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.
Hello,
I’m going to step across the NDAs and explain the issues behind the Android Froyo update to Samsung Galaxy S phones in the United States. I think most of you have come to this realization yourself now: the withholding of the Froyo update is a largely political one, not a technological one: Froyo runs quite well on Galaxy S phones, as those of you that have run leaked updates may have noticed.
To explain the political situation, first, a primer on how phone firmware upgrades work for carriers. When a carrier decides to sell a phone, a contract is usually written between the phone manufacturer and the carrier. In this contract, the cost of updates (to the carrier) is usually outlined. Updates are usually broken into several types: critical updates, maintenance updates, and feature updates. Critical updates are those that resolve a critical bug in the phone, such as the phone overheating. Maintenance updates involve routine updates to resolve bugs and other issues reported by the carrier. Finally, feature updates add some new feature in software that wasn’t present before. Critical updates are usually free, maintenance updates have some maintenance fee associated with them, and feature updates are usually costly.
In the past, most phone updates would mainly consist of critical and maintenance updates. Carriers almost never want to incur the cost of a feature update because it is of little benefit to them, adds little to the device, and involves a lot of testing on the carrier end. Android has changed the playing field, however – since the Android Open Source Project is constantly being updated, and that information being made widely available to the public, there is pressure for the phone to be constantly updated with the latest version of Android. With most manufacturers, such as HTC, Motorola, etc. This is fine and considered a maintenance upgrade. Samsung, however, considers it a feature update, and requires carriers to pay a per device update fee for each incremental Android update.
Now, here’s where the politics come in: most U.S. carriers aren’t very happy with Samsung’s decision to charge for Android updates as feature updates, especially since they are essentially charging for the Android Open Source Project’s efforts, and the effort on Samsung’s end is rather minimal. As a result of perhaps, corporate collusion, all U.S. carriers have decided to refuse to pay for the Android 2.2 update, in hopes that the devaluation of the Galaxy S line will cause Samsung to drop their fees and give the update to the carriers. The situation has panned out differently in other parts of the world, but this is the situation in the United States.
Some of you might have noticed Verion’s Fascinate updated, but without 2.2 : This is a result of a maintenance agreement Samsung must honor combined with Verizon’s unwillingness to pay the update fees.
In short, Android 2.2 is on hold for Galaxy S phones until the U.S. carriers and Samsung reach a consensus.
Some might wonder why I didn’t deliver this over a more legitimate news channel – the short answer: I don’t want to lose my job. I do, however, appreciate transparency, which is why I'm here.
Interesting.. thank you for that
Sent from my GT540 using XDA App
this has been an issue since the Samsung Omnia (SGH-i900) came out. Promises of updates to no avail. No updates, just do it yourself!
Finally something that makes sense to me. I do have 2.2 on my phone thanks to the folks here on XDA.
I work for Sprint at a service and repair store. We had a memo that the Epic was suppose to get Froyo on Dec 26th, but that they pulled it because it bricked half their test phones and needed more work. I do know that the Intercept had an official update go out for Froyo that bricked roughly 10% of customer's phones and we were instructed to put them back on 2.1, I do know someone who has a legitimate carrier copy of Froyo on their Intercept, its not a Galaxy phone but its still Samsung. What you're saying Samsung is doing(which sounds right/true) is pretty petty. HTC released an update to Froyo for the Evo about 2 weeks after the phone launched. That's what manufacturers should do IMO.
In regards to the Epic, i'd like to remind people that originally, it was marketed as having 2.2. Then, closer to release, they changed it to 2.1 "with 2.2 coming soon after." Well, "soon after" has come and gone.
I bought the Epic partly because it suited me better than the Evo, but also because of 2.2. I knew that i would have a current version running. Froyo was part of the basis of my bargain. At this point I'm fed up with samsung. We've been getting teased with 2.2 almost every month for literally 5 months now, and at least for 1-2 months prior to the phone being released (which makes it upwards of 6 months). It is ridiculous.
People who have this phone should just return it when something new comes out. Samsung has breached their promise. Im sure there will be people here who will comment about the fact that you can always root your phone or that they are happy with eclair; that's fine. I bought this phone with the assumption it would perform on par with 2.2, and not have any annoying lags and bugs.
If everyone complains and ditches boycotts samsung phones, then maybe they will change their ways. From everything i have ever read, i never see anyone mention the fact that samsung marketed this device as having 2.2 and subsequently, promising it within a short period of time.
Just my .2 cents
This is one major reason that I am contemplating trading my Epic out for an Evo, I am tired of Sammy's bull****.
I am realizing that even though it is a good phone, it will soon be "out of date" with the lack of support from every one.
All this is bull****. Us cell carriers suck.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk
samsung
personally after owning a moment i will never own a samsung phone again. thank got i got an evo shift
Interesting. Kinda contradicts with Samsung's marketing agenda during launch of the Galaxy S line in the States. During the launch event in NYC it was clearly stated by Samsung that all variants of Galaxy S line will receive Froyo firmware update, no where it was mentioned that if you are on a US carrier the device upgrade will be subject to terms and conditions set between the manufacturer and the carriers http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wf3uGTAeQy4
FF to 4:45
I think it's pretty god damn egregious that they'd charge large sums of money for code thats open source and freely available. I'd also think it has to be against some sort of law or license.
Hot_Hands said:
I think it's pretty god damn egregious that they'd charge large sums of money for code thats open source and freely available. I'd also think it has to be against some sort of law or license.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Disclaimer: I am not defending Samsung. Upgrading an embedded platform (regardless is the software is open source or not) is an extensive process that takes the time of engineers and testers...so it does cost Samsung money. I think the argument that just because Android is open source, Samsung has no reason to charge carriers for updates is off-base. This type of R&D cost money....maybe not a whole bunch, but some investment dollars are still allocated.
With that said, if Samsung led the public to believe that US Galaxy S devices would be upgraded to Android 2.2, then they need to absolutely hold up their end of the bargain. A lot of these corporate types lack long-term thinking. Samsung could begin to build a good fanbase if they pickup the slack in the customer support department by providing timely upgrades, fixes, and other types of support. This fanbase will continue to buy their products and recommend others to do so. This is why Apple consistently ranks highest customer satisfaction, they provide software support for their products for at least a year, mostly two.
At this point, their public image (in my eyes) has taken a dive. I own the Captivate, a Samsung monitor, and digital camera. But these will be my last three Samsung products forever and I will not recommend any others Samsung products.
Great post. Makes me dislike Samsung even more now!
Thanks for bringing this side of the story to light, and risking your job to do so. If this story holds any bearing, Samsung is an entirely terrible company who hold zero care for their customers. They are only concerned with profits and pushing out new products instead of making their current customers happy and possibly turning them into repeat customers. Pitiful.
Great OP, which leads to three comments / thoughts.
First, if a carrier, such as T-Mobile USA decided to carry the rumored Vibrant 4G, this would suggest that either 1) they have renegotiated their contract with Samsung or 2) that they don't care about their customer base - given what their existing Vibrant customers have experienced. We will know, in due course, what path T-Mobile USA has chosen to walk.
Second, it sounds like the iPhone has an advantage over Android based products because Apple is in a position to update the operating system without involving the carrier. If this is the case, then financially, one would expect carriers to start pushing the iPhone to their customers. I don't see this happening yet as many carriers have really built up their Android lines. But it will be interesting to see what happens now that other carrier(s) start to carry the iPhone.
Third, it seems like this is an area where Google really needs to step in and set expectations - with carriers, manufacturers, and consumers. Right now, we are witnessing a growing dissatisfaction with Samsung. However a recent report showed that the best manufacturer for pushing updates - HTC - only had a 50% track record. Consumers, who are locked into a 2 year contract, will grow frustrated if their only means of getting the latest operating system (including some "non-critical" bug fixes) is to purchase another phone at full price. This will affect how Android and Google are perceived.
Seriously, why do we need to keep telling people this:
Never
Ever
Ever
Buy a phone for promised future updates.
You buy it for what it can do now, if it can't do that, then you have zero right to complain when it doesn't.
Yet in all seriousness, what does it matter to anyone on this forum? We all have the capabilities to upgrade our devices to the latest roms. Yes, pushed out updates give us updated drivers, packages and all around system fixes, but seriously guys, even with a N1 I don't even wait for OTAs.
OP, can you maybe link to some official documentation on this? Not that I doubt you for a second, but putting out some dox would light a serious fire under Samsung's ass...
So does this have anything to do with the fact that AT&T was/is(?) dumping the Captivate on the marketplace?
Last July, it was giving away Captivates. I have heard rumors that some folks are STILL able to procure free Captivates.
Is this the beginning of a falling out between Samsung and AT&T?
Awesome, thanks for the news. This article explains a lot but on a different note, I'm not sure about "effort on Samsung’s end is rather minimal" is 100% accurate. Have you seen how crazy TouchWiz is integrated into stock Android OS, it is pretty ridiculous when comparing to to Motorola's Moto Blur...
No update - No problem
No worries. The lack of update to Froyo forced my hand. I found the wonderful world of XDA and also taught myself how to choose custom ROMs, tweak features, and remove Sprint bloatware that I never wanted anyway.
So this little spat of theirs has actually provided great benefit to me. I've learned how to customize my phone and I've learned that Samsung is a ****ing nitwit of a company. The Galaxy S is my first and last Samsung phone. I'm very happy with it, currently, with my custom ROM. However, when the time for an upgrade comes, so long Sammy.
I hope your extra fees for open source software covers your future losses from me and others jumping ship.
Oh wait, no I don't.
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.
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?
Hi all,
I study this stuff and just came across this article which might be of interest. It's not that you haven't heard of this idea, rather that this article is current and offers contribution to knowledge.
http://theunderstatement.com/post/11982112928/android-orphans-visualizing-a-sad-history-of-support
I came here to a great extent out of discovering the poor software support from my phone's manufactuer, in my case Sony Ericsson.
The single most critical aspect of this article in my two eyes (other people may find something else depending on your education, work and interest) is that this article argues that Cyanogen getting the latest OS working on even old devices shows the manufacturers are just being cheap but that is awful judgement on their part - because we move on to a different manufacturer.
What do you think?
The nexus series is okay, but the rest... For me it was sure that I'll go with custom roms from the very beginning because of this s**t.
Wasn't there some kind of contract that the manufactures provide support for a certain amount of time? I read about it somewhere.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA App
All i have to say it
WOW! thats crazy.
Personally I don't get why so many people are excited about the Samsung Galaxy S II. I have the Galaxy S. It came out at 2.1 when 2.2 had been out for months and finally got 2.2 about 6 months after it went on sale. NOTHING since.
For me, Samsung is a #neveragain product. ZERO support.
Yes, the manufacturers sometimes give clear support for some phones. My phone was launched around June 2010 on 1.6 (don't laugh lol) and I bought it that August. It was upgraded to 2.1. Around May/June 2011 an upgraded version was released instead of upgrading the 2010 line. Sony Ericsson said they 'give up to 2 years support and updates' for the phone. Most of the updates had negligible effect.
Any of you guys know your phone's support level?
Droidicus said:
Personally I don't get why so many people are excited about the Samsung Galaxy S II. I have the Galaxy S. It came out at 2.1 when 2.2 had been out for months and finally got 2.2 about 6 months after it went on sale. NOTHING since.
For me, Samsung is a #neveragain product. ZERO support.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
SGS update for GB has been out for several months everywhere except the USA for some models. That clearly makes this a USA carrier problem as Samsung has delievered timely updates outside of the USA.
The model for Android means the updates flow slowly through the system once they are announced and code is released. In BB and iOS, you get it all at once because its a closed system and RIM and Apple dont share anything with other companies.
Cooperation results in more variety and features but comes at the expense of slower implementation. This is seen in any situation, not just with mobile OS.
But it is the open source nature of Android which allows communities like Cyanogen and XDA to exist. We succeed where others fail.
Plus, while I like some Apple products like iPod, some of the rest of it is tremendously over-expensive clever marketing, where people show off their expensive goods to friends and pay for Apple's champagne parties in the process.
phoneyericsson said:
But it is the open source nature of Android which allows communities like...XDA to exist
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
XDA existed years before Android was released.
Perhaps but that doesn't mean that we don't benefit from systems like Android. With BB and iOS you begin with a closed system locked down.
The phrase is not mutually exclusive - that one point is true and the other false.
most app developers will end up targeting an ancient version of the OS in order to maximize market reach.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This doesn't bother me so much. I'm currently developing on a Rogers HTC Magic running 2.1 and I'm fine with that (ok not really, I'm getting the Galaxy Nexus in January). Anyway, the way I see it is targeting lower APIs just means there are fewer functions available for us to use, meaning we have to implement a few extra things ourselves. No big deal.
What is a big deal is the inconsistency of implementation of features by different manufacturers (eg Camera intent) That makes me rage.
---------- Post added at 06:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:33 PM ----------
phoneyericsson said:
Any of you guys know your phone's support level?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well keep in mind that your 2 year old phone may not be able to pull the greatest and latest version of Android. That could be one reason for a short support cycle.
As much as I would like rogers to update my phone to 2.2, it's not going to happen, because the hardware is not so good (by today's standards)
The author neglected the fact that there are hundreds of Android phones available and only 5 different iPhones (not counting the varying colors/storage spaces). It's far easier to provide and maintain updates for 5 devices than the 20+ Android devices each manufacturer has released within the previous two year period (minimum contract for subsidized pricing).
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using XDA App
Droidicus said:
Personally I don't get why so many people are excited about the Samsung Galaxy S II. I have the Galaxy S. It came out at 2.1 when 2.2 had been out for months and finally got 2.2 about 6 months after it went on sale. NOTHING since.
For me, Samsung is a #neveragain product. ZERO support.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Even the European Orange carrier branded Galaxy S is at 2.3.5. This non-support thingy is a US only problem (and probably some Asian countries).
American carriers are some blood sucking companies, of course they don't want to update their phones, because they must sell the next big thing.
And God, they fuc**d every good phone released there. That GNexus version from Verizon isn't even a google phone anymore.
US people should buy the international version if their network is compatible (like AT&T) and stop complaining. I only buy unlocked versions of the phones, and if I bought a low-end Android phone, I wouldn't complain about not getting updates. Seriously, you expect for your OEM to upgrade your 200$ (unlocked phone, I don't care how much is on contract) phone from 1.6 to 4.0 ?
I don't see my mom complaining about Android 2.3.3 version on her Galaxy Gio because he doesn't even know what an OS is. And even if the phone won't get updated anymore, the phone is perfectly working.
Now, if I do read tech blogs, I know what an OS is, and the most significant thing, I'm on XDA, is so hard to flash a custom rom on my almost out of warranty 18 months old phone ?
And what good is to update your phone if afterwards it will work like sh!t? 3GS is an example.
Some interesing points there...
- I agree that it wasn't really elaborated that the iPhone has a couple of variations whereas the Android situation involves many manufactuers so it is obviously going to work differently, watch Apple try fill those shoes. I don't really pay too much attention to Apple on that count though. While I think they do generally a good job looking after their own customers, take a look at their product portfolio - they have no interest in mass market generally, for quite a few years now they've moved away from iPods (companies which move away from their original core products have a struggle to survive) and into iPhones/iPads and now iTV incoming, which are, as we know, 'products of exlcusive consumption' which yield very high profit margins. That has nothing in common with the multi-manufactuer Android-approach, so I don't think very much about what Apple would do, simply, they wouldn't.
- Interesting note from the developer side there from that other person ^^^. And I hate throwing fuel in the fire, and I especially hate this term (it's a word pushed by Apple/Microsoft to spook Google's business partners in my opinion) but is fragmentation a problem?
- Also, this isn't an American problem. I'm European and we have the same problem. For you guys, contracts for 2 years -seems- to be normal there, but prepay is very popular here. The networks/carriers subsidise the handsets heavilly and you are not locked down really. There are some normally very expensive handsets in the shop now for €150 and I can use that for a year or whatever I want and switch next year. The network/carrier has paid a lot of subsidy to make it that cheap for me though. Contacts suit businesses perhaps more than consumers in this area. Secondly, minor point, but problems like Carrier IQ seem to be rampant in the US, whereas I've yet to find a company here using it. (there surely is, but they've yet to be named and shamed).
- Product support whether contract or prepay is usually defined. I just read another article point out that 2011 was the year of Froyo, which was released in 2010, it took so long for it to be rolled out. 2012 will be the year of Gingerbread, because it too is taking so long to roll out, yet we've just seen ICS come out...that Google strategy that some manufactuers signed up to...was it a joke?