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.
Hey everyone, happy Monday,
I have a quick question about the amount of time it takes for a phone to be announced to when it goes to retail/pre-order. The reason I ask is because my family (8 people) will be switching to Sprint from Verizon (my dad is sick of their billing and customer service) and we are going to get 4 smartphones. Being the tech geek of the family, I really want to make these smartphones the new phones being announced on the 25th. We are switching over in April, and I'm hoping to be able to smooth talk a manager about getting the new phones when they come out, but I know he will deny any offer if they come out during or after the summer.
Any answer/tips for smooth-talking a Sprint store manager?
What? I dont quite understand what you're asking. If the phone isn't released you can't get it, just because they announce it doesn't mean certain people can just go buy it.
Sent from my Nexus One using XDA Premium App
Yea...after I read it over, I didn't make much sense.
So here's my situation as simply as I can explain it. There are a few new phones coming out at CTIA that I am going to purchase.
My question is, how long does it normally take for a phone to go to a retail store for consumers to buy AFTER they have been announced.
Ex. The kyocera echo (only phone I can think of right now) was announced in Jan/Feb and is going to start being sold in April.
I was hoping if someone could give my a more specific date as to when the new phones at CTIA were going to be sold (Evo 3D, may atrix for Sprint).
I hope that clears things up, and If it doesn't, then I'm going to sleep and rethink how I word things.
@FLAC Vest: it's perfectly clear - the OP is wondering how long it takes for a phone to go from being announced to being able to buy or at the very least pre-order it.
The OP's family are hoping to switch to Sprint and get some of the new handsets they're about to announce in a couple of days time, so the OP is wondering when it's likely they'll be available.
@the OP: it varies device to device.
On one hand you have Apple, who have the iPhone on sale a couple of weeks after announcing it - albeit in limited markets.
They do this by delaying the announcement as long as possible and also because of their relatively slow product refresh cycle.
With other manufacturers it's very hit and miss.
Some like Sony Ericsson have a poor track record, having taken nearly a year in the past to get a handset to the market (though in fairness to the, nearly a year after it was leaked, not announced).
Samsung are improving but have had their share of delays, like the original Galaxy S which took a number of months to be released after it's announcement.
Generally I'd say it's around a month or two from announcement to release but sometimes phones are delayed unexpectedly.
However if a handset is exclusive to a particular network, that can sometimes speed it up a wee bit as the manufacturer is only having to supplier one company, not a miscellany of competing networks.
There's a good chance that when Sprint make their announcement, they'll also announce an expected release date.
That should give you more of an idea.
Thanks Step you
a) made me much more confident that I wasn't going insane and typing in gibber-gabber
b) answered my question completely, even above and beyond A+
Now I can only hope that the Evo 3D or Atrix will come out on sprint before/during May
BTW: Do you think anyone here knows how to sweet talk a manager?
As we close in on the 15th, I think two things will happen:
A) No Mango. The rumor-mill did it again.
B) Microsoft will STILL not have learned their lesson about replying to rumors.
They have to know what is being said on every single blog on earth. Type Mango into Google and it pulls up 500 news stories that say "durr will Sept 15 be release date??". Yet the closest thing I can find is a reply to a comment on the dev team blog. What happened to that guy who was hired after the NoDo fiasco to liaise with consumers?
Rule 1 in their position should be addressing rumors. No matter how small. Set up a "wp facts" page. Address the 15th rumor or whatever is next. By not, they're shooting themselves in the foot. I'm a cold-hearted cynic, and even I'm half convinced that it may actually begin being launched tomorrow.
A. I think the chance is rather high, but one never knows until that day gets here, right? That's what makes those rumors so power - the suspense of it. If it doesn't come people will just blame the carriers or OEMs. I think Microsoft was smart to say that their job was done, but they threw the OEMs and carriers under the bus in the process. Microsoft still has to approve the OTA even after the OEMs and Carriers do their thing, and there really isn't much to do since you they aren't allowed to bake in a ton of apps like on Android, WinMo/Symbian, and BB.
B. I think Microsoft thinks it helps them because it gets headlines, but when those days come and go the disappointment more than counters whatever was gained leading up to those days.
They did set up a webpage. Mango is not on it yet.
Just to answer your question. The guy they hired to be customer facing said in a blog post about a month and a half ago that he was going to maintain radio silence and "the next blog post will be the announcement that it is being released." A lot of good that's doing him.
While I wish they could have a concrete release date, I do wish they would at least deny dates. Sure it's our own fault for investing to heavily into unsubstantiated rumors, but they really could kill all of the speculation with one quick blog post.
Although the guys who said the release was this week have been spot on with their previous predictions, I may have to bet against this one.
Sent from my LG-C900 using XDA Windows Phone 7 App
A: Microsoft only have an estimate date of when Mango will be ready for roll out.
B: Microsoft will only roll out the update after it test the update infrastructure.
Lol @ test the update infrastructure.
No.
Also, "this fall" is not an estimated date. Fall is a season, not a month, not a week, and certainly not a date. It's a 3 month season and if they wish to pass that off as an estimated date, I guess it means they genuinely think their customers are idiots. An estimated date would be something along the lines of "the second week of September." "This fall..." That tells me nothing other than "we're giving ourselves a 3 month span so that if they ahve to wait until the dawn of Winter, we won't look like idiots."
But anyways, we've seen this tactic employed recently. Remember the Samsung US Galaxy S FroYo updates and #NeverAgain? Yea, that's basically what happened. I'm suprised WP7 users aren't furious they had to wait a whole year for an update, but this seems like a special kind of user base. Microsoft must be ecstatic they're given so much rope to play with (then again, they didn't sell 10M phones like Samsung, probably 3-4M in the US alone)...
Main issue is getting the update through the OEMs and carriers. Most OEMs already have the update ready, and they're even making new stock Mango phones.
Carriers are another deal, but I'm suprised it takes carriers so long with WP7 updates when they have a lot less stuff to test due to their inability to bake as much bloatware into the devices' ROMs and stuff like that.
Maybe the carriers are waiting for their partners (TeleNav, MobiTV, Slacker, Netflix, etc.) to get their apps Mango-ready before they approve it? Cause we all know they won't Okay the update if their subscription-based Value-Adds don't work correctly on it...
sure haven't said:
B) Microsoft will STILL not have learned their lesson about replying to rumors.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Microsoft has a policy concerning rumors. That is they do not comment and that is the best policy.
If this rumor is true, MS might make an announcement in the next few days and then the download will be available. If that's the case, then there was no need to comment on the rumor and say "Yes Mango is coming this week, but we want it to be available shortly after we announced it so we're not announcing it today."
If the rumor is false, people might be pissed at MS but they have no reason to be so. We do not know who started the rumor and all we ever heard from MS was "fall".
Now if MS were to dismiss every incorrect rumor as soon as they can (to not get up expectations), a missing comment on a rumor would kind of mark it as true.
They only comment on rumors when the rumor really might leave many people disappointed, like the Xbox + blu ray thing a couple of years ago.
Xbox 360s have sold way better than Windows Phones and this Mango rumor might be a big deal for us enthusiasts, but apart from us that's that.
BTW, I saw someone yesterday or the day before casually toss out the 2 PM PST time for a Mango release. That rumor's now dead.
I have a feeling it will be released on the 20th
9/15 isn't mango day, that was another rumor, folks. We've been saying "fall"... it's not fall yet! http://t.co/ZcvBO5ys
From joebelfiore on twitter.
I5 launching around then. Theyre dumb.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
sure haven't said:
As we close in on the 15th, I think two things will happen:
A) No Mango. The rumor-mill did it again.
B) Microsoft will STILL not have learned their lesson about replying to rumors.
They have to know what is being said on every single blog on earth. Type Mango into Google and it pulls up 500 news stories that say "durr will Sept 15 be release date??". Yet the closest thing I can find is a reply to a comment on the dev team blog. What happened to that guy who was hired after the NoDo fiasco to liaise with consumers?
Rule 1 in their position should be addressing rumors. No matter how small. Set up a "wp facts" page. Address the 15th rumor or whatever is next. By not, they're shooting themselves in the foot. I'm a cold-hearted cynic, and even I'm half convinced that it may actually begin being launched tomorrow.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What lesson do they have to learn? They get free publicity, the only ones disappointed are the idiots that power the rumor mill.
fb401 said:
Just to answer your question. The guy they hired to be customer facing said in a blog post about a month and a half ago that he was going to maintain radio silence and "the next blog post will be the announcement that it is being released." A lot of good that's doing him.
While I wish they could have a concrete release date, I do wish they would at least deny dates. Sure it's our own fault for investing to heavily into unsubstantiated rumors, but they really could kill all of the speculation with one quick blog post.
Although the guys who said the release was this week have been spot on with their previous predictions, I may have to bet against this one.
Sent from my LG-C900 using XDA Windows Phone 7 App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
by the way, that's the same guy that kept radio silence while the blog was exploding with angry people during the nodo update failure.
The best thing for EVERYONE, devs, users, shops, etc would be to a predetermined release date, well in advance too. Failing that, as the date closes in, more and more accurate time windows. Failing that too, bad enough as it is, at least dispel rumors. Because it's not like people are EXCITED about the update. People are IMPATIENT. And rightly so, you're putting out features that have been on every smartphone for a long time !
let face with it or without mango WP7 is never going to win much of the market share, I expect theres a few who will have renewed their contact & jumped OS's before the mango hits the consumer ?
Updated 09/6/12 http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=31190482&postcount=81
This is a combined log of my attempt to get answers from Verizon and Samsung regarding the encrypted bootloader. I currently have a ticket with level III tech support at Samsung. It took a huge dog and pony show to get this far and I have had several forum members contact me asking to pass along info and ask questions when I finally get a hold of the right people.
I posted most of this in another thread, but it not where it should have been so I am moving it for a mod so we can keep that other development thread clean. Its 8am EST and Samsung Level III should be open in three hours as they are not staffed 24/7 like Level II/I.
For the record Samsungs Tech Support phone number is 800-726-7864
Just remember the rep you talk to regardless of what their position in the company is had no say in the encrypting of the bootloader. Its not their fault Verizon screwed us, please keep that in mind if you call. Using 5c technical words will get you past Level I but level II seemed to be on point. It took some manipulative games to get the guy to admit there was even a level III department; at first he told me level II was the highest I could go in tech support. Will update with more info when I have something.
I am also considering contacting the firm that handled the Motorola V710 lawsuit against Verizon years ago. We won that one and anyone who wanted got to trade in their phone and accessories for a full refund, no ETF, and if they wanted could also get a new device w/o extending their contract. I hate lawyers and would rather cut off my pinky finger then deal with them but it may be the only option in the end. Its like Verizon delivered us cake, then shot our dog and walked away. So mentally exhausted dealing with this crap.
Lastly, I was able to get a hold of Verizon corporate and had a low level executive call me back. This was before the device was released and we knew the bootloader was encrypted. She told me to save her number, and I am glad I did because once we found out about the lockdown I called her back and left VM. Should hear back from her Monday.
Verizon's Corporate Contact Info.
Verizon Corporate Office Headquarters:
140 West Street
New York, NY 10007
Corporate Phone Number: 1-212-395-1000
Corporate Fax Number: 1-212-571-1897
Original Post:
Ok, just an update. Level III Samsung tech support is not 24/7 like Level II/I. I have a ticket in the system regarding the issue and its been forwarded to Level III.
They will be in tomorrow (Saturday) from 8am (PST) to 7pm (PST) and I have to call back to get a hold of someone in the Level III department. I will keep dragging this up the chain of command till I can get some answers. Level II once again confirmed what we already know, Verizon did mess with the phone. Level II said don't bother with Fastboot because were not getting in that way. I don't know if he was lying but he seemed to know exactly what I was talking about when I mentioned the odin/fastboot switch.
One more thing to note, I am not sure I believe him but he said that they sent the phones to Verizon, and its Verizon that did the messing around not Samsung. I find it hard to believe Verizon was able to do this without Samsung support.
I don't have high hopes of getting anything that will be able to help us out of Level III but I will try. They have also lodged a my customer complaint and supposedly I am going to be getting a call back from someone from their corporate office in consumer relations.
I wish I could help more on the technical side but my experience only takes me to the point where everyone else has gotten with fastboot. I am however quite the people person when it comes to making noise with corporations and will keep up the good fight with Verizon / Samsung Corporate.
If there is anything specific you want me to ask Level III send me a PM by tomorrow morning and I will address it with them when I call. I know enough that I should be able to at least hold a conversation with them on the subject but more ammo would be great. I would also be willing to conference call with a repeatable dev/mod when I call them so that you don't have to jump through the two hours of crap I just did to get this escalated.
Post 2: (A reply to a forum member asking for an update)
I asked them if there is a reason I can't get into fastboot and the guy said because Verizon has locked down the device. I asked him "how" and "why" but he was unable to provide me with an answer to both questions. He then referred me to Level III as he said they were the ones who could discuss how it was done. I asked him if there was a way around it through odin using .ops he went silent for a while and said he had no information to provide on the subject and just reiterated that Verizon has made changes to the device software and I would have to refer to them regarding those changes.
With regard to the "why" question he simply said that Samsung could not comment on carrier practices only that Verizon requested the lockdown and that the phones were sent to them first to have it applied. He made it sound like Samsung told them to go take a flying leap and Verizon went ahead and did it anyway. Again, were talking about a rep here so take it with a grain of salt.
I talked about the FCC's Block C agreement regarding carriers not locking devices but the rep said he did not have a comment on the subject as he was just tech support. Block C is probably the only legal course of action we have but despite the FCC saying they were going to enforce the rule, we all know how the FCC could give a crap.
I am going to flat out ask Level III to do the right thing and leak a file for us to fix the issue. I may be nuts but I am not delusional and have no real expectoration they will help. I am however going to do my best to get them to slip something that may help a dev find a solution. If I can get at least a small puzzle piece out of Level III it might be the crack in the dam we need to blow open the floodgates.
07/11/12 Samsung Level III blew me off yesterday as well saying they were still looking into the matter. I called again today and finally received an official reply. Samsung says they have no information exactly what Verizon has done to the phone, they do not know exactly what is and is not signed/encrypted, and they have no further information. I have submitted a complaint to the president of Samsung USA but thats as far as I could go with Samsung. They have closed my case and can not provide further information. I asked if they had an original system image before Verizon gimped the phone and they said "yes but we can not provide that to our customers per carrier agreement."
Lastly I was told that there is going to be a Verizon "Developer Edition" that you can buy directly from Samsung in the coming weeks. This is in "direct response to complaints filed by customers" according to Samsung and will be distributed and supported by Samsung directly. It will cost $600+ and basically be the same phone but w/o an signed/encrypted bootloader.
Off the record information from an unnamed outside source: Verizon is releasing a OTA update to patch the root exploit in the coming days. This OTA will break and prevent re-root as well as try and stop people from using the image off of the "Developer Edition" to mess with the "normal" Verizon Galaxy S3. I don't have specific details; sorry. Do not OTA unless you want to loose root and probably not get it back. Verizon is fk'ing pissed; I mean really pissed that we have root.
From what I am hearing, Verizon's "top %5 data abusers" are all typically rooted/romed. The whole point of locking this phone down was to mess with these unlimited data customers. Verizon started this war; let us end it and make them loath the day they decided to fk with the dev community.
Again, my case Support case has been closed with Samsung. We will get nothing further from them nor any direct help. My case with Verizon corporate is also closed; they said Samsung will offer a Developer model directly and if I wanted that kind of access I needed to talk to them not Verizon.
The lawyers still have not called me back. No shock.
Up until this point I have been angry; now I am pissed. This isn't over; not by a long shot.
Will update when I have more information.
07/17/12
Samsung "Office of the President" -
Phone 877-268-2121
eMail [email protected]
FYI Samsung records phone conversations between the 4th minute and the 18th minute. Anything you say after minute 4 and before minute 18 "MAY" be recorded. I know that sounds like a strange window of recording, but its straight out of the mouth of a sympathetic to the cause tech support rep. Just had a great conversation with a guy, nothing is fixed of course but needless to say, there are people in Samsung that have been hearing rumors that the company is tired of carrier's crap and with in the next few years will be offering all Samsung headsets for a subsidized price, directly through Samsung. There will probably be trade-in specials, loyalty discounts, etc. I can't wait not to buy my devices directly through Verizon! Secondly, as of now (Verizon lies again) anything software related with this phone is coming from, programmed by, and completely influenced by Verizon. Samsung manufacturing does not touch the device or support updates after its in the hands of Verizon. The developer model is not Verizon approved, nor is Verizon happy its going to be sold [from what I am told] however per FCC open network regulations Verizon has to allow the device on the network. Updates for the developer model will be directly from Samsung.
I was able to get the Samsung Apps (store) sideloaded on my device BTW. Verizon requested it be removed which is why its not on the device pre-installed. S-Suggest is NOT the same thing as Samsung Apps. Will Write something up here on XDA later when I get a chance.
07/24/12
The Electronic Frontier Foundation called me back and said they need more info on Block C. I am out of town until next Monday and let them know I would get back to them in a few days. They also are finding a lawyer who will do it pro bono. Looks like this may actually make it to court.
So we have root but we are still locked down unlike all other carriers. Basically this is going to turn into a Droid X situation and for those who know what I am talking about you know how bad this still sucks.
I am tired of this crap guys, and think with the amount of SG3 phones sold in the US and specifically Verizon, this is the time to strike back against all encrypted devices not just the GS3. We have dealt with this garbage long enough and now its time to end nonsense.
Kirtland and Packard, (310) 536-1000, 2361 Rosecrans Ave Ste 450, El Segundo, CA 90245
That's the law firm that won the huge case against Verizon over the Motorola v710 BT lockdown. I have left them a message asking if they will take this case too. In reality this one is going to vastly larger then the Moto case because of the number of users that have this device.
Please call them and let them know on the main VM that you too have been effected by this lockdown, or any lockdown in the US on any carrier. The more people who call the more likely they will take the case. Lots of people calling is how the guys over at Howard Forums were able to get the ball rolling on the v710, so let history repeat itself for the sake of every dev, phone enthusiast, and civil rights advocate.
ROM developers usually work off of donations and by encrypting this and other devices Verizon is stealing from these developers who's livelihood is phone software development. Software developers who want an open platform also have to deal with the hassle that Verizon and other carriers have put them through by locking down devices. If the personal computer was locked down like this when it was first created and sold to people we would never be where we were today technology wise. The crippling of our mobile devices needs to stop, and it needs to stop now.
Its time to take the fight to Verizon and hopefully end the lockdowns once and for all. If the lawfirm takes the case this is going to be winner takes all. This may be our best shot to end device lockdowns in the US once and for all.
I think the push we will make is going to be Block C. Normally Verizon could argue that they locked the device [against the FCC Block C mandate] because of network security. This is going to be hard for them to argue though when every other carrier in the US and internationally has not encrypted the device. It's a long shot, and its going to be up hill, but as far as I see it this is our best chance and the time to strike on this issue is now.
Samsung Level III opens in 30 min. Will update again soon.
Level III is not in on the weekends, so I was just told by the automated message I got when the guy transferred me to that department. ok... Not what they told me yesterday but ok.
So Monday at 8am PST it is, and that's also when Verizon corporate will be calling me back too as the past two calls they have made to me have been the ass crack of dawn. If I time it right I can conference the two in and let them try and point the finger at the other one, to each others faces. No more "That's what the manufacture wanted, go talk to them" vs "That's what the carrier wanted, talk to them" runaround bull****.
Anyway, no updates till Monday then. That gives me time to root.
i'll be the first to say it but thank you
going above and beyond especially considering nobody asked you to do this. great work and i hope it leads to some results
chill145 said:
i'll be the first to say it but thank you
going above and beyond especially considering nobody asked you to do this. great work and i hope it leads to some results
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes thank you 100%, we are all in this together.
Also please file FCC Consumer Complaints against Verizon for potentially violating the openness requirements of the Block C spectrum purchasing agreement.
https://esupport.fcc.gov/ccmsforms/form2000.action?form_type=2000F
http://www.xda-developers.com/android/it-is-illegal-for-verizon-to-lock-some-bootloaders/
It's a long shot, but maybe worth it.
Have filed complaint with FCC and BBB, posted poor review on both Blue and White versons on VZW website, wall post ripping them apart on VZW facebook, poor reviews on every device site that will let me do so that I know of, personal contact with VZW reps filing complaints.
Any other avenues we can take?
Here's what I wrote in my FCC complaint:
The new Samsung Galaxy SIII on Verizon Wireless has a locked and encrypted bootloader, which appears to violate the openness requirements that Verizon agreed to when it purchased Block C, pursuant to § 27.16 (b) of 47 CFR Ch. I (10–1–10 Edition) available here-- http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2010-title47-vol2/pdf/CFR-2010-title47-vol2-sec27-16.pdf
§ 27.16 (e) clearly states "Handset locking prohibited" except under certain circumstances previously delineated. The anti-consumer actions taken by Verizon impinge upon the free of use of devices by consumers, and potentially harms the livelihoods of developers, who may not be able to do their work on the device of their choice.
I would appreciate the FCC investigating and clarifying this situation.
Thank you,
Thinking further about it, with how prominent devices are in today's world, would various news providers not want to run this story as well?
I recommend tipping off any local newspaper and news station you have access to. Lets get this story out there~!
Thalinor said:
So we have root but we are still locked down unlike all other carriers. Basically this is going to turn into a Droid X situation and for those who know what I am talking about you know how bad this still sucks.
I am tired of this crap guys, and think with the amount of SG3 phones sold in the US and specifically Verizon, this is the time to strike back against all encrypted devices not just the GS3. We have dealt with this garbage long enough and now its time to end nonsense.
Kirtland and Packard, (310) 536-1000, 2361 Rosecrans Ave Ste 450, El Segundo, CA 90245
That's the law firm that won the huge case against Verizon over the Motorola v710 BT lockdown. I have left them a message asking if they will take this case too. In reality this one is going to vastly larger then the Moto case because of the number of users that have this device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know that the dev's are working there rear ends off, and I appreciate all their efforts. I am truly pulling for them and hope that they can get the bootloader figured out. I'm not an expert, but in my opinion the ROMs on the DX didn't compare to a fully unlocked device and I'd prefer not to have to suffer through 2+ years of touchwiz.
Thalinor,
I agree that this maybe turning into the Droid X. As a droid x owner, waiting and watching for 18 months to see VZW and Motorola dump on us, I don't think we'll get anywhere with them. There was a huge effort on the DX with petitions, phone calls, emails, twitter, and FB posts.
Just a thought, but what about petitioning the law firm to take up this case. We are not going to get anywhere from VZW's or Samsung's pity for us. If this bootloader is truly encrypted, and if it is anything like the DX, the only way we will get this device completely unlocked is through a legal obligation on VZW's part. I think our energy would be better spent with the Attorneys who stand to profit from this case rather than burning our energy on VZW and Samsung who probably don't give a crap. I would think that the law-firm would have some interest in this (maybe?):
File with the FCC:
http://www.fcc.gov/complaints/
Talk about the Block C complaints. Don't attack them.
Post on VZW's Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/verizon
Talk about how dissatisfied you are and how you're looking to switch. Don't attack them.
Post on Samsung Mobile's Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/SamsungMobile
Don't attack them. Talk about how you will reconsider purchasing their devices in the future. They don't want to have to lock bootloaders, Verizon is almost certainly making them do it.
File with the BBB:
http://www.bbb.org/us/verizon-wireless/
Talk about how anti-competitive their practices are and how dissatisfied you are as a customer. Require an answer.
Complain to Verizon Wireless' Site:
https://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/contact/email.jsp
Don't attack them. Keep in mind you're talking to an employee, they didn't choose to lock down the bootloader. Be respectful but make your concern noted.
The problem lies with Verizon Wireless. They believe that there are not enough people concerned about this to affect their profit margin. You need to show that you will vote with your dollar and move somewhere else if this complaint is not answered. Also, bring up the Block C agreement. There are potential legal repercussions-- meaning that the FCC may be the best place to direct your complaints. Be respectful, I know we're upset, but being pissed off won't get you anywhere.
I just filled out a complaint with the FCC basically asking them to enforce the Block C agreement from Verizon.
I'll phone the lawyers posted on the first page when I get a chance at work tomorrow.
amt897 said:
File with the FCC:
http://www.fcc.gov/complaints/
Talk about the Block C complaints. Don't attack them.
Post on VZW's Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/verizon
Talk about how dissatisfied you are and how you're looking to switch. Don't attack them.
Post on Samsung Mobile's Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/SamsungMobile
Don't attack them. Talk about how you will reconsider purchasing their devices in the future. They don't want to have to lock bootloaders, Verizon is almost certainly making them do it.
File with the BBB:
http://www.bbb.org/us/verizon-wireless/
Talk about how anti-competitive their practices are and how dissatisfied you are as a customer. Require an answer.
Complain to Verizon Wireless' Site:
https://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/contact/email.jsp
Don't attack them. Keep in mind you're talking to an employee, they didn't choose to lock down the bootloader. Be respectful but make your concern noted.
The problem lies with Verizon Wireless. They believe that there are not enough people concerned about this to affect their profit margin. You need to show that you will vote with your dollar and move somewhere else if this complaint is not answered. Also, bring up the Block C agreement. There are potential legal repercussions-- meaning that the FCC may be the best place to direct your complaints. Be respectful, I know we're upset, but being pissed off won't get you anywhere.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't even own an S3, nor am I on Verizon, but damn't...I'm doing every one of things and calling just out of principle. I'm glad I left Verizon a long time ago, but they still tried to get more for money for almost 2 years. Damn near ruined my credit...assholes are going down.
Sent from my SGH-I727 using xda premium
I'd love to see this in major media:
"The Samsung S3 is a excellent smartphone, but Verizon's software modifications have made it unlikely to be upgraded and supported long term. If that's important to you, we recommend you consider another carrier."
My girlfriend used to work for the local news, I'll talk to her about contacting her friends at the station and see if I can get a face to face, or at least an email contact. I'll have to dig up all the info I can on the block C stuff and locked/encrypted bootloaders to take to them first.
Sent from my Droid X until I get my SGS3
block c
The Block C issue relates more toward unlocked devices like the nexus on the play store than unlocked bootloaders. You may be able to press the unlocked bootloader issue under the 'open applications' provision, but obviously that did a ton of good for Google Wallet. Of course, I can't find a single device you can use on Verizon's network that isn't held in verizon's death grip, so even the open device provision seems to be being ignored. The worst part is that verizon filed suits against these provisions and LOST. But true to form, if you have enough money and pull, and are willing to screw your customers as every turn (share everything plans are such a great deal right?) you can break the law over and over in broad daylight, and no one with power will bat an eye. Also, I'm not sure why the 'open application' provision was never really used as a battering ram when in came to things like tethering applications.
I think this type of work is very important. Thanks so much. Very much looking forward to hearing more from the companies themselves about why they make these types of decisions. Can't wait for an update here.
Sent from my Incredible 2 using xda app-developers app
Complained with the FCC, here is my complaint for anyone looking for somewhat of a template.
Recently, after preordering a Samsung Galaxy s3 handset from Verizon, I learned that they have violated the openness requirements of the Block C spectrum purchasing agreement by encrypting my device. This directly impacts my ability to enjoy my phone, and take advantage of the spectrum which Verizon owns. While I understand that the purchasing agreement gives Verizon leeway in regards to "reasonable" protection of the network, no other carrier in the United States (or the world), has done this, leading me to believe that this action is indeed unreasonable. It is unfair and anti-competitive for a company to misuse frequencies they own in this way.
I appreciate your time, and would appreciate a response in this matter.
Thank you,
With Verizon Twitter claiming it was Samsung, I'm curious what both companies said.
skennelly said:
I know that the dev's are working there rear ends off, and I appreciate all their efforts. I am truly pulling for them and hope that they can get the bootloader figured out. I'm not an expert, but in my opinion the ROMs on the DX didn't compare to a fully unlocked device and I'd prefer not to have to suffer through 2+ years of touchwiz.
Thalinor,
Just a thought, but what about petitioning the law firm to take up this case. We are not going to get anywhere from VZW's or Samsung's pity for us. If this bootloader is truly encrypted, and if it is anything like the DX, the only way we will get this device completely unlocked is through a legal obligation on VZW's part. I think our energy would be better spent with the Attorneys who stand to profit from this case rather than burning our energy on VZW and Samsung who probably don't give a crap. I would think that the law-firm would have some interest in this (maybe?):
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's the whole point! I certainly don't have the money to go up against Verizon and do not want to make a dime out of this; that's not the point at all. I want Verizon to once and for all agree to stop ****ing with our phones. Phones should be sold locked not signed/encrypted.
Locked protects Verizon or the manufacture from having to eat the costs of a new phone when an end user breaks their device doing something irresponsible. I don't want Verizon paying for people's screwed up devices because eventually it will lead to MY bill going up. Its not my fault if someone screw's up their device. On the other hand by encrypting the bootloader Verizon is forcing people to do things that may lead to breaking your phone. If the manufacture offered a phone number for unlocking, where you would agree that unless it was something hardware defective, if you unlock and your device breaks, its not under warranty. Problem solved for everyone; no encrypted bootloader needed.
I am going after Verizon but this is really about every carrier who gimps cell phones. Smartphones have become pocket computers. They are no longer PDA's, or "like" pocket computers, they ARE pocket computers. Hell, my SG3 is got better hardware specs than the **** netbooks people waited in line for last black Friday at Walmart. If we consider netbooks in that they come giving the buyer full administrative access over the device and yet still give the end user the option to hook it up to Wi-Fi. One way or another my devices are hooking up to a company who I pay for data and/or voice service. My rights should be universal and now that the device in my pocket has evolved into a full blown computer, my access rights should evolve as well. Whether its a computer in your pocket or a computer on your desk, it can be used in accordance with your providers service agreement, or it can be abused.
Prejudging your entire customer base to abuse your network and handing down sentence as judge, jury, and executioner like Verizon has done, before people have even had the chance to make the decision to do right or wrong; to me that just violates every ideal set forth in this countries constitution. I am ****ing sick of corporate america ****ting on this countries citizens, and the whole god damn world for that matter. It needs to stop. While I despise lawyers to the core, I sincerely hope they take on this case and prove there are still people in the field who remember why their profession exists (Hint: Its NOT to make money) and that there is some justice left in this country.
/end rant
Update: Talked to Verizon Exec, they have passed info on to the lawyers to look over and may or may not get back to me; at this point its out of her hands.
Update: I have not heard back from the lawyers above, but another user here on XDA PM'd me and said they were able to talk to someone today who told them that the legal team was looking into the case and make a decision after getting more information. They have my number, if they want to call me they can; if not I could care less who spear heads this as long as the battle is fought and won.
Update: I called Samsung, talked to Level I, they tried to transfer me to level III, I was put on told and Level I came back and said they would call me back later. The call never came. I will try them again more vigorously tomorrow.
MichaelVash7886 said:
With Verizon Twitter claiming it was Samsung, I'm curious what both companies said.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LMFAO @ Verizon's blatant bull**** lies. Why would Samsung decide, at their own free will and expense, to sign-encrypt ONLY Verizon's Galaxy S3, and not one other carrier in the world? Verizon is full of **** and the fact they think the line "Its the other guys fault" is actually going to work, is flat out ****ing insulting.
Screenshot that and post it here please. I do not use social networking; if they really need to spy on me they have my smartphone information, and know where to find me.