[Podcast] Let's talk about the U.S. Galaxy S Froyo update

[Phil Nickinson]

Some of you feel that we haven't given enough attention to the long overdue Froyo update for the U.S. versions of the Samsung Galaxy S (that'd be the T-Mobile Vibrant, Samsung Fascinate, Sprint Epic 4G and AT&T Captivate).

So let's talk about it on this week's podcast, and we're opening the floor.

Leave your comment or concern below, and we'll go through them and talk about the on this week's podcast. Maybe if we talk slow enough, the update will drop by the end of the thing.

 

[ChuckG73]

Thanks Phil for doing this I have a feeling it will not get us anywhere but at least the people who have the phone and feel that have not been heard will have a chance to vent. I myself love the Fasicinate's hardware and design. I got the docking station for Christmas from my wife only to find out that the audio out does not work and will be functional when 2.2 launches. I contacted Samsung and asked what I should do and he instructed me to return the Dock and apologized saying that they should not be selling the Docking station until 2.2 is released.

The other complaint is the number of published dates, missed dates, and the lack of clarity about the whole situation. I myself will probably never buy a Samsung phone again.

Thanks

 

[zeravla531]

Even when they rollout Froyo, people will still be upset about the delays and broken promises. They will also crave Gingerbread updates, especially when HTC rolls them out to the Evo, Shift, Incredible, etc.

Honestly, the only way Samsung can come out of this looking good is if they cancel Froyo and update the Galaxy S series straight to Gingerbread within a month or so.

 

[mhunter995]

Post on XDA that's seems legit

Hey guys,

I ran across this post the other day on XDA from someone who is supposedly knows what is going on with the Samsung Froyo updates here's the quote:
"Hello,

I’m going to step across the NDAs and explain the issues behind the Android Froyo update to Samsung Galaxy S phones in the United States. I think most of you have come to this realization yourself now: the withholding of the Froyo update is a largely political one, not a technological one: Froyo runs quite well on Galaxy S phones, as those of you that have run leaked updates may have noticed.

To explain the political situation, first, a primer on how phone firmware upgrades work for carriers. When a carrier decides to sell a phone, a contract is usually written between the phone manufacturer and the carrier. In this contract, the cost of updates (to the carrier) is usually outlined. Updates are usually broken into several types: critical updates, maintenance updates, and feature updates. Critical updates are those that resolve a critical bug in the phone, such as the phone overheating. Maintenance updates involve routine updates to resolve bugs and other issues reported by the carrier. Finally, feature updates add some new feature in software that wasn’t present before. Critical updates are usually free, maintenance updates have some maintenance fee associated with them, and feature updates are usually costly.
In the past, most phone updates would mainly consist of critical and maintenance updates. Carriers almost never want to incur the cost of a feature update because it is of little benefit to them, adds little to the device, and involves a lot of testing on the carrier end. Android has changed the playing field, however – since the Android Open Source Project is constantly being updated, and that information being made widely available to the public, there is pressure for the phone to be constantly updated with the latest version of Android. With most manufacturers, such as HTC, Motorola, etc. This is fine and considered a maintenance upgrade. Samsung, however, considers it a feature update, and requires carriers to pay a per device update fee for each incremental Android update.

Now, here’s where the politics come in: most U.S. carriers aren’t very happy with Samsung’s decision to charge for Android updates as feature updates, especially since they are essentially charging for the Android Open Source Project’s efforts, and the effort on Samsung’s end is rather minimal. As a result of perhaps, corporate collusion, all U.S. carriers have decided to refuse to pay for the Android 2.2 update, in hopes that the devaluation of the Galaxy S line will cause Samsung to drop their fees and give the update to the carriers. The situation has panned out differently in other parts of the world, but this is the situation in the United States.

Some of you might have noticed Verion’s Fascinate updated, but without 2.2 : This is a result of a maintenance agreement Samsung must honor combined with Verizon’s unwillingness to pay the update fees.
In short, Android 2.2 is on hold for Galaxy S phones until the U.S. carriers and Samsung reach a consensus.

Some might wonder why I didn’t deliver this over a more legitimate news channel – the short answer: I don’t want to lose my job. I do, however, appreciate transparency, which is why I'm here."

I think it makes sense personally but what do you guys think?
Original post here
The Samsung Secret - Why U.S. Galaxy S Phones run Android 2.1 Still - xda-developers

 

[caleb02]

I think it has something to do with usa carriers wanting to make money off the replacement devices. Like the new galaxy s 4g for tmobile. I have seen sprint and others not issue dot releases and informed users to get the newer model. Also remember sprint ppc6600 sprint said a software update to evdo is all that was needed. Then sprint said buy the ppc6700 apache.

I yhink as users we should have the same os upgrades like we do on our home laptops. Pay a small upgrade fee of like $50 ~ $100 and as long as the.phone meets the hardware specs then let us have it

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

 

[zeravla531]

Hey guys,

I ran across this post the other day on XDA from someone who is supposedly knows what is going on with the Samsung Froyo updates here's the quote:
"Hello,

I?m going to step across the NDAs and explain the issues behind the Android Froyo update to Samsung Galaxy S phones in the United States. I think most of you have come to this realization yourself now: the withholding of the Froyo update is a largely political one, not a technological one: Froyo runs quite well on Galaxy S phones, as those of you that have run leaked updates may have noticed.

To explain the political situation, first, a primer on how phone firmware upgrades work for carriers. When a carrier decides to sell a phone, a contract is usually written between the phone manufacturer and the carrier. In this contract, the cost of updates (to the carrier) is usually outlined. Updates are usually broken into several types: critical updates, maintenance updates, and feature updates. Critical updates are those that resolve a critical bug in the phone, such as the phone overheating. Maintenance updates involve routine updates to resolve bugs and other issues reported by the carrier. Finally, feature updates add some new feature in software that wasn?t present before. Critical updates are usually free, maintenance updates have some maintenance fee associated with them, and feature updates are usually costly.
In the past, most phone updates would mainly consist of critical and maintenance updates. Carriers almost never want to incur the cost of a feature update because it is of little benefit to them, adds little to the device, and involves a lot of testing on the carrier end. Android has changed the playing field, however ? since the Android Open Source Project is constantly being updated, and that information being made widely available to the public, there is pressure for the phone to be constantly updated with the latest version of Android. With most manufacturers, such as HTC, Motorola, etc. This is fine and considered a maintenance upgrade. Samsung, however, considers it a feature update, and requires carriers to pay a per device update fee for each incremental Android update.

Now, here?s where the politics come in: most U.S. carriers aren?t very happy with Samsung?s decision to charge for Android updates as feature updates, especially since they are essentially charging for the Android Open Source Project?s efforts, and the effort on Samsung?s end is rather minimal. As a result of perhaps, corporate collusion, all U.S. carriers have decided to refuse to pay for the Android 2.2 update, in hopes that the devaluation of the Galaxy S line will cause Samsung to drop their fees and give the update to the carriers. The situation has panned out differently in other parts of the world, but this is the situation in the United States.

Some of you might have noticed Verion?s Fascinate updated, but without 2.2 : This is a result of a maintenance agreement Samsung must honor combined with Verizon?s unwillingness to pay the update fees.
In short, Android 2.2 is on hold for Galaxy S phones until the U.S. carriers and Samsung reach a consensus.

Some might wonder why I didn?t deliver this over a more legitimate news channel ? the short answer: I don?t want to lose my job. I do, however, appreciate transparency, which is why I'm here."

I think it makes sense personally but what do you guys think?
Original post here
The Samsung Secret - Why U.S. Galaxy S Phones run Android 2.1 Still - xda-developers

This hit the wire days ago and was denied by Samsung who claims they do not charge for updates.

 

[Chris Kerrigan]

I think the the biggest problem revolving around this whole situation has been a complete lack of communication from both Verizon and Samsung. When the Gaax S line of phones began rolling out, Samsung promised that thy would be receiving a Froyo update in a "timely" fashion. Most people gave them the benefit of the doubt and took their word for it, myself included.

Now, here we are some nearly 6 months later, and still no Froyo (at least for any of the U.S. versions). It's been delayed several times. For us Fascinate owners, it was promised "soon". Then it was promised "by the end of the year", yet still no Froyo. It's led a lot of people to a lot of tension and frustration over the matter, but where I think they made their first mistake was lack of communication.

If either Verizon or Samsung had come forward at some point during this entire process and told the consumers "Look, we're working on the update. We apologize it has taken so long, but this is the reason we are having problems delivering the update in the original time frame we had given you ---" then I think the backlash wouldn't be nearly as bad. However, that's not what happened. Instead, they keep giving the same statement every time, that they're working on it and that's all the information that they an provide.

I understand that a lot of Samsung or Verizon reps may truly have no idea what the details of the situation are, and that's fine, I don't expect them to. But surely Samsung as a company knows, and I'm sure Verizon does too. All I ever asked for was some sort of official statement from one (or both) of them explaining the situation at hand. The common denominator here is the U.S. carriers. Froyo has been available outside of the United States (even Canada) for quite some time now.

Rumors fly, and people add fuel to the fire. It's not hard to start a rumor. Personally? I still to this day think it has something to do with the carriers here in the U.S., it has to be, otherwise why do other Galaxy S phones around the globe already have a stable version of Froyo available to them? Do I think Samsung is charging U.S. carriers for the update? No, quite frankly that always sounded a bit ridiculous to me, and I stand by my statements in the past that carrier bloatware has at least a *small* contribution to this mess.

Just my $0.02.

 

[anon(50120)]

Annoying, but not unusual

My Samsung Fascinate is my first venture into the Android world, prior to that I had a BlackBerry. I can say without question that long delays between when the software is released to the carriers and when the carriers release to the users is nothing new.
When I purchased my BlackBerry Tour it had OS 4.6 on it. 5.0 was released to the carriers in November of 2009 and VZW didn't roll it out to users until March 30th, 2010. From what I understand Samsung has rolled 2.2 out to the carriers in October, so we are not beyond that time frame (4-5 months). I would suspect that android releases from the carriers would take longer than BlackBerry because of the shear number of devices and manufacturers they are working with. Blackberry had at the time 3 phones that were eligible for the 5.0 upgrade, and all 3 were manufactured by the same company that released the software update.

 

[anon(43552)]

Samsung

The Vibrant has been the first Samsung phone I have ever owned, as well as the first Android. So I have not been a part of the hole Behold 2 issue. I have found the Vibrant to work VERY well for me with it running 2.1 not rooted.

I came from Blackberry. I had the first Curve, the 8900 then the 9700. Over a 4 year span, I saw exactly 1 update across 3 phones. So I am used to not getting updates.

My Vibrant works great for me, however, I do want Flash so that is why I am frustrated with not getting Froyo yet. If it weren't for Flash, I would be perfectly content with this phone. Furthermore, while my first trip down Android lane, I have to say Android is awesome. Light years ahead of Blackberry. And even Samsungs hardware is better than Blackberry's. I did at least 5 warranty replacements with EACH Blackberry. My Vibrant has been flawless.

With that said, if Samsung gives me Froyo, that is great, but I am not going to lose sleep if they dont. That's what rooting is for. Samsung gets a bad rap over the Behold, but honestly, EVERY Samsung product I have ever bought has been top notch and this Vibrant is no different.

I understand the frustration though if you were part of the Behold issue, but not all of us are ready to stop supporting Samsung just yet.

 

[ju12zo]

Who waits for official updates? Root baby Root!!

In all seriousness, I think as long as they say they are updating we should just sit back and wait. We don't ask team douche for eta's, why should carriers be any different.

 

[TripSixes]

Samsung Fascinate owner since first week of it being released on VzW.

For every day that goes by, the update to 2.2 becomes increasingly more irrelevant (for me). When the first reports hit that 2.2 was around the corner, I too was excited for my phone to be upgraded to the latest Android release.

However, I'm not one to sit and wait, so, I root, I load SuperClean ROM's, I update kernels to try and improve my everyday experience. It is this freedom that has now convinced me that waiting for a 2.2 release from VzW/Samsung is pointless. What I can do with this phone outside of them, is far better than anything they could provide to me.

Would I like 2.2? sure, would i like 2.3? sure.. Do I feel that the updates in them are going to cause me to think that my current 2.1 install is antiquated? never.

The biggest drawback that I have is that certain market apps are written for "2.2+ devices". That sucks.. but, in most cases, I can find an equivalent app that runs on 2.1 without much hassle.

The unfortunate side to all this, is that Apple/iOS has gotten it right as far as updates goes. When iOS 4.2 is released, all phones gets 4.2 within a short period of time.

It is time to drop all custom UI's, and have Android=Android. Google needs to mandate that NO custom UI be installed on the phone "out of the box". IF the phone manufacture wishes to create a custom experience for its users, put it into App-form, and make it a market download.

 

[octobermagic]

Update

Hey Phil,

This is the main issue as I see it. Android as an OS is primarily for "tinkerers" and those of us who wane for "openness". All the forum members here on this site and others come for the news, which you and the staff are great at delivering. When the main source (in this case, Google) announces a new OS, you're left to wonder not only when, but IF your phone will get it. In the case of Galaxy S owners, a new OS was announced which happens to be two generations from what Samsung Galaxy S phones are currently running, That gets to be rather frustrating. Regardless of whether it's the carriers or Samsung, the bottom line is that there's no transparency.
Whereas if you're on IOS, when something's announced from the main source (in this case Apple) There's no question that you're going to get it, unless the carrier gets in the way. But at least you know who's to blame in that situation.

The fragmentation issue aside, if there was more transparency on all parties, the situation would be more "understanding" to those with any sense about them.

 

[bbennett40]

I agree with the first post. I love my Captivate. I had done some research before purchasing this phone in August of last year. Froyo was already released and Samsung had publicly stated that 2.2 would be released for the phone. After some use, I purchased the desk mount. The accompanying literture even states that the audio out port will not work until the release of 2.2. Heck, even the much touted(by Samsung) Media Hub does not work on the phone (still says Coming Soon). Here we are five months after my purchase of the phoone (even later than the release of Froyo) with no update. The most aggravating part is the lack of communication. I have read all the speculations and accusations and do not pretend to believe I know the real issue. By all information provided by Samsung (and AT&T for that matter) was that 2.2 would be released for the phone. By no stretch of the imagination do I consider 5 months soon. I simply want the device which was promised by the manufacturer, one with Android 2.2. From that point, I will be sated. 2.3 is not in my expectations. Samsung did state the phone would support 2.3, but I don't think they have ever stated they would upgrade that far. In any area of business, this lack of fulfilled promises is an extreme foible in customer relations.

 

[RobertInCypress]

My question is will an official release improve the ROM's being cooked? XDA has several nice ROM's built off of 2.2, what would change if they had an official release to tinker with?
For us AT&T users the only thing I see an official release doing is locking down features that current ROM's already allow.
If those of us in the US are running a ROM based off of the 'official' Europe 2.2 release they why bother with the AT&T crippled FroYo when if comes out?

 

[rahlquist]

Phil I so appreciate you taking this extra step. Some of you no doubt know how I feel about this subject ( http://forum.androidcentral.com/and...request-androidcentral-all-android-sites.html ).

The more I think on it the more I think Google is the one who should be exercising some influence here. Maybe I was wrong to push the Android sites on this but I felt it was a warranted move. Its a shame I never saved every misquoted release window.

In the end though you guys are an honest site and for that I am grateful. Your review could be like Engadgets review of the nexus S where they mentioned that the device has a GPS and stopped there. Didn't say one word about the history of poor functionality and lack of updates. That was about as crappy coverage as it gets. So yes your review of Captivate was better than Engadgets review of Nexus S.

In the end Samsung is only generating heat, by ignoring the community, their complaints, their desire for updates. If its really a cost issue, then Samsung sell me the bloody update! I can almost guarantee you contractually arent charging AT&T more than $20 a phone. Let us buy it if money is really your problem. The modding community has managed to put together some top notch roms with only scraps compared to the vast resources Samsung ban bring to bear. For crying out loud, take the source tree for Nexus S, strip the incompatible stuff, insert the captivate drivers and compile it. Then we could have Gingerbread. Instead you are steadily building an army of haters, one day at a time.

 

[Brianadfl]

Ill make it short and sweet. I'm running the test build for the epic 4g for a few days now. Haven't had one problem. Where are these unstable builds their talking about, and can each phone take an upgrade different. Some ppl have problems upgrading while others(like me) don't? Could that be what the delay is for? A difference in hardware for the same phone?

Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk

 

[tony bag o donuts]

Even when they rollout Froyo, people will still be upset about the delays and broken promises. They will also crave Gingerbread updates, especially when HTC rolls them out to the Evo, Shift, Incredible, etc.

Honestly, the only way Samsung can come out of this looking good is if they cancel Froyo and update the Galaxy S series straight to Gingerbread within a month or so.

I was just thinking the same thing.

My concern in general for android is that it doesn't fall into the same trap that BB has. Too many different roms, etc. out there.

If you have an android device on verizon, then all device updates should come within a week or two of each other tops. Only if the device supports the requirements.

Don't have Eclair on one device, froyo on another and Gingerbread on yet another device. Any device that is less then a year old should always have the same OS IMHO. It will be easier on developers, etc.

 

[morechoff]

Froyo on Samsung Captivate

The major gripe I have is the lack of information. It would solve many problems if ATT and Samsung communicated the release dates for the software. If there is a delay, then ATT and Samsung should communicate it as well. US Cellular released its schedule for Froyo then why can't ATT?

Froyo does have its advantages and ATT/Samsung should understand our desire to have it. There is Flash to name one. Froyo is faster. Skype does not work on 2.1. I bet Swype and other software is more current on Froyo. Google and others are also releasing software updates that work on 2.2 and above only.

I can see many reason why Samsung/ATT would not want an upgrade. ATT is in the phone business and they don't care if the phone is using 2.1, 2.2. or 2.3. They just want users to make phone calls and access the internet. Bottom line they just want a subscriber. I would also venture to guess that most people using Androids don't really care what the OS version is as long as the phone works. The other reason would be that Samsung/ATT do want you to buy a new phone after the contract expires. If the OS was upgraded to the latest and greatest, that would keep many of the users from buying a new phone. A

Communication is key. Not only for Froyo, but Gingerbread as well. Will Gingerbread be available on the Galaxy S in the US?

Mike

 

[Xrayeyes]

I have to agree that the wait can be frustrating, especially when there are applications that need 2.2 to run. I received an email from Samsung about a month ago talking about how the Media Hub is going to allow all this great entertainment to be displayed on your phone, yet here I still wait with no other communication. I like my phone, and don't see changing it anytime soon, but it would be nice to have it "current" at least. I can't say who is to blame, if there is anyone, becasue as it has been stated above NO ONE is talking about the release other than what it can do. If Samsung and the carriers would just come out and let everyone know SOMETHING, most people would quiet down and relax, but we have nothing to go on.
PLEASE would someone just talk to us?

 

[gmanunited]

I think the the biggest problem revolving around this whole situation has been a complete lack of communication....

I think this is a big part of the Frustration of most Galaxy S users. There are 3 issues with the current Galaxy S devices

1)Great Device-Screen, Speed, Form Factor etc.
2)Bad GPS-(GPS issue for me/most has still not been resolved. It either works or it doesn't and in my case it does not.)
3)Froyo 2.2 update- Whether it is Samsung or the Carrier it is still an issue.

Facebook and Twitter are littered with complaints mostly for Froyo but also "wonky gps" issues too. These are not just POWERUSERS but Regular people who read about the features of Android and find out that 2.1 does not provide.
Coming from the Windows Mobile World (HP Ipaq, Tilt 1, Tilt 2) Custom Roms became a norm in which you would try to get basic functionality out the O.S. This is not the case with Android(Captivate purchased off contract) it is great out of the box and it was very hard for me to Flash my Captivate. "We should not have to run custom roms although rooting is necessary." Unfortunately some Apps. only run on Froyo and Samsung/Carriers with broken promises keep their users in the dark. HTC and Motorola updated their devices in a very timely manner but here we sit tin foil hats and all.

Samsung needs to release something. I think most of the damage is done and it will take a lot of making up to get a lot of the customers to purchase a Samsung device again even the NEXUS S on AT&T. Me included.

You cannot cry about getting 2.3 Gingerbread until Froyo 2.2 is released.