Related
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.
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.
After today's expected launch went without an event, I contacted Verizon.
Here is the link to the about page for VP and Chief Marketing Officer, Marni Walden.
http://bit.ly/iAKpSp
I sent her the following letter (click the link at the bottom of her page)
Ms. Walden,
I am contacting you as a very disgusted customer. Since last fall, I have been waiting for Verizon to release a Windows Phone 7 device. I learned in the fall that this device would not be available on the CDMA networks, and as a software developer, I understand how Microsoft had not yet implemented support for it. However, Verizon has been stringing its customers along for about five months now with the implied promise of a Windows Phone 7 device, yet has not delivered.
In December, VZW advertized to Microsoft employees the Trophy, and it promised an "Early 2011" delivery. That offer had an expiration date of 12/31/2010, although that delivery has been pushed back to March, April, and May, and the delivery time range has been removed from the flier.
On March 23 the CDMA Sprint HTC Arrive was released. CDMA support was finally here. But Verizon dragged its feet. An April launch was expected, because despite the tight lips at Verizon, pictures were leaked of a Verizon branded Trophy, as well as an April expiration date on the Microsoft employee offer. That came and went. Now two Thursdays in May have come and gone without the device that many of us are waiting for.
You are not doing anything but making customers angry by dragging your feet, not releasing the device, and not giving us a release date. You are holding on to a phone that was available in Europe last October, albeit without CDMA support. Which means if you wait much longer you will be releasing a year-old phone. Do you think it is all right to treat your customers like this? Are you that ticked off at Microsoft over the failure of the Kin that you are willing to drag your customers who want the Windows Phone through the mud like this?
It is high time for whomever at Verizon is throwing the temper tantrum about the Kin to get over it, and give us the phone we want. I don't want one of the 47 different Android phones you now carry. I don't want the iPhone. I and many well-informed consumers like me, want a Windows Phone 7 device. Please quit holding us hostage.
Sincerely,
Richard Hopkins
Verizon frustrating
I've talked to many salespeople about what signs there are of the Trophy being released. The general consensus is that the rumor start a month before the device is available and training is done a week before. None of these things have happened for the Windows Phone 7 device. There are two blank spots at Costco for two new devices.........maybe.....?
A dummy device was spotted at Best Buy this week. http://bit.ly/iig3Sr
XBox Live had a Verizon Trophy theme for download yesterday (since pulled) http://bit.ly/mTOJbU
Verizon employee training started two weeks ago. http://bit.ly/itTXms
The phone is currently on Bestbuy.com, and can be placed in shopping cart, but order cannot yet be completed. http://bit.ly/mbk04A
Press shots have been leaked http://bit.ly/m3wCia
Verizon is excited to offer Win Phone 7 http://cnet.co/erI5Wp
I'm not sure how much louder the rumors could get, to be honest.
Encouragement
Just talked to another Verizon guy and he said training was last week. Asked the Costco people and they said they "hoped" that one of the spaces was for the Trophy.
You're going to learn very little if anything at all by canvasing the VZW employees and retailers. They can (and often do) lose their jobs for letting information out. And since they often do leak, they are often kept more in the dark than those of us who know how to use Twitter.
I just had a nice chat with Lachelle at Verizon Wireless. I voiced all of the concerns I've had, blah blah blah.
Among the things she said:
1. We can't give out release dates for our phones because it affects our competitiveness. My response: You announced on Feb 11 that you were going to carry iPhone, release in a month. You gave a month notice, and you launched on time. How competitive are you on this platform if you're the only major carrier in the world (with supported language) that doesn't have a phone on the platform? You have like 47 different Android models, but not everyone wants Android.
2. I will pass your comments on to our marketing department so they can look into whether we should carry this phone. My response: You WILL be carrying this device. You have made a special offer to Microsoft employees, and have modified that offer at least 3 times that I can think of off the top of my head. A dummy device has been spotted in a Best Buy store, and I've seen pictures of it online (I forgot to tell her it is listed on bestbuy.com). Your store employees have been trained on it. Verizon branded devices have been seen in the wild (I forgot to tell her about the one on craigslist). You're on the edge of launching, and granted, all I've got are rumors, but the photographic evidence to back those rumors is overwhelming. You are frustrating your customers by keeping this so tightly under wraps. The whole world, except for Verizon employees it seems, knows that there is a device coming, and the lack of information is frustrating your customers. I stayed with Verizon, and gave you until the 12th, because the most powerful evidence of a launch seemed to point at the 12th, but I NEED the phone now, so today I became an ATT customer, and I'm talking to you on an ATT phone.
Anyway, she gave me the typical "I'm going to pass this up to marketing" blah blah blah and "thank you for your feedback because it helps us to keep our customers happy blah blah blah." She also said that the more they hear from customers, the more attention they can give this issue. WRITE THOSE LETTERS!
We'll see what happens. I'm kind of hoping, since there is a droid phone launching tomorrow, that it may be tomorrow, however that is just speculation on my part and I have no evidence to back it up whatsoever.
Call, email, message etc both companies until they release a security patch for our phones. If enough of us call they will take notice and release updates. Be polite but firm.
calm down
No
I didn't mean to post 3 times. Not sure how that happened. But anyway my post is an outright demand over the blueborne patch. Samsung and T-mobile cannot just have a major Vulnerability sitting in the wild where people with the knowledge (and don't doubt that people can't figure out how to hack) can just get personal info off a phone. I have an almost 8 year old laptop that got patched from Microsoft. Why can't a two year old phone get a patch as well? It's been months
I have not posted this in questions - as I feel it is more of a discussion topic.
Why does Samsung take so long to roll out OTA updates?
Oreo was released to some European countries, and yet almost two weeks later the UK is still without the update. To be clear, I am talking about unbranded, generic devices from Samsung, not carrier branded because we can always point the finger at the carriers for that. However, Vodafone in Spain has managed to start the rollout of Oreo too.
Does anyone have an actual reason for why 'Rollouts' of the same software take Samsung so long?
People may point to 'Server Strain', however the Galaxy S8 makes up a small % of Samsung handsets, if Apple can roll out an update to millions of devices, Samsung can roll it out to a % of it's user base easily.
People may point to they want to make sure there are no bugs - Sony roll-out software, however it is a much quicker process and most people have an update within a week. I believe they had to halt the Nougat update midway through, but quickly resumed.
How is it European carriers can release the Oreo update, yet Samsung themselves cannot release the update?
Does anyone have the answers, or any theories that go beyond what we already know?
Furthermore, I could flash the update. However, why should I? Samsung should be able to get this out of the door quick enough, it is becoming a joke.
As first timer with Samsung my gut feeling is that this is caused by a mix of being too prudential and the fact that the 99% of their user base really don't care.
I have to say, coming from years of custom Roms and having almost always the latest software, I don't mind a bit of "slowness".
It's annoying but at the end I don't have huge problems that needs to be fixed.
I wish they would publish more often security updates.
Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
It looks like, if you´re on international ROM, we´ll get monthly sec. updates -- https://security.samsungmobile.com/workScope.smsb
qpkqkma said:
It looks like, if you´re on international ROM, we´ll get monthly sec. updates -- https://security.samsungmobile.com/workScope.smsb
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
An extract from the disclaimer reads
"Please note that in some cases regular OS upgrades may cause delays to planned security updates. However, users can be rest assured the OS upgrades will include up-to-date security patches when delivered."
Based on that, Oreo rollout could be delayed again so that they can include the March update?
Maybe, so that next time you think of buying a Samsung phone, you will consider carriers (like Vodafone) rolls out update faster than the unlocked ones.
Which means the carrier gets another customer on their terms and conditions. Just a theory on business' perspective.
Carriers give deals to Apple. Samsung gives deal to carriers.
r0k3t said:
Maybe, so that next time you think of buying a Samsung phone, you will consider carriers (like Vodafone) rolls out update faster than the unlocked ones.
Which means the carrier gets another customer on their terms and conditions. Just a theory on business' perspective.
Carriers give deals to Apple. Samsung gives deal to carriers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is an interesting assumption, but based on what? The generic software rolled out to many countries (excluding some MAJOR ones) before Vodafone started rolling it out.
My argument is more about why roll it out in 3 or 4 countries, and not everywhere at once.
Also, surely it would not be in the interest of Samsung from a legal standpoint to be doing deals based on device security, which of course software updates include.
You guys sound like girls regretting life after a one night stand..
Thats just the usual shuffle of users to which you provide updates. You dont want to break things for everyone at once. Does not matter that it is stable release. It is the way big software providers work.
You may think of smaller companies that update everyone at once -> they also appear most frequently in news for things that are broken for all users.
Samsung sells device by advertising a curved screen and a good camera, not by advertising super fast android updates. Why spend money on something that can break your product, for the sake of a minor software change? The majority of samsung users do not even know what it means to update software, so why bother..
Thats a good businesses strategy, nothing else.
malimukk said:
You guys sound like girls regretting life after a one night stand..
Thats just the usual shuffle of users to which you provide updates. You dont want to break things for everyone at once. Does not matter that it is stable release. It is the way big software providers work.
You may think of smaller companies that update everyone at once -> they also appear most frequently in news for things that are broken for all users.
Samsung sells device by advertising a curved screen and a good camera, not by advertising super fast android updates. Why spend money on something that can break your product, for the sake of a minor software change? The majority of samsung users do not even know what it means to update software, so why bother..
Thats a good businesses strategy, nothing else.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well that sounds a bit harsh, but I generally agree with Malimukk. Look around you every second person you see is using a Samsung phone. They have to be super careful with every update. If they screw up, a lot more people will angrily stir up a ****storm on the internet, than if Sony or HTC would screw up an update.
Also I personally think it's totally fine if it takes up to 6 or 7 weeks for an update to hit all the devices. As long as Samsung releases the kernel sources quickly.
80% of Samsung users really do not care what softwareversion they are running and I'm sure Samsung will implement a working "check for updates"-Feature in the near future for the 20% like us.
Again these threads go no where but to arguments about this topic....
As stated many many times if you want timely updates buy google....
Thread closed