Related
Verizon just announced to today that Droid X is gonna be getting froyo on the 22nd of September. This really suck!!!! I need some froyo...
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Here you go, now quit whining froyo
that looks so ****ing good.
Verizon is also a much larger company.
Yes, Moto/Verizon do a great job..
If they r not using CDMA, I will definitely use Verizon and choose Moto..
jayprime said:
Verizon just announced to today that Droid X is gonna be getting froyo on the 22nd of September. This really suck!!!! I need some froyo...
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you mean the Droid x that was released before the vibrant is getting it first... I'm shocked...?....
laristech said:
Verizon is also a much larger company.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is why t-mobile should tell manufacturers they only want vanilla android phones. They would get updates faster AND they wouldn't need to modify them before release. It would bee cheaper for them and it would make customers happy.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
dan0zone said:
you mean the Droid x that was released before the vibrant is getting it first... I'm shocked...?....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes! This is so not right
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Tpavey said:
This is why t-mobile should tell manufacturers they only want vanilla android phones. They would get updates faster AND they wouldn't need to modify them before release. It would bee cheaper for them and it would make customers happy.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's all fine and wonderful, but the Galaxy S wasn't Vanilla on any of the four major US carriers so that doesn't really matter here does it?
dan0zone said:
you mean the Droid x that was released before the vibrant is getting it first... I'm shocked...?....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If I remember correctly, the Droid X, Vibrant, and Captivate had release dates that were within a week or two from each other.
Either way, it's pretty sad news to hear the Spain division of Samsung is now claiming the Froyo release to happen around "late October." I wonder what's really going to happen when late October rolls around...."late November?"
http://www.engadget.com/2010/09/21/samsung-mobile-spain-pegs-galaxy-s-update-for-late-october/
Tpavey said:
This is why t-mobile should tell manufacturers they only want vanilla android phones. They would get updates faster AND they wouldn't need to modify them before release. It would bee cheaper for them and it would make customers happy.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It would hardly make customers happy. If T-Mobile were to deny every handset with a custom UI, they would have what, 2 Android phones? Maybe 3 since 2008?
T-Mobile has been ragged on in the past for being the carrier that never steps up to the plate to offer the latest and greatest phones. They are now starting to come out of that with all of these new Android phones and eventually later this year, Windows Phone 7. Why would they regress?
I think he is just trying to say that if T-Mobile insisted that devices be loaded with Vanilla Android than we could get updates faster, not to deny any of the handsets, just tell Samsung, "Hey, our Galaxy S phone needs to be Vanilla Android, Thanks"
So we would still get the killer phones, but with Vanilla Android rather than a custom Android that needs further development after Vanilla is released. (The Plausibility as to the phone manufacturers actually saying "Okay, no problem!" is debatable but I do believe that is what he is getting at.)
rjwisniewski said:
That's all fine and wonderful, but the Galaxy S wasn't Vanilla on any of the four major US carriers so that doesn't really matter here does it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, the Galaxy S OS has never been Vanila. It is modified and locked first by Samsung, then modified again at the behest of the US carriers.
It's basically a mess.
That's why it will take ages to update.
The whole Android open-source idea is being destroyed by both carriers and manufacturers, who modify it enough to be able to lock it and prevent software upgrades, so they can sell the next hardware version to the suckers.
MacGuy2006 said:
Actually, the Galaxy S OS has never been Vanila. It is modified and locked first by Samsung, then modified again at the behest of the US carriers.
It's basically a mess.
That's why it will take ages to update.
The whole Android open-source idea is being destroyed by both carriers and manufacturers, who modify it enough to be able to lock it and prevent software upgrades, so they can sell the next hardware version to the suckers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've been seeing this opinion more and more and it makes me sad to think that the beautiful (yet idealistic) concept of Android is being corrupted. The OS being fragmented between devices and manufacturers bogging down amazing hardware with unnecessary crap has the potential to seriously harm Android imo.
MacGuy2006 said:
Actually, the Galaxy S OS has never been Vanila. It is modified and locked first by Samsung, then modified again at the behest of the US carriers.
It's basically a mess.
That's why it will take ages to update.
The whole Android open-source idea is being destroyed by both carriers and manufacturers, who modify it enough to be able to lock it and prevent software upgrades, so they can sell the next hardware version to the suckers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In the traditional sense, you are correct. However, Samsung has taken a different approach in regards to their Android offerings. I would hazard to say that it isn't actually "locked" by Samsung, as you put it. Maybe a little by T-Mobile.
However, Samsung has made it clear that they are supporting the development community. The source code for each US variant is available as a free download on their website. Rooting the device was intentionally left open by Samsung (although T-Mobile might lock it via updates). The carrier unlock codes are blatantly available on the device if you know where to look, and there is even an app that will give it to you for free with no effort. They have opened up multiple channels for support (Twitter, Facebook, phone, website) for it's users and even respond to development questions. I've even seen a couple of reports of Samsung support helping people out who have bricked devices.
In a sense, Samsung has become the most open Android handset manufacturer. Doesn't sound to me that Samsung has gone to great lengths to "lock" the Galaxy S out of development, as you put it.
I've read it a few times before about Froyo for the Vibrant not coming until the G2 is released, which isn't too far away. But then "rumor"(i know, rumors aren't always true), Samsung will release a Galaxy Slider phone and skip 2.2 for the Vibrant and push everyone to G2 or the new Galaxy phone.. I hope this isn't the case.
I think tmobile will release froyo after they see how the g2 does on the market... Because the vibrant is a beast without it, so just imagine what it will be like with it. The g2 might not do that great with vibrant running froyo... Imo
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
monsta34 said:
I think tmobile will release froyo after they see how the g2 does on the market... Because the vibrant is a beast without it, so just imagine what it will be like with it. The g2 might not do that great with vibrant running froyo... Imo
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Two very different phones. G2 is going to be the next dev phone. Vanilla android. It will get the updates first. It will likely run MUCH faster than it's specs would indicate (see G1) because it will be optimized. Also, it has a keyboard.
Vibrant has a Samsung SAMOLED display and, currently, the fasted GPU out.
There may be fewer people who jump to the G2 from a Vibrant if it got Froyo now, but I cannot imagine it would impact those who don't have a Vibrant now. The majority of users really couldn't tell the difference, and many T-mobile sales reps in the stores wouldn't be able to inform them. The 1% of the Android community that comes here doesn't mean anything to T-mobile especially since these are likely the same people who optimize their bills to pay the least amount possible.
monsta34 said:
I think tmobile will release froyo after they see how the g2 does on the market... Because the vibrant is a beast without it, so just imagine what it will be like with it. The g2 might not do that great with vibrant running froyo... Imo
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I doubt it, I don't even think Tmobile know that difference between Eclair and Froyo, they will just be confused as to why we are talking about deserts..
MacGuy2006 said:
The whole Android open-source idea is being destroyed by both carriers and manufacturers, who modify it enough to be able to lock it and prevent software upgrades, so they can sell the next hardware version to the suckers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I thought I read that Google was removing the ability (or restricting?) to customize Gingerbread when they release it, basically unifying the device platform across the board so if you had 3.0 or greater, it was all the same vanilla android without custom carrier and/or device modifications. If that is the case, than obviously even Google has seen the butchery of their original concept and are looking to rectify it. (End User's would still be able to mod the hell out of it I'm sure, but they wouldn't allow device Manufacturers and carriers to modify the OS right from the get go).
I could be wrong, I have read a lot of stuff lately lol...
So samsung posted something on their facebook page about what do you dream for. A lot of people have been using this as a platform to let samsung know their disappointment with the whole F word thing. I think its a good idea and maybe if a massive number of people comment we could have some impact..
heres a link
http://www.facebook.com/SamsungGalaxyS
At this point, Samsung is most likely removed from the equation. The update will come from VZW, not Samsung
Kevin Gossett said:
At this point, Samsung is most likely removed from the equation. The update will come from VZW, not Samsung
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where do you think VZW is getting it from?
I understand that, but VZW already (read: should) has what they need from Samsung. So it's on VZW now.
still in samsungs hands... VZW just says Yey or Ney.. on the software... Samsung does all the programing...
So here's how the process works.
The guys who built the phone program the phones.
Verizon just sells and ensures that the customers get the optimum experience on their phones.
Now if we take this bit of knowledge and combine them, then you will realize that Samsung is responsible for compiling the software then passing it unto Verizon when they have a release candidate. If that passes Verizon's scrutiny, then it becomes released unto us.
DJ05 is an example of what's not supposed to happen because Verizon likes to ensure it's customer support...
Anyways, I hope this was informative.
RacerXFD said:
So here's how the process works.
The guys who built the phone program the phones.
Verizon just sells and ensures that the customers get the optimum experience on their phones.
Now if we take this bit of knowledge and combine them, then you will realize that Samsung is responsible for compiling the software then passing it unto Verizon when they have a release candidate. If that passes Verizon's scrutiny, then it becomes released unto us.
DJ05 is an example of what's not supposed to happen because Verizon likes to ensure it's customer support...
Anyways, I hope this was informative.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you! I'm learning this stuff little by little... So the real wait is samsungs fault, cause everything they are sending verizon sucks?! Well good :/
I have to respectfully disagree with you, RacerXFD.
It's entirely possible (even likely) Verizon is holding the whole thing up to ensure perfect compatibility with all the VZ services. Even if Samsung is the one having to do the coding work, all the extra work being neccessary in the first place is probably due to Verizon bloatware. The integration between Google's Froyo update and Samsung's specific hardware drivers is unlikely to have taken Samsung any longer for the Fascinate than any of the other Galaxy S phones. But then Verizon insists on the inclusion of Carrier specific crap before they will let Samsung say all done. So Verizon's fault.
Even if Verizon is taking forever to bloat up the Fascinate with their apps, it's still Samsung's fault for delaying the release almost every month. They only just got it to them this month, I'm pretty sure.
The real truth is that we simply don't know exactly who's to blame for the delay.
Could it be all Samsung? Possibly -- the upgrade's been delayed for a lot of the other Galaxy S handsets on other carriers too, which is telling, and Samsung has a terrible history of (not) delivering software updates.
Could it be all Verizon? Also possible -- it's rumored they're borderline overzealous when it comes to updates, and also rumored that they were the reason the Droid 1 took forever to get Froyo.
Or, is it more likely a bit of both? I'd bet it is, just like how Samsung made the dumb decision to weigh down the phones with RFS, while Verizon chose to force Bing on us. Neither party has what I'd call a great track record here.
But, even that is just speculating at this point.
If its Verizon's fault we don't have froyo then why don't any of the other US carriers with Galaxy S phones have froyo? I think there are problems Samsung is still working on. My guess is they want people to buy the Nexus S and have been working in that phone instead if ours.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk
Samsung develops, and tests the update on their end.
They send it over to VZW for network/qa testing.
VZW tests (they have a few "levels" of testing, lab tests, and real world), and if they run into any issues, they send it back to Samsung.
Wash, rinse, repeat.
If you want to place blame for the delay, it's on both of their shoulders. VZW is slow in testing, and Samsung obviously is slow in development.
Well, I really think the same issue that plagues our Devs from porting 2.2/2.3 to our phones is the same reason that Samsung/VZW will not release 2.2...
Just a thought.
All these Froyo related threads always end up the same way.
dricacho said:
All these Froyo related threads are a waste of bandwidth and clutter to the forum and should be deleted
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Fixed for you.
Dunno if you guys have seen this. I didn't notice because I usually only hang around here but it just got posted to reddit so I saw it.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=913045
If true, it would definitely explain a lot of things. It does make me dislike Samsung, but hopefully the carriers can strong-arm Samsung into doing what everyone else is doing.
Personally, I bought this phone because it was either this or the Droid X, and the difference was that while the DX might have Froyo now, the odds of Motorola putting Gingerbread on it are less than 100%, and the odds of it getting anything after that are even lower, and with the locked bootloader you can't do anything about it. With the Fascinate, at least we can look forward to community built ROMs for some time into the future, definitely past what Samsung is willing to do (I figure they're never going to even consider putting Gingerbread on the Fascinate what with the LTE phones coming out soon, and SAMOLED+ and all that). People should probably avoid Samsung unless they specifically want the nice hardware and easy hacking, in which case it seems like Samsung is the most lax with security so they're the best choice for hacking.
Hmm, very enlightening, of it's true of course. Sounds entirely plausible though. Oh well, I really don't care anymore, not with kaos and friends on the job.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
This is what we all expected.
But the question is... Why was it released with Eclair when Froyo was released before this phone was released.
wasn't the reason it was released with eclair because of the 1.6 ril or whatever? from what i read, the ril would barely work with eclair and no way for it to work with froyo.
my understanding is that a large part of the magic that kaos is doing was to build a functional ril.
They arent building a new ril. They are hacking android around the current crap ril Samsung gave us.
Don't buy it.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
upsidedownaaron said:
wasn't the reason it was released with eclair because of the 1.6 ril or whatever? from what i read, the ril would barely work with eclair and no way for it to work with froyo.
my understanding is that a large part of the magic that kaos is doing was to build a functional ril.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's what jt's been doing, and he ended up just hacking the current Samsung RIL to work. And if you follow his twitter, he said that the RIL from Eclair, Froyo, and Gingerbread on the Android side didn't change much which is why they're jumping straight to Gingerbread instead of wasting time with Eclair.
upsidedownaaron said:
wasn't the reason it was released with eclair because of the 1.6 ril or whatever? from what i read, the ril would barely work with eclair and no way for it to work with froyo.
my understanding is that a large part of the magic that kaos is doing was to build a functional ril.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Um, wow, what have you been reading? First off, our phone came with 2.1, not 1.6, so I'm not sure where you got that number from.
Secondly, the reason that we (not Samsung) could not build a ROM not based on the stock OEM ROM was because the source code for the RIL that Samsung provided for the Fascinate was bad code, which made it extremely difficult to create a working RIL what will work with a custom OS. However, jt1134 and punk.kaos were able to reverse engineer the bad code into working code, in order to proceed with ROM building.
This has nothing to do with Samsung themselves though. Samsung built the RIL to begin with, so they most certainly can (and have) created RIL code that works with Froyo, quite a long time ago in fact. They released the Galaxy S line with Eclair because that was likely the newest version available when they began developing the OS for those phones. In order to convert the OS to Froyo to launch it on the phone, they would have had to significantly delay the launch, which was not an option. This is likely why so many phones are released with outdated versions of Android. And I would like to point out that if they just put Google's code on there and didn't insist in polluting it with their own proprietary junk, it wouldn't take so long to release in the first place, and wouldn't be so difficult to upgrade later.
Getting back on topic, I figured that the problem with getting these updates really all comes down to money. People have always had to pay for OS upgrades for PCs, but due to Android and iOS, have now come to expect to receive these updates for free. The problem is, somebody has to develop an upgrade process, and test the heck out of it, and those developers have to get paid. So the OEM pays them, and then naturally tries to pass the cost along to the carrier, because they don't want to work for free. The carrier also doesn't want to pay for the upgrade, but also knows they can't get away with charging their customers for it without significant backlash, so they basically just sit there and hope the problem eventually goes away, or that the OEM will finally back down and release the update for free, which is what's been described as our current situation.
If this is really such a big problem, they could be taking steps to not end up in this situation, such as figuring the cost of these upgrades into the price of the phones and/or rate plans. However, the carriers also have added incentive to not push for the upgrades, because that effectively extends the life of the handset, and they want you to keep buying new hardware all the time, since they make money from selling hardware, and lose money on the free upgrades.
In the end, it's all about money. Thankfully we have such a great community of developers here on XDA that are willing to go the extra mile to not only get us our upgrades, but also add cool features and boost the performance way beyond what the manufacturer gave us. Thanks to that, our hardware's lifetime is determined not by when a carrier or OEM pulls support, but rather by when the devices physically die or break, or the hardware becomes too outdated for the tasks we wish to perform. And this way, through donations, we can pay our developers for good upgrades, not our carrier for crappy, bloated ones.
Im not saying its true but the most legitimate explanation for all this bull**** I have actually heard in a while. So for what its worth Im not going to shoot that down. Possibly true at this point.
Sent from my fascination station using XDA App
ivorycruncher said:
Um, wow, what have you been reading? First off, our phone came with 2.1, not 1.6, so I'm not sure where you got that number from.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mrbirdman said it himself, actually. (1.5, but close enough).
http://twitter.com/#!/_mrbirdman_/status/3002051533479936
Anyway, I don't know whether to believe this but it explains why no US carriers have Froyo yet. It's kind of frustrating that Verizon is the only carrier that hasn't even had a leaked Froyo build it seems. Damn ingrates spoiling leaks for the rest of us.
Ah, I see. Thanks for the link. I admit that tweet came before I followed him on twitter, so I hadn't seen that. I can see how that would complicate matters though.
This is the last farkin' time I ever buy a Samsung phone. Shame on me for believing their lies when they said they'd support it.
If that user is really violating an NDA, he's already fired, and the XDA admins would be hearing from lawyers demanding they remove the thread.
Sounds like it's just more trumped up bull**** designed to stir up the masses. Who knows really, but all I know is I wasn't stupid enough to purchase a phone based on future "promises."
Jake_Mongoose said:
This is the last farkin' time I ever buy a Samsung phone. Shame on me for believing their lies when they said they'd support it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You might wanna rethink that. Why, you ask? Because Samsung puts out some of the best hardware available, especially the screens, and we always have devs that can hack up the code to make it better than it ever would have been with a stock ROM. HTC isn't too bad, though the issue with rooting the G2 is certainly raising some eyebrows, but if you were thinking about Motorola, have fun with your locked bootloader and other fun tricks that attempt to squash community development. Aside from lousy source code, Samsung phones are the easiest to root and customize due to the unlocked bootloader. You can basically just flash anything you want with ODIN, no problem.
It is not necessarily the case in the future because Tab reportedly has locked boot loader. This said people already found workaround, but who knows?..
That is true. Nobody knows what the future holds. In any case, if you have no problem loading custom software from XDA devs on your phone, then OEM software support should not even be on the list of requirements when buying a phone. I now make my phone purchasing decisions purely based on hardware specs and quality. If it's a quality piece of hardware with the features I want, on my carrier of choice (Verizon), I will buy it, regardless of manufacturer or UI. Warranties and insurance work the same no matter who makes it, and software updates come from XDA, so nothing else really matters. But then again, that's just my opinion.
ivorycruncher said:
That is true. Nobody knows what the future holds. In any case, if you have no problem loading custom software from XDA devs on your phone, then OEM software support should not even be on the list of requirements when buying a phone. I now make my phone purchasing decisions purely based on hardware specs and quality. If it's a quality piece of hardware with the features I want, on my carrier of choice (Verizon), I will buy it, regardless of manufacturer or UI. Warranties and insurance work the same no matter who makes it, and software updates come from XDA, so nothing else really matters. But then again, that's just my opinion.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup, this is how I've decided to make phone decisions from now on as well. As long as the phone's software can be replaced by XDA, I don't care too much about the manufacturer's updates.
J Shed said:
If that user is really violating an NDA, he's already fired, and the XDA admins would be hearing from lawyers demanding they remove the thread.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is easier to hide posting on a forum than it is sending a tip into an online news outlet, at least in general. Also, by posting it in a forum, it is entirely likely that it will be up for longer than it would be if posted at say, Engadget, because it takes longer for news to show up in major outlets if posted in a forum first as opposed to a news site. If it were posted at Engadget or another tech blog, they are likely watched over very closely for potential NDA breaches, etc. I doubt Samsung looks are random forums/subforums/threads nearly as close.
IF it were $$ couldn't we as users pay like $20 for Froyo...
x 3 million phones = more than enough to pay for DEV
I don't buy it.
Why?
Because these companies work off of contracts. Verizon would know exactly what they were getting into before signing. If Samsung decides to breach said contract, fine, let Verizon sue the hell out of them. Lastly, Verizon would not have sold or marketed docks that rely on 2.2, if they had no intention of releasing it.
Actually one more thing. If US Carriers were refusing, Samsung would halt development. We are seeing new leaks for the other US models all the time, and Verizon is still being worked on (but not leaked).
This is a case of where 2+2=5=false.
As above really, I have the galaxy S "HAD" the Desire and Nexus (both died) and the one thing they all have in common are great support and quick updates.
But the Tab has been ignored, there is already a beta leak of Gingerbread on the S it's rubbish but it's there.
Does anyone else thing that the Tab was a pet project for Samsung a new Hobby they are bored with? Correct me if im wrong but we are still on 2.2 not even 2.2.1
Thanks Samsung for all the hard work and dedication to bring the latest and greatest to the fine people who purchased your "flagship" product it's nice to know we can put as much faith in you as you have with us.
Fine we probably wont get Honeycomb I can accept that but Gingerbread?
Ground Control to Major Samsung we are all still here copy?
It's a shame. But I think I can try to understand why.
Companies like Samsung are essentially hardware companies. They try to dedicate some resources to software development, but they are always limited resources.
To support something with upgrades needs great dedication. Samsung might have decided to pour those limited resources into the next Tab. In Samsung's mind, the current Tab and its Froyo can stand on their own. The newer Tabs will have the latest Android as their selling feature.
However unfortunate this is to me as a Tab owner.
So, what can we takeaway from our experience?
When you buy something make sure it does what you need it to. Do not believe in the potential for future upgrades to give you features you need.
Also, I am baffled by this group mania (not just here but by the whole tech community) for the latest release. I have upgraded to Gingerbread on my phone and while it has some nice add-on features, it has not changed the experience of using the phone significantly. While I would like Honeycomb on my tab I know that if I got it I would use the tab in the same way I do now.
utrx said:
It's a shame. But I think I can try to understand why.
Companies like Samsung are essentially hardware companies. They try to dedicate some resources to software development, but they are always limited resources.
To support something with upgrades needs great dedication. Samsung might have decided to pour those limited resources into the next Tab. In Samsung's mind, the current Tab and its Froyo can stand on their own. The newer Tabs will have the latest Android as their selling feature.
However unfortunate this is to me as a Tab owner.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While I agree with you that is still no excuse. If a company releases a product they have to have the resources and skill to back it up.
So far.....Samsung makes excellent products...BUT refuses to help ppl who need help or updates.
For shame Samsung....for SHAME.
00r101 said:
So, what can we takeaway from our experience?
When you buy something make sure it does what you need it to. Do not believe in the potential for future upgrades to give you features you need.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Point one: don't buy Samsung for Tabs
Point two: I based my decision on the ongoing support for current devices and expected that same level of care on this device, this is based on my experience of Samsung devices and the usual amount of product support they give.
If Samsung sold the product and openly stated "please be aware when you buy this there will be no updates or support" How many people would purchase it?
waz000000 said:
Point one: don't buy Samsung for Tabs
Point two: I based my decision on the ongoing support for current devices and expected that same level of care on this device, this is based on my experience of Samsung devices and the usual amount of product support they give.
If Samsung sold the product and openly stated "please be aware when you buy this there will be no updates or support" How many people would purchase it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For point no.2, they only update if the software has bug on it....not for adding new features as this will only make them loses (better to offer new product)
I just saw a new Tab released here in South Korea. It is a Wi~Fi only version. Not sure what the software version is. It is so new that only the Samdung store has it for a few weeks.
I think there might be some updates soon as thry will want to keep this new product up to date for awhile.
They are promoting it as no 3G, Free Wi~Fi. Lately anothrr company has started selling Wi~Fi only phones here for kids so there is no per minutes charge.
Also South Korea has some stringent customer service laws for after service. I yhink you will see updates coming as soon as they are available. The new 8 inch Tabs wiil be basicly the same as whst we have, so it will have updates that will probably apply to us to.
But what I have seen of Honeycomb makes me think I do not wsnt it on my Tab. It appears to be landscape oriented, and I do not want landscape on my Tab. It works better for me in portrait. Hold better and apps fit better. I rarely use the landscape mode, and if I need that then I use a traditional laptop or desktop.
Look for updates soon. Just my humble opinion.
Sent from my SHW-M180S using XDA App
samspunker said:
I just saw a new Tab released here in South Korea. It is a Wi~Fi only version. Not sure what the software version is. It is so new that only the Samdung store has it for a few weeks.
I think there might be some updates soon as thry will want to keep this new product up to date for awhile.
They are promoting it as no 3G, Free Wi~Fi. Lately anothrr company has started selling Wi~Fi only phones here for kids so there is no per minutes charge.
Also South Korea has some stringent customer service laws for after service. I yhink you will see updates coming as soon as they are available. The new 8 inch Tabs wiil be basicly the same as whst we have, so it will have updates that will probably apply to us to.
But what I have seen of Honeycomb makes me think I do not wsnt it on my Tab. It appears to be landscape oriented, and I do not want landscape on my Tab. It works better for me in portrait. Hold better and apps fit better. I rarely use the landscape mode, and if I need that then I use a traditional laptop or desktop.
Look for updates soon. Just my humble opinion.
Sent from my SHW-M180S using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well lets hope for this... but sorry im quite pessimistic
BasicCX said:
For point no.2, they only update if the software has bug on it....not for adding new features as this will only make them loses (better to offer new product)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No they don't, they are adding support for Gingerbread on the I9000 as we speak im using a custom Gingerbread rom now from the leaked beta.
That phone started on 2.1, 2.2, 2.2.1, 2.3.2
And supporting the phone didn't make them loses in fact it's the reason i bought the tab.
But a debate on this is what I want make your opinions count
Samsung have never had an amazing record of looking after their devices. I was well aware if that before I purchased my Tab and I'm sure a lot of other people did too. It didn't hinder me buying it though. I love my Tab. If it stays on FroYo, so be it. I'm not willing to sell it just to buy another tablet just because it has Gingerbread or Honeycomb. I'm more than happy with my Tab reguardless of the firmware its on.
Sent from my GT-P1000
[quote/] Also South Korea has some stringent customer service laws for after service. I yhink you will see updates coming as soon as they are available. The new 8 inch Tabs wiil be basicly the same as whst we have, so it will have updates that will probably apply to us to.
But what I have seen of Honeycomb makes me think I do not wsnt it on my Tab. It appears to be landscape oriented, and I do not want landscape on my Tab. It works better for me in portrait. Hold better and apps fit better. I rarely use the landscape mode, and if I need that then I use a traditional laptop or desktop.
Look for updates soon. Just my humble opinion.
Sent from my SHW-M180S using XDA App[/QUOTE]
Actually the 8.9" will most certainly be tegra2... And more similar to the 10.1 than the 7 inch tab.
Sent from my SGH-T849 using XDA Premium App
I used one for a fortnight in December and almost cried when I had to give it back.
I get my Tab tomorrow and I know what it can do out of the box (exactly the same as it could do 4 months ago). Sure you're always a little miffed when Google release a new app or an update that will only work on higher versions of Android than the one you have. But you need to understand what the device does before you order it. If it's not enough, don't buy it.
Slave1 said:
But you need to understand what the device does before you order it. If it's not enough, don't buy it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree, but I was blown away by t-mobile blocking by imei, and the block on the voice. That was not obvious up front, at least to me. I'm glad California has a 30
day return policy. Then I went directly to at&t with that cash.
Since you are talking about Samsung abandoning us, isn't Samsung obligated to release the source code for the device? As Android is Linux based and Linux requires posting of source code for any derived work. I ask this because I really don't care (much) if Samsung doesn't release 2.3 or 3.0 as long as the developer community has the capability to produce those upgrades. Since what I have seen so far scares me as it seems as though loading a custom ROM is fraught with danger, I would think that releasing the code would advance that process. Also, if they have limited development resources, then reach out to the developer community and give them the access that is needed develop custom ROMS. They will be way ahead of Apple if they do.
RE:
Up until about 2 weeks ago, I was an employee of Telus, and while my co-workers and I sat on our hands waiting for word of what tablets we were getting this year, Bell and Rogers were getting the Galaxy Tab.
Finally, around late January, early February our manager came to us with news from the grapevine on high stating that Telus would not be picking up the 1st gen Galaxy Tab because Samsung would not be supporting it with software updates.
This isn't exactly great news, but it is at least some semi-conclusive news from within the industry.
I look at it this way. If the tab gets an upgrade to Honeycomb from Samsung or through a port it will still be the same device. The tab operates just fine with Froyo.
Right now the tab has eliminated the necessity for me to carry a laptop and a phone. The tab has much more mobility than the laptop since it fits into a jacket pocket and has phone/and mobile internet capabilities on 3G and wifi.
What more could I possibly ask for from a highly mobile device?
While a more advanced OS like Honeycomb would make the tab a better device...the lack of Honeycomb doesn't degrade it or make it less functional.
ourtech said:
Since you are talking about Samsung abandoning us, isn't Samsung obligated to release the source code for the device? As Android is Linux based and Linux requires posting of source code for any derived work..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Popular Open Source misconception #1
1. All open source licenses are the same.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Linux kernel, which is part of the software distributed by Samsung, is released under the GPLv2 license, and this license requires that any derivative work must be accompanied by an offer to provide the source code (called a copy-left license) if the software is re-distributed.
Samsung have provided kernel source, so they are in the clear here.
Android itself is provided under the Apache Software License (ASL).This is a non-copy-left license, so if you wish you can take Android source, do pretty much whatever you wish with it, and you are under absolutely no obligation to release your modified source code.
Simplistic overview I know, but essentially correct.
Regards,
Dave
PhelanPKell said:
Finally, around late January, early February our manager came to us with news from the grapevine on high stating that Telus would not be picking up the 1st gen Galaxy Tab because Samsung would not be supporting it with software updates.
This isn't exactly great news, but it is at least some semi-conclusive news from within the industry.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I find this *extremely* hard to believe. The 1st gen Tab is clearly still relevant, and current, because Samsung are still going to ship a WiFi-only model in April.
We might not get Honeycomb, though I do wonder how Samsung will be able to ship a WiFi-only Tab with Android Market, given that it does not meet all of Google's criteria for "phone" Market access, though it would for Honeycomb as a tablet.
Regards,
Dave
waz000000 said:
... If Samsung sold the product and openly stated "please be aware when you buy this there will be no updates or support" How many people would purchase it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Remembers me end 2009 when HTC first announced that our HD2 would get the WM6.5 to WP7 update, and finally denied some monthes after.
Since then, as some say, we don't care because of the great developpers here hacking it... challenging for them, but isn't normal in my opinion.
For the Galaxy Tab, those who have paid the very high price as an high end device when it came out (1.000 USD in november here in france) buying it without provider, surely expect more concern from Samsung, updates and support on the existing system (still waiting at least for the "bending gsensor" fix).
About Honeycomb, why giving it to us as an update, if it will make some want to change their device in some monthes? Even if you don't care, it's still a selling point. Consumerism.
foxmeister said:
Popular Open Source misconception #1
The Linux kernel, which is part of the software distributed by Samsung, is released under the GPLv2 license, and this license requires that any derivative work must be accompanied by an offer to provide the source code (called a copy-left license) if the software is re-distributed.
Samsung have provided kernel source, so they are in the clear here.
Android itself is provided under the Apache Software License (ASL).This is a non-copy-left license, so if you wish you can take Android source, do pretty much whatever you wish with it, and you are under absolutely no obligation to release your modified source code.
Simplistic overview I know, but essentially correct.
Regards,
Dave
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am aware that not all licenses are the same. I was not aware that you could mix the licenses and that Android itself was licensed under the Apache license. Thanks for the clarification. Which is a shame in one sense because while I do understand the need to protect proprietary secrets, I do believe that enlisting the support of communities like this can only increase the popularity of their devices. Microsoft just realized this as they invited some from the "hacker" community to meet with them and offer them support (they gave them t-shirts). Samsung would benefit from helping this very community here. It is free development.
Things are starting to make sense, in a very bad sort of way.
**snip **
Google has also tried to hold up the release of Verizon (VZ) Android devices that make use of Microsoft's (MSFT) rival Bing search engine, according to two people familiar with the discussions.
**snip**
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/11_15/b4223041200216.htm
Scrappy1 said:
Things are starting to make sense, in a very bad sort of way.
**snip **
Google has also tried to hold up the release of Verizon (VZ) Android devices that make use of Microsoft's (MSFT) rival Bing search engine, according to two people familiar with the discussions.
**snip**
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/11_15/b4223041200216.htm
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Shouldn't have used bing in the first damn place.
If google really wants to stick it to the carriers, they should release the source code straight to developers at XDA and other sites so as to by pass carriers and reward the users who work to improve the OS for free. If the carriers don't want to play ball, leave them on the bench.
wideopn11 said:
If google really wants to stick it to the carriers, they should release the source code straight to developers at XDA and other sites so as to by pass carriers and reward the users who work to improve the OS for free. If the carriers don't want to play ball, leave them on the bench.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you do understand we need samsungs version of google's source code correct?
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
This would make sense and apply only to new phones under development. Why would they hold up a phone/software that is already on the market and as a result punish the consumer? Once again, dont read too deep into things.
This is totally wrong. FTA:
"Google has also tried to hold up the release of Verizon (VZ) Android devices that make use of Microsoft's (MSFT) rival Bing search engine, according to two people familiar with the discussions."
The keyword is "devices." Google can't do anything whatsoever about devices that are already released -- at least, ones running Froyo or Gingerbread since both have already been released through AOSP. Honeycomb, that's a different story, and they can try to hold up new device releases through license negotiations -- but Samsung does not need to work with or go through Google at all to update pre-3.0 devices.
To put it another way, Google has nothing whatsoever to do with an existing device's upgrade from 2.1 to 2.2 or 2.3.
Falcyn said:
This is totally wrong. FTA:
"Google has also tried to hold up the release of Verizon (VZ) Android devices that make use of Microsoft's (MSFT) rival Bing search engine, according to two people familiar with the discussions."
The keyword is "devices." Google can't do anything whatsoever about devices that are already released -- at least, ones running Froyo or Gingerbread since both have already been released through AOSP. Honeycomb, that's a different story, and they can try to hold up new device releases through license negotiations -- but Samsung does not need to work with or go through Google at all to update pre-3.0 devices.
To put it another way, Google has nothing whatsoever to do with an existing device's upgrade from 2.1 to 2.2 or 2.3.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wished Google would do something about existing devices, Bing and VZW are really F**king with my android experience and joy.
GREAT business practice - google owns the OS code and does the development - mfg are getting code for free
Android will be on 48% of smartphones by 2012
Why not police the UI?
Falcyn said:
This is totally wrong. FTA:
"Google has also tried to hold up the release of Verizon (VZ) Android devices that make use of Microsoft's (MSFT) rival Bing search engine, according to two people familiar with the discussions."
The keyword is "devices." Google can't do anything whatsoever about devices that are already released -- at least, ones running Froyo or Gingerbread since both have already been released through AOSP. Honeycomb, that's a different story, and they can try to hold up new device releases through license negotiations -- but Samsung does not need to work with or go through Google at all to update pre-3.0 devices.
To put it another way, Google has nothing whatsoever to do with an existing device's upgrade from 2.1 to 2.2 or 2.3.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The liscense ring that includes Google, Samsung, VZW, and Microsoft is complicated and spans multiple products. Don't be so certain you know the jockeying and agreements between them. Its evil no doubt. Please offer up a better explanation of why the fascinate update is lagging all others so drastically.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
dmasjz45 said:
you do understand we need samsungs version of google's source code correct?
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The point is to by pass carriers in an effort to convince them to stop mucking up code with unwanted bloat. With android taking hold of the market, who will carriers turn to if google refuses to give them code. Windows? No thanks. Apple is only interested in iphone. If cricket was the only carrier getting android and getting quick updates because they play nice with google, I think a lot of people would switch. A lot.
onemotodroid said:
GREAT business practice - google owns the OS code and does the development - mfg are getting code for free
Android will be on 48% of smartphones by 2012
Why not police the UI?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know how it is for native English speakers, but Bing voice search does not "speak" Engrish, Google voice search had no problem with it.
Scrappy1 said:
The liscense ring that includes Google, Samsung, VZW, and Microsoft is complicated and spans multiple products. Don't be so certain you know the jockeying and agreements between them. Its evil no doubt. Please offer up a better explanation of why the fascinate update is lagging all others so drastically.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because Verizon has extra "customization" on top of Samsung's "customization", and Verizon also has no motivation to make it a priority at all to release Froyo to us... why would they? They already have your money. The vast majority of users won't realize they're so far behind because they're not interested in such technical and political matters. The only people that will get upset are the tiny, tiny number of people on these forums... and I'd be surprised if the Fascinate was one of their top selling phones ("it's not a Droid!!!!"), so the Fascinate user base is likely fairly small compared to their other phones... and now they likely won't be selling it for much longer.
That makes far more sense than 'EVILOCITY!!!!!!!'. Sure, Verizon is still a jackass, but it's not a conspiracy to take over the world.
Scrappy1 said:
The liscense ring that includes Google, Samsung, VZW, and Microsoft is complicated and spans multiple products. Don't be so certain you know the jockeying and agreements between them. Its evil no doubt. Please offer up a better explanation of why the fascinate update is lagging all others so drastically.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The fascinate was the last SGS variant to get launched in the US for major carriers and was also the most bloated with VZW crap ware, logically it will be the last to get the update. No need to dream up conspiracy theories.
KitsuneKnight said:
Because Verizon has extra "customization" on top of Samsung's "customization", and Verizon also has no motivation to make it a priority at all to release Froyo to us... why would they? They already have your money. The vast majority of users won't realize they're so far behind because they're not interested in such technical and political matters. The only people that will get upset are the tiny, tiny number of people on these forums... and I'd be surprised if the Fascinate was one of their top selling phones ("it's not a Droid!!!!"), so the Fascinate user base is likely fairly small compared to their other phones... and now they likely won't be selling it for much longer.
That makes far more sense than 'EVILOCITY!!!!!!!'. Sure, Verizon is still a jackass, but it's not a conspiracy to take over the world.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Replacing Google search with Microsoft Bing on an android phone is so strange and wrong, its very possibly behind the problems getting froyo out. It's also the reason the fascinate wasn't a "Droid". So my original post still holds. Again, we're explaining why the verizon galaxy S is lagging all others.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
Scrappy1 said:
Replacing Google search with Microsoft Bing on an android phone is so strange and wrong, its very possibly behind the problems getting froyo out. It's also the reason the fascinate wasn't a "Droid". So my original post still holds. Again, we're explaining why the verizon galaxy S is lagging all others.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Droid is branding that VZW pays royalties to obtain; they had contractual agreements with Motorola to release phones with Droid branding around the same time. The lack of exclusivity of the Fascinate renders it a poor investment under the Droid brand and thus was pimped out to MS for extra change. Your assumption holds no ground.
FDro said:
Droid is branding that VZW pays royalties to obtain; they had contractual agreements with Motorola to release phones with Droid branding around the same time. The lack of exclusivity of the Fascinate renders it a poor investment under the Droid brand and thus was pimped out to MS for extra change. Your assumption holds no ground.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
VZW also has Droid contracts for HTC, so I'm missing the point you are making about Motorola.
Samsung galaxy S phones outside VZW were updated long ago: Samsung alone is not the issue
VZW phones like Droid X were updated long ago: VZW alone is not the issue.
Hmmm, what could be different about the fascinate then? What could it be? Well, could it be... BING!
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
Read the post over again, I addressed your questions.
From some of the rumors I have read the Fascinate is not part of the droid line because Samsung has been adamant about building their own brand, the Galaxy S line. If one of their phones is going to be a Droid branded it won't be one from the Galaxy S line. Also, who cares if it runs Bing search. Bing is a usable search engine, really people, quit hating. Google is more then likely going to have to go to court to be forced play ball and let other other search providers integration in Android (like Bing, or Yahoo, or whoever). The problem with the update is either Verizon wants something included or fixed and Samsung sucks at coding. I know my next Verizon phone won't be a Samung, it will probably be the Droid X2 (if it is indeed Tegra 2 dual core and 1gb of Ram, with a qhd screen). I like the SAMOLED screens but Samsung's software support of their product is truly pathetic for such a large company. Even if they haven't released the update via Verizon, where is the workable source code? Its just sad.
Scrappy1 said:
Replacing Google search with Microsoft Bing on an android phone is so strange and wrong, its very possibly behind the problems getting froyo out. It's also the reason the fascinate wasn't a "Droid". So my original post still holds. Again, we're explaining why the verizon galaxy S is lagging all others.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you're that upset about it, and so close minded that you think Bing is the sole reason that Froyo hasn't been released yet, go get a Droid phone.
imnuts said:
If you're that upset about it, and so close minded that you think Bing is the sole reason that Froyo hasn't been released yet, go get a Droid phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just getting the word out and fostering discussion. Pony up a superior theory or go home.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App