Slashdot Mirror
Is Samsung Blocking Updates To Froyo?
jfruhlinger writes "One of the complaints about Android is its fragmentation; many different versions of the OS are out there in the wild, and often users are held back from upgrading by their hardware or their carrier. But now a disturbing rumor has it that Samsung is strong-arming T-Mobile to prevent an over-the-air upgrade to Android 2.2 (Froyo) for Samsung Vibrant owners. The reason? Samsung wants people to shell out for the new Vibrant 4G — which, other than the fact that it ships running Froyo, is largely identical to the Vibrant."
Reader CWmike contributes an informative link if you'd like to know which Android vendors are actually delivering timely upgrades.
Hows all that "open platform" "not locked to a walled garden" "no need to jailbreak" Android working out for all the people that rant and rave against the iPhone?
I want an OTA update for my Samsung Vibrant. It's a Galaxy S on 2.1 Android, and it's a nice bit of hardware. I don't really need the upgrade but I do wonder why they're not putting anything out OTA. They are dragging their heels on the Kies update. Well, even if it were on Kies, I wouldn't use that piece of junk. Oh, wait, they don't make it for the Mac. It's silly to have such an advanced phone, which can't update itself over the air like pretty much every other smartphone in the past few years can do.
[
The good thing about Android is that it's open and anyone can add features, customizations, etc. to it.
The bad thing about Android is that the manufacturers and the carriers usually end up raping it and making it a worse experience.
The ugly part is that Google doesn't seem to care all that much and is perfectly willing to put up with this kind of crap.
Not to say this rumor is true, but this is why forced vendor dependence is a bad thing. I'm not sure if Samsung is doing it (and they aren't yet, as I understand it) but if Samsung was doing what Motorola was and signing the kernel, then such fixes and updates would be impossible to install.
As it stands, you can root a Samsung device and load whatever ROM you want on it. But beware, this is the sort of behavior that they want such lock down for. Not for your security, but to deliberately limit the lifespan of your device and make you buy a new one.
Customers should demand that the phone's come with documentation stating A) What upgrade rights the customer has, B) The minimum span for which the vendor promises to support the phone by issuing upgrades to the standard Android build or a variant, and C) In the event that the company cannot fulfill (B), for example, because that particular model sold poorly, or the company goes out of business, that the phones will be completely unlocked (except for the black box components that let you violate FCC regs) and third party vendors or OSS hackers can issue their own upgrades, at the customer's own risk. Oh, and include a revert to original state option in case an upgrade goes south.
These rules could probably use some fine tuning, but I believe that this will make purchasing decisions simpler and budgets more predictable. It will also establish a sense of trust and even loyalty with the vendors that follow this model. As it stands, very few phone makers or telcos have earned any trust whatsoever. We just have to guess who will screw us hardest-- and when the contestants are Microsoft, Sony, AT&T, Verizon, Apple, Samsung, that's not a fun game.
Smart phones are expensive, and they're taking the place of PCs in many areas. PC vendors don't restrict your ability to install an alternative OS. We should expect the same from phone vendors. The status quo encourages forced waste-- which is always profitable for a few scumbags, but it's bad for all other life on the planet, consumers included.
Quite well, as long as the Nexus S and/or the various Android Dev Phones are available.
Yes, just as the iPhone is a great open platform, for after all we have jailbreaking.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
My tmobile vibrant runs just fine with froyo because I put it on there. It would be nice if it was an ota update but it works great all the same.
[RIAA] says its concern is artists. That's true, in just the sense that a cattle rancher is concerned about its cattle.
It's bad enough the two worst cellphone carriers are making the iphone (AT&T) and android (T-Mobile) look bad... but let's not blame the manufacturers. HTC, Samsung, Motorola, and others have done a great job of providing open upgradeable platforms... AND developing upgrades for them with hardware specific vendor modifications.
Blame AT&T and T-Mobile for sucking. Samsung is ok in my book.
E
I really like it actually. GPS is spotty compared to iPhone, but other than that it is world's better (in my opinion). The OLED is gorgeous.
That said I will never purchase another Samsung device that needs updating. I was promised Froyo in September after purchasing in June. Still haven't gotten it. Sure I got my own Froyo update in December, but I expected an update and got shafted. I'd read bad reports about Samsung not updating in the past and thought "this time will be different... this is a flagship device." Nope.
I dislike the "this group messed up, so hate the whole company" attitude, so I would consider a TV or the like. But not a phone.
Call me naive, but it seems to me that a lot of these problems can be resolved by Google allowing (and release a application to do it) for any device to be flashed reliably to a stock Android [stable] release. Past and present.
Manufacturers don't want to update there fancy phone and custom UI to the latest? That's fine. But the user is still allowed to manually update themselves and lose the original features they bought into. Guess what -- those fancy features that brought them to your phone may prove to be optional and there's a much better chance they won't choose your hardware platform moving forward. This may be a big enough kick up the butt that the manufacturers need.
The thing is, Samsung preventing the users from upgrading may cause us to abandon the phone, but in what bizarro world would we ever buy another device from Samsung? The thing about Android is that many different manufacturers sell handsets, and if I have to buy another device anyway, I might as well buy from a manufacturer that delivers TIMELY UPDATES.
So, I'm thinking this will play out as just another rumor caused by severe update anxiety.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Samsung have done this since their first Android phone, the Galaxy i7500. Why do you continue buying Samsung phones when you know they will do this?
We're still working out which vendors are going to support their phones for the long run, like Apple does with their iPhone, and which ones are expecting you buy a new one every year, like Nokia. My expectation in 2011 is that if I spend £500 on a new phone, I expect to get software updates for as long as the hardware is viable, *especially* when the manufacturer isn't bearing the cost of building the software! If Samsung don't deny this rumour and confirm they'll be issuing minor Android updates, I don't see how they expect to compete against Apple, and every other Android vendor out there. The ridiculous, wasteful "fire and forget" model of smartphone development is long dead, and manufacturers that try it will fix it, or exit the market pretty quickly.
Even 8 years ago, I never understood why Nokia didn't try to sell their phones as long-term investments, and ship better software for their premium phones as they developed it, rather than trying to hawk us a new bit of plastic every 18 months.
Matthew @ Bytemark Hosting
I frequent XDA a lot and the warnings were clear. If you're not buying a Nexus device (Nexus One/Nexus S), you will most likely be left in the dark for an official upgrade path. The G1 and the original, slower Galaxy, for example, never received an official upgrade past 1.6. Personally, I don't think carriers/OEMs have a lot of demand from most of their consumer base to engineer upgrades. This news might gain much more attention since it's blatantly obvious that Samsung was gunning for obsoleting one of their flagship phones so quickly, but unless video calling really takes off (doesn't seem to have done so yet), it's not the biggest deal for many.
From a technical standpoint, it's completely irrelevant. Save for the upgraded modem and the front-facing camera, it's the original Vibrant. (They probably added more tricks in the hardware to make rooting harder, though.) Additionally, it's pretty trivial to add a front-facing camera to the current Vibrant and there is an unofficial carrier-engineered version of Froyo for it floating around on the Internet. For starters, it has Wifi Calling natively bundled into it. It's also somewhat faster. I flashed my Dad's Vibrant with it before I gave it to him as a Christmas gift and it works amazingly for him.
Just the mere existence of that ROM suggests that an update might be around the corner. The question, though, is how wide T-Mobile and Samsung is making that corner for people.
The real reason they are stonewalling on the 2.2 update for Vibrant is this: When they released the 2.2 update for the Vibrant in Canada, the update worked fine for a week or two, and then like clockwork bricked a huge percentage of the phones that updated. And when I say bricked, I'm not being liberal with that word, after a week or so running the Samsung 2.2 update, the SD card would become corrupt, and recovery mode would be unable to format it. My wife and I both have Vibrants, and it happened to them both one day apart. Samsung has been silent on the matter. Not surprising they'd avoid moving sending the 2.2 update out to US Vibrant owners, and also not surprising that they're refusing to explain why. Bell at least is fixing them, but lots of people on the XDA forum are saying their "repaired" phones are bricking again in short order.
ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
The problem with Verizon isn't so much the clown-makeup, but the nickle-and diming. In fact I am SHOCKED that Verizon is open-upping AT&T by including tethering. Verizon has long been notorious for locking down ringtones (so you can't make your own, but have to buy from Verizon), locking down or deleting apps (especially games) that ship with the original factory firmware, and otherwise crippling the phones, and then selling you back the features the phone originally shipped with.
That they are leaving the iPhone untainted by their greed is an awesome step forward and it makes me despise Verizon just a tiny bit less.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
The Samsung Intercept, at least the one distributed by Virgin Mobile, is going to the the Froyo update soon. So any insinuation that Samsung blocks all android updates is false.
http://twitter.com/virginmobileus/status/24854959556136961#
A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
I was concerned about something like this.
If having current Android OS software is important then you get a Google phone. Otherwise you are putzing around. None of these other manufacturers+carriers actually care about supporting people that have already signed up. As far as their concerned you're done. On the books. `Next!' The only vendor that is motivated to support their systems with their latest work is Google.
Nexus One owners got upgraded to 2.2 They will get 2.3 as well. Nexus S came out with 2.3 (while others are still shipping 2.2) and will get 3.0, etc.
Please, if you care at all about staying current then stop inflicting Samsung et. al on yourself and get what Google is supporting. When the answer is so clear it's hard to feel a lot of sympathy for those that get it wrong.
The phone business wants to retain its classic model where the (feature) phone keeps the firmware that shipped forever. The whole notion of 'upgrading' phone operating systems is foreign and they're doing it badly as a result. It will take some time for this to change. If buyers start demanding ongoing OS upgrades as a condition of purchase instead of signing up for the latest shiny and then bitching about it, it just might.
Until then you may a.) buy Google, b.) use unsupported software if possible or c.) live in anger hating the choice you made.
Lurking at the bottom of the gravity well, getting old
handset makers treat software maintenance like a teenager treats a book report. 1/2 assed effort at the last minute.
It could be said that the teenagers are using appropriate judgment regarding the value of the book report.
This "entitlement" is because we realize that these phones are actually computers running largely general purpose software, and there are security vulnerabilities that need patched. This is like Gateway, Dell, or eMachines colluding with Comcast to block WindowsXP security update requests to update.microsoft.com so that you'll buy a new computer when your XP box gets owned.
If an Iphone user wants an open phone and doesn't want to jailbreak
If they want an open iPhone then they want to jailbreak. I don't see where one would desire something and then ignore the clear path to obtaining it. It makes no sense.
Jailbreaking is legal.
It does not void your warranty.
It's easily reversible should you decide it's not for you.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Where are all the custom IOS ROM's then?
Can I load IOS onto a HD2?
Thought not.
The really sad truth is that you cannot make modifications to IOS no matter how much you hack. What's even sadder is that you cannot replace IOS on the Iphone 3GS or above because the 3GS requires code the be signed by Apple before it can run.
Sorry but you cant have it both ways, the most common thing I hear about IOS is that it supposedly "Just Works(TM)" but then you're trying to convince us that it's many times more hackable than any other mobile OS. The simple fact that there are no custom IOS ROMs means it is nowhere near the level of hack-ability that Android and WinMo 6 has.
I'm absolutely certain you'll say this is possible, as certain as I am it isn't but you cant rip out and replace the IOS kernel like you can with Android, jailbreaks just haven't gained that kind of access for some time. You've even said this yourself.
I suggest you look up what a "substrate" is. Yes they've used the term correctly, it's a base or foundation for applications, however it sits on top of the operating system and does not give you access to modify the OS's code. Essentially it sits on top of an OS in the way the substrate of a building sits on top of the ground, the substrate provides a stable surface to build on but does not allow the building to modify the ground.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
It's gone to hell because quality control isn't a requirement anymore in this wonderful new age where everything has updatable operating systems and drivers.
Now they can ship it out "good enough" and make everyone who buys it at the beginning be their bug testers. Then release a firmware patch several months later to fix it. Rinse and repeat until the bugs are all gone or the company has milked all the money they can out of sales and moved on to hyping the newest model.
Back when this wasn't possible they had to do quality testing, because a product that made it to market with a major bug could require an expensive recall to fix.
All models of iPhone with the exception of the original can be updated to iOS 4.x via the regular old Apple process. And given the hardware limitations of the original iPhone, I can't imagine the user experience would be even close to tolerable on that device.
So no, there are no "roll your own" distros of iOS. No one needs them.
At the same time, fanboys like you aren't helping anything either. Responding to any criticism of your chosen system with "That's not an actual problem, what the hell are you talking about" is just as bad, and it serves to push the idea that Android fanboys can't take criticism. Android is great, I love it, but to pretend that things like this aren't a problem is just insane.