I'm hoping that VS management throws us a bone once they realize what a mistake it was adding that TnT layer.
roebeet said:
I called them today, as well - good bunch of people over there and a pleasure to talk with them.
I'm serious - in a world of reps in third world countries speaking broken english and working off a script, the VS reps are a breath of fresh air and Viewsonic should be commented for that alone. I put in my usual request to please release the source and I was told that they will pass it onto the development team.
I don't expect anything to come from it, but they do know who I am and who we are, so I'm hoping that VS management throws us a bone once they realize what a mistake it was adding that TnT layer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree. The guy I talked to was pretty cool. He also said that the developers are being very persistent about keeping TnT in place. Very nice to talk to someone that can actually speak English
scsione889 said:
I agree. The guy I talked to was pretty cool, and even he came out and said xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. He also said that the developers are being very persistent about keeping TnT in place. Very nice to talk to someone that can actually speak English
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Watch out, they read these forums, don't want to get the poor guy fired!
jacindc said:
Watch out, they read these forums, don't want to get the poor guy fired!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
x2 on that! Rule of thumb - if you write something here about a conversation with CS, assume that their management might read it and how that would look.
Just spoke with Mike @ Viewsonic gtablet support. First, they are very nice! Second, Mike said that they are working on a release, but no date yet. Finally, Mike said that they would be posting it to viewsonic.com/gtablet website (and to also check xda-developers.com for other updates).
They also took my e-mail address - hopefully to send out a blast when they are finally able to post it.
BTW, Mike - thanks!
I also have to echo others who have posted here - Thank you, Viewsonic, for having people who can speak English!!
I figured I would do my part as well. I called & spoke to a tech who said they were not releasing it & have no plans to do so. I said its linux based & the GPL says they have to release the source by law. He said they dont support changing the operating system. I said Android is linux based & falls under the GPL. He then transfered me to a senior tech who said:
Tap n tap is proprietary & therefore it doesn’t fall in the GPL. He said the TNT is also horrendous & they want to protect the tap n tap ‘investment’ which is why the source wont be released. They did not ask for my information aside from my first name for the conversation we had. He basically said they were not going to release the source regardless of how many people called. The only way to get it is to sue the company & force them to do so. Obviously, I am not looking to spend more money just to get the source. He knows that, the company knows that & until someone bucks up & hires an attorney, viewsonic doesn’t care.
He did say that they did get a number of calls, he feels for me, he said others have rooted it but tough titties (my summary).
RichTJ99 said:
He basically said they were not going to release the source regardless of how many people called. The only way to get it is to sue the company & force them to do so.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Boy, did my blood pressure just skyrocket.
RichTJ99 said:
I figured I would do my part as well. I called & spoke to a tech who said they were not releasing it & have no plans to do so. I said its linux based & the GPL says they have to release the source by law. He said they dont support changing the operating system. I said Android is linux based & falls under the GPL. He then transfered me to a senior tech who said:
Tap n tap is proprietary & therefore it doesn’t fall in the GPL. He said the TNT is also horrendous & they want to protect the tap n tap ‘investment’ which is why the source wont be released. They did not ask for my information aside from my first name for the conversation we had. He basically said they were not going to release the source regardless of how many people called. The only way to get it is to sue the company & force them to do so. Obviously, I am not looking to spend more money just to get the source. He knows that, the company knows that & until someone bucks up & hires an attorney, viewsonic doesn’t care.
He did say that they did get a number of calls, he feels for me, he said others have rooted it but tough titties (my summary).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the info.
What I don't understand is why is it that HTC is bound to GPL in that it must release source for its devices even though the majority of HTC devices has the proprietary software, Sense?
I don't think having proprietary software on a device exempts a company from conforming to GPL.
i think they must be new to linux or HTC is very used to dealing with Linux.
The senior tech was sympathetic but was firm in repeating the company plans. Heck their twitter page sais the same exact thing.
It makes me wonder if I should return it.
RichTJ99 said:
i think they must be new to linux or HTC is very used to dealing with Linux.
The senior tech was sympathetic but was firm in repeating the company plans. Heck their twitter page sais the same exact thing.
It makes me wonder if I should return it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree- without source, the gtab won't be able to experience its full potential especially if Viewsonic thinks anyone likes tapntap. Makes me wonder if I should return mine even though (outside of a few annoyances) I really like the device.
Viewsonic has to release source. Their device is Linux based with a proprietary software user interface just like HTC devices. This is ridiculous.
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.
Before we start, it may appear Motorola and Samsung will be the only ones who will have a Honeycomb product until at least May/June. The reasons being:-
1. Honeycomb supply to manufacturers have been delayed until May/June. I dont know exactly what this means except that the manufacturers I work with cannot get access to Honeycomb for their products (but it may be related to the next rumor).
2. Honeycomb wont be open sourced and a major manufacturer is working with Google on trying to secure licensing.
Sorry I cant be more specific than this. The second rumor contradicts everything Google has done so far, but if I mention the manufacturer involved, it lends weight to the rumor.
Does anyone else have any further information to collaborate/debunk these rumors?
EDIT: When I say Honeycomb wont be open sourced, I meant Google plans to close source it and Honeycomb will require a license.
I'm gonna call BS on all of the above.
#1. New member, first post, no sources or company names given.
#2. Honeycomb SDK is already published. Functional installs of Honeycomb can and have already been built from this.
#3. Licensing means they CANNOT closed source it
Either present us with some evidence, or quit spouting rubbish.
FloatingFatMan said:
I'm gonna call BS on all of the above.
#1. New member, first post, no sources or company names given.
#2. Honeycomb SDK is already published. Functional installs of Honeycomb can and have already been built from this.
#3. Licensing means they CANNOT closed source it
Either present us with some evidence, or quit spouting rubbish.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
^ couldn't put it better myself.
Sent from my HTC Vision using XDA App
There is a reason why this is a new account, if it isnt obvious to you.
I am not asking for speculative opinions, I am wondering if there is anyone else in the industry hearing either of these rumors.
Atleast give some sources?
Sent from my HTC Vision using XDA App
Sorry, the market for real Honeycomb products is actually very small at the moment so any hints will reveal too much. Please, if anyone else has heard anything just PM me.
Small huh? There are plenty of devices coming out quite soon. Acer's Iconia Tab A500, for example, has just had its FCC approval granted and will be out mid-April. That's running Honeycomb, so kinda slaps your "rumours" in the chops about it not being available until June.
FloatingFatMan said:
#3. Licensing means they CANNOT closed source it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What licence exactly?
FYI Android itself is licensed under the Apache software license, which is a non-copyleft licence.
If Google so chose, they could keep Honeycomb itself closed source, and their only open source requirement would be publishing the source for the linux kernel on shipping devices.
Regards,
Dave
foxmeister said:
What licence exactly?
FYI Android itself is licensed under the Apache software license, which is a non-copyleft licence.
If Google so chose, they could keep Honeycomb itself closed source, and their only open source requirement would be publishing the source for the linux kernel on shipping devices.
Regards,
Dave
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because they've already released it under open license.
FloatingFatMan said:
Because they've already released it under open license.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The latest release of Android released under the Apache Software Licence is Gingerbread - that can't be taken back.
However, anything built on top of that source can be closed source if the developer so wishes, and that includes Honeycomb!
I still expect Google to release Honeycomb under the ASL, but the point it - *they don't have to!*.
Regards,
Dave
Seriously guys,do you really think that in times like these we're living,Google will abandon the idea that made their OS so successful?I highly doubt that...
tolis626 said:
Seriously guys,do you really think that in times like these we're living,Google will abandon the idea that made their OS so successful?I highly doubt that...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I absolutely agree with you - I cannot fathom any reason for Google to make Honeycomb close source. This rumor (#2) is from a bigger company than the company that provided the first rumor.
Interesting news ! Thanks for the share !
FloatingFatMan said:
I'm gonna call BS on all of the above.
#1. New member, first post, no sources or company names given.
[...]
Either present us with some evidence, or quit spouting rubbish.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same as the troll who claimed Samsung were trying to charge networks for software updates yet everyone was willing to believe that...
I'm not arguing that this looks and smells like trolling, merely attempting to highlight that plenty of people round here seem to be quite happy to 'never let the facts get in the way of a good story'.
Sorry to double-post but Engadget has an article on the matter.
Here's a quote from Google:
Android 3.0, Honeycomb, was designed from the ground up for devices with larger screen sizes and improves on Android favorites such as widgets, multi-tasking, browsing, notifications and customization. While we're excited to offer these new features to Android tablets, we have more work to do before we can deliver them to other device types including phones. Until then, we've decided not to release Honeycomb to open source. We're committed to providing Android as an open platform across many device types and will publish the source as soon as it's ready.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Absolutely no mention of licences.
It does, on the other hand, talk of Honeycomb 'not being ready, which ties in to a lot of reviews and impressions of it as an OS.
Again, I feel this is very similar to the 'Samsung charging for upgrades' rumour - something takes a little bit longer than normal to happen and a minority start making up ridiculous rumours to try and explain it.
Step666 said:
Sorry to double-post but
Here's a quote from Google:
Absolutely no mention of licences.
It does, on the other hand, talk of Honeycomb 'not being ready, which ties in to a lot of reviews and impressions of it as an OS.
Again, I feel this is very similar to the 'Samsung charging for upgrades' rumour - something takes a little bit longer than normal to happen and a minority start making up ridiculous rumours to try and explain it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am not sure whether my post occurred before the Engadget article or not, but this article certainly validates rumor #1. It would be interesting to see how this affects manufacturers who have announced Honeycomb products (one poster mentioned Acer earlier). I know some are launching Gingerbread instead, which isnt ideal.
While the link between the two rumors is subject to interpretation, the two rumors were taken from different sources. The second rumor is less believable (even to me) however, the source is from a significantly larger company.
No, it doesn't validate rumour number one.
You claimed that manufacturers are unable to get a copy of Honeycomb - there's a big difference between Google publicly releasing the source code and passing copies of it to manufacturers.
Do you really think that when Google released Froyo's or GIngerbread's source code that that was the first time HTC, Samsung etc had seen it?
I really don't.
Also, as has been pointed out already, the fact that there are Honeycomb devices coming from a range of manufacturers goes some way to disproving your point.
As for the believability of your rumours, unless you can back them up with any sort of proof, I don't see any reason to believe either of them.
Well the op might be on to something at least. I'm not buying that top tier manufacturers won't be able to get the code as LG and Acer among others are going to be releasing tablets with honeycomb in the coming weeks.
http://www.androidcentral.com/google-not-open-sourcing-honeycomb-says-bloomberg
Thank you so much for this article - this is another source verifying the difficulty of manufacturers getting honeycomb source code. There is no doubt the Tier 1 companies will get preferential access to the code - the question is, who is seen as Tier 1 by Google.
Perhaps in regards to licensing, this may be just a legal formality for companies to get access to Honeycomb at the moment, and it is unclear whether these licenses will cost anything.
Thank you again, this has been a great help. This is a third party source we can use to explain to our clients why we cannot launch honeycomb at the date we promised.
I am glad Google isn't releasing the code so cheap companies can't just stick Honeycomb on crap devices and make it look bad.
Sent from my Incredible with the XDA Premium App.
Viewsonic announced it's Honeycomb tablet @ 7 inches. Which means they have the HC source code... which means they hate the gtab community.... because we don't get it, even for modding purposes.
http://www.engadget.com/2011/05/12/viewsonic-7x-shrinks-honeycomb-to-7-inches-for-the-tiny-handed/
They don't hate the Gtab community. Don't try to anthropomorphize a corporation because you will only end up sad and depressed. All Viewsonic wants is to make money by putting out products and then putting out more products. We are numbers, not faces.
Fair enough. I suppose I am a bit idealistic that they would continue to support something older. Perhaps more my frustration is the lack of source code when it could be given... but that it an entitlement mentality I suppose.
forgiventhief said:
Fair enough. I suppose I am a bit idealistic that they would continue to support something older. Perhaps more my frustration is the lack of source code when it could be given... but that it an entitlement mentality I suppose.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
stop caving because one person says something!!!!
and to the user that commented to the OP, thought the info you stated (numbers, not faces) is true, STOP ACTING LIKE IT'S ACCEPTABLE.
To many 300 to 500 dollars is a lot of money and the company has a moral obligation to support it for a reasonable amount of time. This was in no way accomplished by viewsonic. Horrible business ethics and I WILL NEVER BUY ANOTHER VIEWSONIC PRODUCT. you vote with your purchasing power and viewsonic lost mine, my family's and my friend's votes.
as an aside, I suspect seeing all the progress made viewsonic might try to "save the day" and eventually release something for our g tab honeycomb flavored. I'm not fooled and you shouldn't be either. Your support should be for the devs like roebeet. If your running honeycomb and you haven't donated to him or the adamdevs you should feel worse than viewsonic.
vote with your money, I VOTE FOR OUR DEV COMMUNITY!
(before I get any posts about talking about donation, donation doesn't imply 3,000 dollars. Even if it's only a dollar, it says something.)
You do realize viewsonic just slapped their name on the Malta, right? You're mad at the wrong company.
schettj said:
You do realize viewsonic just slapped their name on the Malta, right? You're mad at the wrong company.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Doesn't matter, though. As soon as VS slapped their name on it, they've adopted it.
The way VS is treating the gtab is worse than just numbers. They have intentionally ignored it, not giving it any press or anything at all. There isn't even a direct link to the gtab from their main website.
The gtab is doing way better than other "real" VS devices. It's the number 1 seller on amazon for goodness sake. I'm still baffled why VS isn't putting more energy into the gtab. It's like they don't even wanna mention it.
I think it is a way to get more people to move to their ViewPad line and off of the GTab. I will not switch to their new line just because they put 3.0 on it. Our Devs will get a port over to the GTab and it will blow their new line out of the water. Shady tactics if you ask me.
goodintentions said:
Doesn't matter, though. As soon as VS slapped their name on it, they've adopted it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But they don't have any code... they have no development resources. They have a brand name. Whooo.
Seriously.
goodintentions said:
It's the number 1 seller on amazon for goodness sake.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, it was for the week it was on blowout $280 clearance. Look, it's a great bit of first gen tegra2 tablet hardware with a dreadful screen that would make it unsellable at any price other than "half of what everyone else charges".
That's dropping under $200-$225 now, which is probably well below the breakeven point. So enjoy it, and support the hackers hacking away, but forget about any serious support for it from VS. You'll be much happier.
yes, the code for our G-tabs belongs to Malata, but so does the code for the Vega and the Adam. They are rumored to be at least getting official GB roms WITH hardware acceleration. VS is to blame for not providing us with that as well. If they do, but are keeping it hush-hush, I'll change my opinion.
Of course, Vega and Adam are running on the new 1.2 bootloader (always have been). Now VS teases us with an update that they pull, that is on the 1.2 bootlaoder? In essence, VS provided our devs, very briefly, with the tools needed to port any updates from Adam or Vega. So, while not actually giving us what we've requested, they are letting other companies, and third party developers do their work for them.
It may be that Malata has abandoned VS for their lack of support for the G-Tab, so Malata cut them off from future development releases.
snapz54 said:
and to the user that commented to the OP, thought the info you stated (numbers, not faces) is true, STOP ACTING LIKE IT'S ACCEPTABLE.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didn't say it's acceptable. In fact it makes me just as mad as it seems to have made you and I have made my opinion on that fact known many times on this board and the Nvidia developer board. I'm just saying that the people who want these updates are currently in the minority. I agree that we should get updates but we have to realize that might not happen. In fact I'd much rather use homegrown software from the fine developers on XDA, Cyanogen, and any other dev website that's working for better things for the Gtab than anything Viewsonic/Malata/Nvidia puts out anyhow.
This whole frequently updated software thing is new to the world. I mean think about Apple and Microsoft. Microsoft updated like once every five years. Apple was better, but in both cases users were made to pay for the updates. Now we buy these devices and expect free software updates indefinetly? Sounds good to me, but what about these companies? Where is the money for them? What incentive to they have to churn out more software at no charge to the customer? I'm just saying that there are two sides to this argument and both should be represented.
adampdx said:
This whole frequently updated software thing is new to the world. I mean think about Apple and Microsoft. Microsoft updated like once every five years. Apple was better, but in both cases users were made to pay for the updates.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What color is the sky in your world?
The problem with Android is exactly the problem Google is trying to get a handle on....
Fragmentation.
When you leave updates up to the the hardware manufactures, you're guaranteed to screw your customers. Because the only way the HW guys make any money at all is by having the customer buy new hardware to get the shiny new features.
Hopefully Google will be able to beat these guys into submission, but I do feel for them... they thought they were getting in on a great thing with a cheap OS for their hardware, and instead they were turned into commodity manufacturers delivering Google ad revenue to Google. Ah well.
I'd much rather use homegrown software from the fine developers on XDA, Cyanogen, and any other dev website that's working for better things for the Gtab than anything Viewsonic/Malata/Nvidia puts out anyhow.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But it's these updates that custom rom devs use to get the information they need to make their roms. If we ever get official hardware acceleration it will be bundled into one of the officially released updates. The drivers can then be added to existing roms, or future roms. The bottom line is that we NEED official updates if we are to ever get the G-tablet to reach it's full potential.
Now we buy these devices and expect free software updates indefinetly? Sounds good to me, but what about these companies?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
These companies, namely VS knows that they put out a crap product, in regard to software. In fact, they, at one point, directed their customers HERE for support for their device. They released a product in which the hardware outclassed the software. What we paid for was hardware, plain and simple. only recently have people actually said they're using stock firmware and it doesn't suck. Prior to the latest updates (3588 and later) I would suspect that everyone that bought a G-tablet, including myself, KNEW that they were going to have to flash a custom Rom. Just a few days ago, another 850+ G-tabs were sold on Woot, again. At one point it was the top seller on Amazon. VS has to save a little face and continue to support their software, and yes, provide updates.
Fortunately for VS, Notion Ink seems more interested in updating their product for us...of course, VS had to sneak in the 1.2 dev branch that's shared by the Adam.
some good points have been made, but none of the ones supporting VS have been valid.
slapping your name on something instantly slaps responsibility on you, this "passing the buck" mentality is a big part of whats wrong with the world. Everyone can blame someone else and nothing gets done.
The consequences in some small part are now realized. Myself and others will not support viewsonic in any capacity in the future. Actions like this catch up with you, VS is a horrible company that saw an opportunity to make a quick buck without a moments thought of how it might affect anyone.
stop supporting these type of actions, they are wrong.
snapz54 said:
some good points have been made, but none of the ones supporting VS have been valid.
slapping your name on something instantly slaps responsibility on you, this "passing the buck" mentality is a big part of whats wrong with the world. Everyone can blame someone else and nothing gets done.
The consequences in some small part are now realized. Myself and others will not support viewsonic in any capacity in the future. Actions like this catch up with you, VS is a horrible company that saw an opportunity to make a quick buck without a moments thought of how it might affect anyone.
stop supporting these type of actions, they are wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So you bought an $800.00 xoom?
snapz54 said:
stop supporting these type of actions, they are wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That would be "don't buy the product"
Since I wanted a device I can experiment with, and didn't want to spend more than $280, this was the only device available.
I bought it knowing what it was. An orphan device with no significant Vendor support.
i thought google said they aren't going to release honeycomb SDK? so doesn't that mean manufacturers are not allowed to release it?
but i guess if we buy the next VS tablet. we can port a honeycomb rom from that to the gtab.
ninditsu said:
i thought google said they aren't going to release honeycomb SDK? so doesn't that mean manufacturers are not allowed to release it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're confusing SDK (Software Development Kit) with Source Code. That said, up to this point, Google has been reluctant to release the Source Code for Honeycomb for - what I can only assume is - the purpose of reducing hardware fragmentation and QA purposes.
schettj said:
What color is the sky in your world?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ha! Always good to get a laugh out of these heated discussions. As far as fragmentation goes, I agree. It's a problem that Google created and now they're trying to fix. I'm not sure I can imagine a world where there are several hundred different pieces of tech floating around from different manufactures that all use software provided by a singular, separate company. Oh, wait...that sounds like WINDOWS. He he... I wouldn't dare compare our beloved Google to the likes of Microsoft. Never.
schettj said:
That would be "don't buy the product"
Since I wanted a device I can experiment with, and didn't want to spend more than $280, this was the only device available.
I bought it knowing what it was. An orphan device with no significant Vendor support.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you. These things are on clearance for a reason. A lot of people here have unrealistic expectations. Companies don't make money by pouring resources into devices that nobody bought. I remember buying an Atari Lynx back in the day and only had it for about a year before everybody stopped making games for it and they were pulled off the shelves. I never once thought that Atari hated me.