I'm shopping for a device to do App development on. It doesn't matter whether it's a phone or a tablet. But I do care about getting new firmware updates within a reasonable time after Google issues a new version.
I expect most vendors only support the latest firmware in totally new models. What I want is to load firmware on an old device, rather than having to purchase a new device.
Perhaps the parent comment should have been in the device suggestion thread. Please forgive my noobness.
Related
In my sadness of downgrading back to froyo, I asked HTC when their official release of gb would be out and got this email:
Dear Matthew,
Thank you Matthew for contacting HTC Technical Support. We are excited to announce that HTC Thunderbolt will receive the Gingerbread (Android 2.3) update in Summer 2011.
Our goal is to give every customer the best possible experience on every phone. Every HTC phone is a combination of a unique HTC hardware and software experience and a core operating system. We only update our phones if it will provide an overall improved user experience as we balance features, performance and usability. Stay tuned for details as we get closer to the update availability.
To send a reply to this message or let me know I have successfully answered your question log in to our ContactUs site using your email address and your ticket number xxxxxxxxxxxx.
Sincerely,
Charles
HTC
Want to see what others are saying? Have a question to ask other HTC fans?
Become a fan of HTC facebook.com/htc
Follow us on Twitter twitter.com/htc
Subscribe to our YouTube Channel youtube.com/htc
Explore our development resources developer.htc.com
We are unable to receive replies to this email account. Please visit us at htc.com if you have any questions or need further assistance.
Unfortunately, Summer 2011 means anything between April and September.
why can't google make something like where you download os update separate from vendors? so you can update your phone to latest without bringing in useless vendor who only if something slows things down?!
thats what they said before the phone was launched, initially it was june, it might happen since we already had a leak that was pretty stable other than the radio and camera app, so keep your fingers crossed. I am thinking at the end of june.
Free wireless hotspot promo ends June 15 and VZW already said it would be disabled with an ota. Hopefully that will be our gingerbread also.
Sent from my ADR6400L using XDA App
a1exus said:
why can't google make something like where you download os update separate from vendors? so you can update your phone to latest without bringing in useless vendor who only if something slows things down?!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it could happen if google had a list of parts vendors are allowed to use. Everyone uses different cpu's, gps chips, wifi, and crap and that's why the os is so fragmented. If google had a set standard for hardware specs it wouldn't be so hard.
Android will always be fragmented, It doesn't mean how many companies sign up for the promised os updates for 18 months. This is one thing that is bad about android. My next phone will be google branded, atleast it has the best support possible.
Didn't they set up like a committee thing with all the companies to speed up the updating process?
krnsushiman said:
Didn't they set up like a committee thing with all the companies to speed up the updating process?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Those same companies would also prefer that you purchase a new phone rather than have to support their existing ones.
Im not going to hold my breath waiting for Verizon. Maybe for a more stable leaked release.
If you're going to run with a rooted Bolt you're not going to care when Verizon releases the OTA because by the time they actually do it just about everyone in this forum will be running the leaked (& safe for rooted bolts) radios and ROM of some kind.
We'll also probably see the OTA weeks before VZW acutally pushes it (unless somehow jcase and company can't get their hands on a leaked version and make it safe for rooted phones before the OTA pushes...which I wouldn't bet money on.)
maybe it the start of OZ's summer, so that would make it like december.
Wonder where these leaks come from?
I am more excited about all ROMs moving to GB with stable base. The community ROMs work so much better than the vendor released for my taste.
Hi everyone,
I maintain a firmware archive for all Nexus and "Google Experience" devices from the OG Droid up through present day. Now that I'm a GS4 owner, I've decided to start archiving Galaxy S4 firmware for US variants on my site as well. As I'm not as familiar with Samsung naming conventions and terminology as I am with Google ROMs, I was hoping some of you Samsung software junkies out there could take a look at my pages to make sure I'm using all my terminology correctly.
Here is a sample Nexus firmware page: http://www.randomphantasmagoria.com/firmware/nexus-7.
Here is my new Galaxy S4 page: http://www.randomphantasmagoria.com/firmware/galaxy-s4.
Make sure to click through to the detail pages.
My rule for the firmware archives are that I do not deal with unofficial stuff whatsoever. I don't do leaked ROMs or anything of the like. I only archive whatever was officially released to the general public, both shipping on new devices and OTA updates. The idea is to be able to follow the strict official release chain from launch to end-of-life. Also, all firmware is indexed on the site by the official firmware name in build.prop.
As you can see, right now I only have a page up for the AT&T I337 variant (the one I own). Right now, I'm displaying the Android version, build, PDA, CSC, links to the ODIN packages and links to the OTA updates if available. Are there any other pieces of info you think I should show on those detail pages? Also, I'm showing the OTA updates as "<new> from <old>" which is how Google names its OTA files. I know that Samsung sometimes does "<old> to <new>" (especially in the yakju(xx) OTA files for the Galaxy Nexus). Which one do you guys think I should go with?
Any feedback you guys could provide would be greatly appreciated. Once I've settled on a final layout, I'll create pages for Sprint, Verizon, T-Mobile, and US Cellular. I'll also add pages for Cricket and C Spire when those devices actually launch. Why am I only doing US devices? Because there are a lot of international device variants and each one of them can have a ton of different firmware variants depending on the country in which it was purchased. It's way too much for one man to manage. Managing 7 US variants will be enough work as it is. haha
So anyway, click around and please provide feedback.
Thank you!
Hi everyone,
I maintain a firmware archive for all Nexus and "Google Experience" devices from the OG Droid up through present day. Now that I'm a GS4 owner, I've decided to start archiving Galaxy S4 firmware for US variants on my site as well. As I'm not as familiar with Samsung naming conventions and terminology as I am with Google ROMs, I was hoping some of you Samsung software junkies out there could take a look at my pages to make sure I'm using all my terminology correctly.
Here is a sample Nexus firmware page: http://www.randomphantasmagoria.com/firmware/nexus-7.
Here is my new Galaxy S4 page: http://www.randomphantasmagoria.com/firmware/galaxy-s4.
Make sure to click through to the detail pages.
My rule for the firmware archives are that I do not deal with unofficial stuff whatsoever. I don't do leaked ROMs or anything of the like. I only archive whatever was officially released to the general public, both shipping on new devices and OTA updates. The idea is to be able to follow the strict official release chain from launch to end-of-life. Also, all firmware is indexed on the site by the official firmware name in build.prop.
As you can see, right now I only have a page up for the AT&T I337 variant (the one I own). Right now, I'm displaying the Android version, build, PDA, CSC, links to the ODIN packages and links to the OTA updates if available. Are there any other pieces of info you think I should show on those detail pages? Also, I'm showing the OTA updates as "<new> from <old>" which is how Google names its OTA files. I know that Samsung sometimes does "<old> to <new>" (especially in the yakju(xx) OTA files for the Galaxy Nexus). Which one do you guys think I should go with?
Any feedback you guys could provide would be greatly appreciated. Once I've settled on a final layout, I'll create pages for Sprint, Verizon, T-Mobile, and US Cellular. I'll also add pages for Cricket and C Spire when those devices actually launch. Why am I only doing US devices? Because there are a lot of international device variants and each one of them can have a ton of different firmware variants depending on the country in which it was purchased. It's way too much for one man to manage. Managing 7 US variants will be enough work as it is. haha
So anyway, click around and please provide feedback.
Thank you!
I have three bad experiences with Chinese-sourced devices that promise to deliver Android updates but then never do. Cube i10, two Onda devices and a Be Touch 2. The Onda sit is really frustrating because of frequent statements that they will "release the update on our site when it is available."
With all the combined experience at xda, I'm hoping some of you have experience to share about devices that actually do keep the Android OS updated within some kind of reasonable time frame.
Lurking here has taught me how to root devices and even get TWRP installed on the phone. But I have had no success in manually try to move from Kit Kat to Marshmallow and so am thinking about buying a new device.
I also think that a list of vendors who honour OS updates would be useful to the community in general.
Many thanks.
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