Android Oreo Bug Eats Up Mobile Data Even When On Wi-Fi (betanews.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Android Oreo Bug Eats Up Mobile Data Even When On Wi-Fi (betanews.com)

Posted by BeauHD on Wednesday September 6, 2017 @10:00PM from the always-connected dept.

Mark Wilson shares a report from BetaNews: An apparent bug with Android Oreo has been discovered which means Google's mobile operating system could be munching its way through your data allowance, even if you're connected to a wireless network. A thread on Reddit highlighted the issue, with many people pointing out that it could prove expensive for anyone not using an unlimited data plan. Google is apparently aware of the problem and is working on a patch, but in the meantime Oreo users are being warned to consider disabling mobile data when they are at home or using a wireless connection elsewhere.

89 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Next question... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-06 22:11 · Score: -1

So? ... How is this Apples fault?
1. Re:Next question... by stealth_finger · 2017-09-07 00:24 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  So? ... How is this Apples fault?
  Because fuck apple.
  
  --
  Wanna buy a shirt?
  https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
Will anybody actually get that patch? by paulatz · 2017-09-06 22:18 · Score: 4, Insightful

With the current record of manufacturers and carriers not giving a damn about porting the Android updates to their products, I'm happy that google is developing a patch, but I'm wondering if anybody will actually receive the patch.

--
this post contain no useful information, no need to mod it down
1. Re:Will anybody actually get that patch? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-06 22:32 · Score: 0
  
  They will, once thousands blast through their mobile data limits without realizing it.
2. Re:Will anybody actually get that patch? by Z00L00K · 2017-09-06 22:35 · Score: 2
  
  And with the current situation where the users of a device is prevented from doing the changes they like to their devices including downgrading the OS the interest in Android goes down.
  It's a sour situation right now when you aren't in control of the device you have bought. I can understand that there may be some constraints to at least prevent malware but the owner of the device shall be able to be in control of the device and not risk it being bricked.
  A major reason for having more control over your device is to get rid of bloatware that the manufacturers have a habit of installing. Some bloatware is also a security risk for various reasons.
  
  --
  If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
3. Re:Will anybody actually get that patch? by Stuarticus · 2017-09-06 22:47 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Oreo is still in Beta so it's only really available on Google devices right now. I'm running it and my mobile data looks perfectly reasonable, so the headline should read "Beta OS may lead to slight increase in data use".
  
  --
  If you think someone isn't free to have a different definition of "freedom" you may be a tyrant.
4. Re: Will anybody actually get that patch? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-06 22:55 · Score: -1
  
  I think normal people or even "techies" don't give a damn about it. No one cares. That's it.
  What I suggest is forking A8 by Lineage team. Then there would be no problem. Would be?
5. Re:Will anybody actually get that patch? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-06 23:13 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  And with the current situation where the users of a device is prevented from doing the changes they like to their devices including downgrading the OS the interest in Android goes down.
  It's a sour situation right now when you aren't in control of the device you have bought. I can understand that there may be some constraints to at least prevent malware but the owner of the device shall be able to be in control of the device and not risk it being bricked.
  A major reason for having more control over your device is to get rid of bloatware that the manufacturers have a habit of installing. Some bloatware is also a security risk for various reasons.
  Only buy a phone that's supported by LineageOS. Then you get updated builds every Thursday. My phone, a Oneplus 2, only officially has Marshmallow. Thanks to LineageOS, I'm running Nougat. It's also more responsive, I get better battery life and I only had to install the bare minimum of Google apps needed for Play (mostly use APKUpdater and F-Droid anyway). Then I just root it with Magisk and still pass SafetyNet (I only care about Pokemon Go).
  TL;DR: buy a LineageOS supported phone or an iPhone if you want regular updates.
6. Re:Will anybody actually get that patch? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-06 23:18 · Score: 0
  
  It was RTMd about a week ago ... do keep up.
7. Re:Will anybody actually get that patch? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-06 23:22 · Score: 0
  
  We are talking about something that is beta software though aren't we. This is September 2017 not September 2018 when we've all been using Oreo for 6 months. Or are we now assuming that beta s/w is a full release and should be bug-free?
8. Re:Will anybody actually get that patch? by miscellaneousfiles22 · 2017-09-06 23:24 · Score: 2
  
  It's not in Beta - it was released on 21st August.
9. Re:Will anybody actually get that patch? by dreamchaser · 2017-09-06 23:28 · Score: 1
  
  Seeing as Oreo is basically only available right now on Google devices (Nexus, Pixel), I suspect that carriers who provide it later on will get the patch.
10. Re: Will anybody actually get that patch? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-06 23:32 · Score: 0
  
  Why would the carriers care? They make money off it
11. Re: Will anybody actually get that patch? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-06 23:33 · Score: 0
  
  The ones that don't get the patch probably didn't get the Oreo update
12. Re:Will anybody actually get that patch? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-06 23:34 · Score: 0
  
  They will, once thousands blast through their mobile data limits without realizing it.
  You mean when thousands of idiot consumers blast through their mobile data limits and do nothing more than sign up for the unlimited* data plan.
  (* = denotes not really unlimited, but idiot consumers won't bother reading the EULA)
13. Re:Will anybody actually get that patch? by geekmux · 2017-09-06 23:42 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  It was RTMd about a week ago ... do keep up.
  The 2017 definition of RTM - "A larger pool of beta testers."
  Do keep up.
14. Re:Will anybody actually get that patch? by geekmux · 2017-09-06 23:44 · Score: 1
  
  It's not in Beta - it was released on 21st August.
  Yes, it was released...to a larger pool of beta testers.
15. Re: Will anybody actually get that patch? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 00:20 · Score: 0
  
  Not when people switch to a different carrier.
16. Re:Will anybody actually get that patch? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 00:30 · Score: 0
  
  This would be why I went with a phone directly from Google when I got an Android phone.
  As you said, the record of manufacturers and carriers to keep their products updated is extremely poor and they have no incentive to change.
17. Re: Will anybody actually get that patch? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 00:36 · Score: 0
  
  What was your post about? Telling regular Replicant user that there is Lineage?
18. Re:Will anybody actually get that patch? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 01:01 · Score: 0
  
  It is actually out of beta? I thought everything Google is doing is still under beta.
19. Re:Will anybody actually get that patch? by thegarbz · 2017-09-07 01:26 · Score: 1
  
  With the current record of manufacturers and carriers not giving a damn about porting the Android updates to their products
  Who are those? The vast majority of vendors based on their current record have no problem at all issuing you patches even for older devices. They do however with-hold OS updates. You want Oreo? Fuck you, here have yet another minor point update to Jellybean instead.
20. Re:Will anybody actually get that patch? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 01:29 · Score: 0
  
  Oreo is still in Beta so it's only really available on Google devices right now. I'm running it and my mobile data looks perfectly reasonable, so the headline should read "Beta OS may lead to slight increase in data use".
  no ... it was released late last month.
21. Re:Will anybody actually get that patch? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 01:37 · Score: 0
  
  And for 99.99% of users, there is 0 fucks given about those changes. You probably are completely unaffected by it as well. Just like to bitch about any and every change.
22. Re:Will anybody actually get that patch? by idontgno · 2017-09-07 01:51 · Score: 2
  
  This is why the standard Google "perpetual beta" joke isn't very damn funny. It's "on paper" officially released. So it's not supposed to be beta-quality.
  But the phased rollout of 8.0 means that the "lucky winners" of this bug are the owners of the "Google device" class, like Pixel and Nexus users. The overwhelming majority of near-future Oreo users won't get it until their phone manufacturer and wireless provider have had a chance to hack on it (i.e., add their own bloatware), so maybe they'll have a chance to roll in the patch for this behavior before releasing to manufacturing? <cross fingers>
  
  --
  Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
23. Re:Will anybody actually get that patch? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 02:50 · Score: 0
  
  Lawsuits might actually be helpful for this. If someone's phone roams without permission and racks up a large data bill that would be some motivation.
24. Re:Will anybody actually get that patch? by swillden · 2017-09-07 02:55 · Score: 1
  
  With the current record of manufacturers and carriers not giving a damn about porting the Android updates to their products, I'm happy that google is developing a patch, but I'm wondering if anybody will actually receive the patch.
  Since only Google devices have received Oreo yet, the patch will be out and in the source before other OEMs upgrade or ship devices.
  
  --
  Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
25. Re:Will anybody actually get that patch? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 03:08 · Score: 0
  
  It's a sour situation right now when you aren't in control of the device you have bought. I can understand that there may be some constraints to at least prevent malware but the owner of the device shall be able to be in control of the device and not risk it being bricked.
  Agreed, but we'll have an entire set of threads here filled with people who will disagree and effectively say "Google knows best, your concerns are invalid." or that you having control over your device somehow makes their device insecure. These people have bought wholesale the dream of Jobs, (the device must be as simple as a toaster) without giving a single concern to the consequences of implementing that dream, and they also think that everyone else should as well.
  Don't forget the media industry here either. They love the current situation, because it gives them something to point to as "workable" when they inevitably ask congress to mandate secure / verified boot as an anti-piracy copyright maxism measure.
  Governments love it too. After all, having the end user have the final say over the device's actions means it's harder to spy on / intimidate / manipulate everyone.
  Corporations (Especially Google) love this because it ensures they have a constant stream of personal data to sell to advertisers. (You're the product remember?)
  In the end, it doesn't matter how wrong taking control away from the device owner is. It's going to be done, because too many people directly benefit (or think that they benefit) from doing so. That's why maintaining the old is the only option for those that care.
26. Re:Will anybody actually get that patch? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 03:21 · Score: 0
  
  An OS released a couple of weeks ago, and you're worried that manufacturers and carriers might not release an update for it? The only phones that have Oreo so far are the ones that are regularly updated.
27. Re:Will anybody actually get that patch? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 03:27 · Score: 1
  
  Pixel users mostly. Nexus downloads may be available already, but the OTA updates are scheduled to start next week, and most will wait for them in order to avoid having to backup and restore all their data.
28. Re: Will anybody actually get that patch? by TheRaven64 · 2017-09-07 03:51 · Score: 2
  
  If the update came from the carrier, then there's probably a class-action lawsuit waiting to happen. If the carrier pushes you an update that makes your device do something that allows them to charge you money, then it's probably a good argument to be made in court that you're not liable for any of that extra cost.
  
  --
  I am TheRaven on Soylent News
29. Re:Will anybody actually get that patch? by Hognoxious · 2017-09-07 03:59 · Score: 1
  
  Don't be silly, most of it hasn't even got that far.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
30. Re:Will anybody actually get that patch? by NominalLoss · 2017-09-07 04:05 · Score: 1
  
  The only people on Oreo right now are Pixel users. Pixel users have unfettered updates (even Verizon is rolling updates out quickly). So, yeah, once a patch is out users will get it fairly quickly. Incidentally, I have a Pixel XL with Oreo and have not had the problem. It seems to be intermittent at worst.
31. Re: Will anybody actually get that patch? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 04:46 · Score: 0
  
  It can be "fixed" if you go into developer options which is available on every Android device and just change the setting that says keep mobile data on at all times.
  That setting is designed to make it so if WiFi cuts out it can immediately continue doing whatever it was doing. If you don't have that turned on then the switch to using mobile data when WiFi is out takes a while couple of seconds
  How could they make a blunder this obvious and this stupid. Thankfully by pure habit I changed the setting right after I updated. I changed it on my wife's phone and now I just need to change it on my son's
32. Re: Will anybody actually get that patch? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 04:52 · Score: 0
  
  That's what TWRP is for. It can downgrade Android via flashing an image of whatever is backed up. The issue is you have to flash it twice so it lives in both OS partitions.
  It worked for me yesterday morning when I was flashing from 7.1.2 to 8.0 then I forgot to do something so I went back to the old image
33. Re:Will anybody actually get that patch? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 08:15 · Score: 0
  
  I guess I'm wondering how they don't do basic testing for this kind of thing in QA. Oh, right - QA costs money and in the rarest best case leaves the release on schedule, so it's the first thing to get cut.
34. Re: Will anybody actually get that patch? by Dayze!Confused · 2017-09-07 12:16 · Score: 1
  
  If all those customers are ones on unlimited plans that are now using 90% of their unlimited amount instead of 30% the carriers will start to care.
  
  --
  "All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." [Thomas Jefferson]
I got hit by a data eating bug on a Galaxy S6 by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-06 22:20 · Score: -1

A month ago Android decided to use up my gigabyte data allowance even when mobile data was disabled. Android is just too buggy and carriers are too greedy with data caps.
Defective By Design - Lazy Devs by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-06 22:50 · Score: -1

Reading the Reddit thread, it seems the "cellular data always active" setting in the developer options is being defaulted to "on" unless the user had already changed that setting to something else. Since few users even know that there are hidden developer options, almost all of them are going to be hit with this issue.
I can easily imagine a developer turning this on to aid in their testing and then forgetting to change it back when they were finished testing/developing a feature. Many of the developers would be using this feature so it wouldn't be reset for them. Seems people don't review change diffs before committing, wasn't caught by code reviews, wasn't caught by unit tests, tests weren't run on a factory reset phone, and the beta testers weren't listened to (some self-proclaimed beta testers said they noticed the settings change). Way to fail Google. I guess all their superstar programmers and the 'we only hire the top 10%' programmers hate following industry recommended processes just as much as the cheap ones.
1. Re:Defective By Design - Lazy Devs by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-06 23:35 · Score: 1
  
  The default for that setting for normal users is "on" by design, it's there for fast transition to mobile data when the wifi signal goes out of range. Pretty sure that was the default in Android 7 also, at least on the Pixel. And it works great, one of my favourite features. That shouldn't increase data usage - wifi is used when it's there, the only difference is how fast you switch over to cellular data when the wifi signal goes out of range.
2. Re:Defective By Design - Lazy Devs by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 04:06 · Score: 0
  
  Stupidest post ever.
3. Re: Defective By Design - Lazy Devs by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 04:49 · Score: 0
  
  Everything you said is right BUT the issue in Android 8 is it will use mobile data even when WiFi is available and fine.
  I reset my data counter and turned the setting back on. I was home all day and about 15 feet from my router and had full signal the entire time but the phone still managed to use 17.78 MB of mobile data. Not alot mind you but I only left the setting on for about 12 hours.
  Besides with the setting off the handover takes about 3 seconds so who cares. Instant is good but a couple seconds isn't really something you will notice
4. Re: Defective By Design - Lazy Devs by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 05:33 · Score: 0
  
  Everything you said is right BUT the issue in Android 8 is it will use mobile data even when WiFi is available and fine.
  I'm not saying that's not the case. My point was that the "cellular data always active" setting being on is not the problem, as the OP seemed to imply. You should be able to have that setting on and not use cellular data as long as you have wifi. I'm not saying there's no problem.
  Besides with the setting off the handover takes about 3 seconds so who cares. Instant is good but a couple seconds isn't really something you will notice
  Depends on your expectations and usage I guess. With that setting on, I can walk out of the building listening to a TuneIn radio stream, and it doesn't drop out at all (there must be some time while it reconnects, but I guess the buffer is enough to cover it). With that setting off, playback drops out, and I have to pull my phone out of my pocket to restart it. So yeah, it's something I notice.
DACA by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-06 23:10 · Score: -1

DACA.....is CACA
Do be Evil by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-06 23:14 · Score: -1

Atleast thats what one would think when this feautre is combined with the ability to not be able to downgrade, wich it is.
1. Re: Do be Evil by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-06 23:23 · Score: 0
  
  It's convenient that Google just happens to have it's open cell phone service that charges per megabyte, too.
2. Re: Do be Evil by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-06 23:23 · Score: 0
  
  I can't quite believe I am defending Google here, but...
  The "can't downgrade" meme is largely a lie.
  It's "if I lock my boot loader , then I can't downgrade" which is pretty much what any organization locking a boot loader wants.
  Want custom ROMs ? No issue - just don't throw that switch.
3. Re: Do be Evil by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 05:52 · Score: 0
  
  What makes you think the bootloaders won't be locked by default ?
Possible workaround missing from the summary,natch by shabble · 2017-09-06 23:18 · Score: 5, Informative

some have suggested that the Mobile Data Always Active option is to blame. You can access this setting by enabling Developer Options and flicking the toggle to the disabled position. In previous versions of Android, the Mobile Data Always Active option was disabled by default, but is enabled now in Oreo.

--
http://harridanic.com
What a fragmented mess by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-06 23:35 · Score: -1

So even if Google works up a patch, how long before it get's through the vetting process from phone makers and cellular providers? This could be weeks, if not months. Another example of how the Android system of updates is broken and should have been improved a long time ago. I've come to the conclusion a while ago that Google does everything half ass and leaves it that way a long time. Or it just abandon's it on a whim, and leaves everyone hanging. I have owned three Android devices and every one of them turned out to be a curse for me.
1. Re:What a fragmented mess by richy+freeway · 2017-09-06 23:53 · Score: 1
  
  Seeing as how the only devices currently running Oreo are Google's own, I'd imagine they'll be getting the patches fairly swiftly.
2. Re:What a fragmented mess by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-06 23:59 · Score: 1
  
  Firstly Android 8 is only just out, I just got the OTA on my Pixel yesterday, so very few people have it. So not really an issue as far as fragmentation goes. I'm not sure any non-Google phones have shipped with it yet.
  Secondly you haven't been paying attention to the Android 8 changes. The Google stuff, the SoC vendor stuff, and the OEM stuff are now cleanly separated (diagram), so Google updates can be applied without affecting the OEM stuff; there is no need any more for OEMs to spend resources customising and testing updates for their devices. So that situation should be much improved even once there are devices shipping with Oreo.
  Thirdly, Android is free, and OEMs are free to put it on good phones, on mediocre phones, and on shitty phones. It's up to you to choose a decent phone. Don't blame Android for your bad choices.
Re:Possible workaround missing from the summary,na by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-06 23:39 · Score: 0

Apple had something called Wi Fi assist which was supposed to keep you connected to Wi Fi and use cellular only when needed. But it also lacked the proper sensitivity for detecting Wi Fi so it was connecting to cellular when it should not. As a iPhone user I just ended up never using it and turning it off.
At least with iPhone you have to do less digging through crap to find the setting. Maybe someone can do a app that will help with this issue?
Re: Gaaaaayyyy... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-06 23:53 · Score: -1

Nobody cares. This site sux bawlz.
unlimited by thereitis · 2017-09-06 23:59 · Score: 1

"...it could prove expensive for anyone not using an unlimited data plan"
Unlimited never seems to mean what you think it means.
1. Re:unlimited by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 01:50 · Score: 0
  
  Well, he wasn't wrong. Usually unlimited means "we won't put a limit on you where we charge you extra if you go over". Instead, they slow you down. Those that are not "unlimited" charge you extra.
  So, lets reword it to "...it could prove expensive for anyone not using an unlimited data plan, and slow for those who are"
No worries, by david.g.holt · 2017-09-07 00:16 · Score: 0

Where do we send the bill?
1. Re:No worries, by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 01:07 · Score: 1
  
  To bill slashdot for wasting you time with clickbait...
  SourceForge Media, LLC dba Slashdot Media
  PO Box 2452
  La Jolla, CA 92038
  General Inquiries: +1-858-454-5900 x 20501
  Investor Relations: +1-858-454-5900 x 20501
  Media Relations: +1-858-454-5900 x 10804 (pr@slashdotmedia.com)
  Sales & Marketing: +1-858-454-5900 x 20501
Why is this a surprise? Or News? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 00:42 · Score: 0

Since Android 5; Google apps has continuously kept the cell network alive; even when wifi was available.
Oreo by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 00:56 · Score: 0

Oreo is just a crappy american version of a round bourbon biscuit.

Mod me informative
OMG we are doomed! by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 01:07 · Score: 0

Oh wait, Oreo represents less than 0.1% of the Android ecosystem.
The world is safe. What's the point of this article?
Overheard at Android and Apple Headquarters by boudie2 · 2017-09-07 01:21 · Score: 0

I can't believe how stupid these people are. We got a license to print money!
Re: Possible workaround missing from the summary,n by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 01:43 · Score: 1

When you only have 5 options the user can change, it's pretty easy to have them readily accessible.
How much data? by cmseagle · 2017-09-07 01:47 · Score: 3, Interesting

The article and the Reddit thread both talk about a "huge spike" in data usage without including any hard figures. What are we talking about here? 100 MB per day? A gigabyte?
1. Re:How much data? by johannesg · 2017-09-07 02:12 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  The article and the Reddit thread both talk about a "huge spike" in data usage without including any hard figures. What are we talking about here? 100 MB per day? A gigabyte?
  It's roughly two football fields worth of data, I believe.
2. Re:How much data? by swillden · 2017-09-07 03:00 · Score: 2
  
  The article and the Reddit thread both talk about a "huge spike" in data usage without including any hard figures. What are we talking about here? 100 MB per day? A gigabyte?
  Dunno. I've been running Oreo on and off for about six months now, though, and noticed no data usage while at home. So at least for my usage patterns it's clearly not large. Maybe some apps are worse than others? Or maybe it depends on your home Wifi. I could see that flaky Wifi combined with "mobile data always on" could cause the phone to fall back to using mobile data if the Wifi seems bad. It would do that with mobile data off, too, but it would take longer to make the switch, which might give the Wifi time to start working so you wouldn't end up using mobile data -- just have bad network performance.
  
  --
  Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
3. Re:How much data? by chisquare · 2017-09-07 04:35 · Score: 1
  
  Exactly correct, or enough data to fill two Olympic-sized swimming pools. If stored on stacked floppy disks, it would reach the moon!
4. Re:How much data? by Hadlock · 2017-09-07 05:58 · Score: 1
  
  I've been experiencing a similar issue in the last week since i applied a security patch with my Pixel using Project Fi (I'm still on Android N), when on wifi at home it will switch to mobile data and stay that way, I've been turning off mobile data at home and it's fixed it for me. Seems to cost me about 20-100mb/day of data otherwise. I got the option to upgrade to O, but... yeah fuck that, I was waiting for the other shoe to drop. Going to wait another two weeks probably and let them sort this shit out, someone else can be their guinea pig.
  
  --
  moox. for a new generation.
What's the big deal? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 01:54 · Score: 0

Just roll it back and wait for them to fix it! Oh, wait. Shit.
Not Just in Oreo by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 02:09 · Score: 0

In Nougat, an app that has established connections via Wifi will be allowed to continue those connections on cellular, even if cellular permissions are denied to the app.
I had my paltry 1GB plan eaten up in a day by Spotify because it was running on wifi at home and when I left for my 500 mile road trip, Android allowed it to continue streaming on Cellular even though I had cellular network permissions for Spotify disabled.
1. Re:Not Just in Oreo by DontBeAMoran · 2017-09-07 02:14 · Score: 1
  
  And it didn't occur to you that something was wrong when streaming was still working after you left your house? Or did you think your wi-fi router had a 500 miles range?
  
  --
  #DeleteFacebook
2. Re:Not Just in Oreo by jittles · 2017-09-07 02:33 · Score: 1
  
  And it didn't occur to you that something was wrong when streaming was still working after you left your house? Or did you think your wi-fi router had a 500 miles range?
  I don't use spotify but I believe the subscription service for it allows you to save music locally to listen without streaming. It's quite possible that the GP thought it was using local media instead of streaming.
3. Re:Not Just in Oreo by Custard+Horse · 2017-09-07 03:03 · Score: 1
  
  It seems unlikely. A 500 mile trip has got to take at least 10 hours. Unless the GP was listening to the same few tracks thinking they had cached - also unlikely.
  I prefer the obvious (in the true spirit of Occam's razor) - the GP has a circular road around his home and he drove 500 miles on that road thinking that the wifi would continue to function.
  The newly installed router fell over and died as soon as he got into his car. From this I deduce that the router was made by Belkin. That's why they call me Sherlock, Holmes.
4. Re:Not Just in Oreo by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 05:12 · Score: 0
  
  What had happened was that, at the end of my playlist, it spilled over into the "suggested additions" and I was already so zoned out by then I didn't notice, until the music did ultimately stop when my carrier turned off my data.
5. Re:Not Just in Oreo by Hognoxious · 2017-09-07 06:52 · Score: 1
  
  You get a different sound when it's saved locally. Not as warm.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Android Oreo bug eats up mobile data on Wi-Fi by DontBeAMoran · 2017-09-07 02:13 · Score: 3, Funny

I've heard that dipping your smartphone in milk fixes the problem.

--
#DeleteFacebook
1. Re:Android Oreo bug eats up mobile data on Wi-Fi by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 03:17 · Score: 0
  
  Pfft, that's your proposed solution to every problem.
2. Re: Android Oreo bug eats up mobile data on Wi-Fi by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 03:56 · Score: 0
  
  Works for Oreo and Marshmallow. Get a bit of a funky flavor with Lollipop and simply don't work with KitKat.
3. Re:Android Oreo bug eats up mobile data on Wi-Fi by thegarbz · 2017-09-07 04:29 · Score: 1
  
  Only for the models without removable batteries. To fix this problem you need to hard reset it with the following procedure:
  1. Remove back cover from phone.
  2. Remove battery with teeth.
  3. Eat battery.
  4. Reassemble phone.
  5. Dip reassembled phone in milk.
  5 - evil edition : Put phone back in packet and give to sister.
Not Released Yet by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 02:20 · Score: 0

Since no one actually got an OTA of Oreo, this is entirely irrelevant. The only people using Oreo are beta testers who installed it themselves.
This is a non-story and the submitter is one of a couple users who spam for betanews
1. Re: Not Released Yet by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 06:30 · Score: 0
  
  My Google Pixel did. Not sure what else did.
Just roll back to the previous version. by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 02:40 · Score: 0

Oh, wait, that's right, they just disabled the ability to do that!
So, like iOS' WiFi Assist then by williamyf · 2017-09-07 03:07 · Score: 1

Right?

--
*** Suerte a todos y Feliz dia!
1. Re:So, like iOS' WiFi Assist then by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 07:09 · Score: 0
  
  iOS WiFi asist won't eat all your data because you can control which applications are allowed to use mobile data. Everything is also metered so if it does happen you can see exactly how much data was used due-to weak WiFi signal.
  I don't know if that's the case on Google's phone OS.
  That and iOS calls the option what it is while Google calls it "mobile data always active". Wtf does that even mean?
2. Re:So, like iOS' WiFi Assist then by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 07:12 · Score: 0
  
  That and apparently the option is burried in developer options menu.
First locking out 'rollback of updates', now this. by Noishkel · 2017-09-07 04:45 · Score: 1

I'm just a cynical bastard as my comment history will say. But damn it... I'd just as soon not be confirmed in my own biases every damn time Google rolls out a really shitty feature.
But at the end of the day Google; why is it that you are so damn obsessed with central control of the environment when you can't even get half of your new features to work right to begin with? You're supposed to be in the business of providing consumer devices to people that they want to buy the best things you can make, not frustrate them with broken products and services.
Heh, not that I, now should ANYONE, have any illusions that Google isn't in the business of selling your constantly leaking stream of marketable data to the highest bidder and any security service that want's it. But you're at last supposed to try to make the basic hardware work first.
Re:Possible workaround missing from the summary,na by Darinbob · 2017-09-07 06:26 · Score: 1

I have an app that lets me quickly turn off mobile data. Well actually, it lets me turn it on, as I have a minimal data plan so I leave it off almost all the time, unless I need to quickly send an email when I'm away from home or work.
When I first go tthe phone this was difficult as there was no quick enable/disable of mobile data like my older phone had, requiring going through several levels of settings to get to it. My guess at the time was that the service providers want you to suck up their bandwidth for extra profit.
Blame Lorenzo Colitti by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-07 07:13 · Score: 0

https://android.googlesource.com/platform/frameworks/base.git/+/5d6bf6d2b1361d0f8220e39c622295e005aad11d
He just felt like enabling it on by default.
Carriers should assume responsibility by misnohmer · 2017-09-07 10:04 · Score: 1

Carriers in the US sell you the phones. Some require that you use their device exclusively. If a carrier sells me a phone, and that phone has a bug that causes my data usage to go beyond what I am using, it's the carrier's problem, not mine. I they attempt to bill me for it knowing that the device they sold me is causing this phantom data usage, they are the ones committing fraud. I see a class action lawsuit coming against carriers who choose to bill for data usage caused purely by a defect in a product they sell.