[pauliphone5]

Are they better about updates on these phones? Or are customers still subjected to Samsungs slow roll outs of updates?

My apology if this has already been asked.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk

[Mooem]

Typically Nexus devices receive the latest versions of Android first.

[nybmx]

Are they better about updates on these phones? Or are customers still subjected to Samsungs slow roll outs of updates?

My apology if this has already been asked.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk

Samsung will have nothing to do with software or updates on this device. Nexus updates are handled by Google.

[turb0wned]

And samsung is not the one to blame for slow updates. Verizon and the carriers are.

[pauliphone5]

And samsung is not the one to blame for slow updates. Verizon and the carriers are.

Then why does it seem like other phones receive quicker and more frequently?

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk

[srkmagnus]

Yes, the carriers are also to blame. But Samsung is notorious for taking their sweet time releasing an update. The Nexus devices are generally handled by Google and are the first to receive latest updates before being released to other OEM devices.

[nybmx]

I don't really blame Samsung for too much of it. I'm sure their are ways they could have handled some things better but when you look at the bigger picture it kind of changes. The I9000 (original international galaxy s) received updates in a decent time frame. Their are leaked Samsung roms a handful of times a month. Each with newer build dates and are usually better performing than the last. This shows that they are working hard at improving the end user experience.
Also don't forget that they gave members of the cyanogen team free Galaxy S II's to get cyanogenmod up and running on. I think this gesture shows that they are serious about their product and the Android ecosystem.

[Officerpolabear]

Then why does it seem like other phones receive quicker and more frequently?

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk

Not only that, but Samsung is putting their main focus of support in Europe because they competing with Nokia to take the Number 1 spot for biggest marketshare for phones in Europe. Idk about South Korea, but they probably updates devices their timely as that's their hometown. As for HTC, I think the reason why they update things quickly here is because Taiwan isn't nearly as a big of a market as the U.S. (at least it seems like it).

[SpaceHippie]

I don't really blame Samsung for too much of it. I'm sure their are ways they could have handled some things better but when you look at the bigger picture it kind of changes. The I9000 (original international galaxy s) received updates in a decent time frame. Their are leaked Samsung roms a handful of times a month. Each with newer build dates and are usually better performing than the last. This shows that they are working hard at improving the end user experience.
Also don't forget that they gave members of the cyanogen team free Galaxy S II's to get cyanogenmod up and running on. I think this gesture shows that they are serious about their product and the Android ecosystem.

Geez, this post makes me kinda love sammy. lol

[ejaymd11]

And samsung is not the one to blame for slow updates. Verizon and the carriers are.

Why are the carriers to blame?

[nybmx]

Why are the carriers to blame?

There are a few reasons. One being they have to approve the update being released. Meaning they have to make sure all their bloat and b.s. is on their and working. Certain carriers also need to make sure that certain features are disabled (ex: at&t and tethering).
So picture the following scenario. Samsung sends at&t an update that they want to push to customers. It doesn't meet at&t's specs for whatever reason. They will then deny this update and force Samsung to work further until it does. This is one of many things that has the potential to slow the process down.

[ejaymd11]

There are a few reasons. One being they have to approve the update being released. Meaning they have to make sure all their bloat and b.s. is on their and working. Certain carriers also need to make sure that certain features are disabled (ex: at&t and tethering).
So picture the following scenario. Samsung sends at&t an update that they want to push to customers. It doesn't meet at&t's specs for whatever reason. They will then deny this update and force Samsung to work further until it does. This is one of many things that has the potential to slow the process down.

But if they find something wrong with it such as bugs. Isn't it better they send it back for bugs to be fixed? What if ATT approved a buggy update won't people complain then too?

[Officerpolabear]

But if they find something wrong with it such as bugs. Isn't it better they send it back for bugs to be fixed? What if ATT approved a buggy update won't people complain then too?

They look for bugs as well, but even if it was a perfect build and it was missing just one of AT&T's apps, then Samsung pretty much gets ****-blocked.

[nybmx]

But if they find something wrong with it such as bugs. Isn't it better they send it back for bugs to be fixed? What if ATT approved a buggy update won't people complain then too?

Yeah you're absolutely right about that. The thing is though this all takes place behind the scenes and people are just left to complain and speculate.

[pauliphone5]

Yeah you're absolutely right about that. The thing is though this all takes place behind the scenes and people are just left to complain and speculate.

The above doesn't seem to answer the question about why other phone manufacturers seem to have their updates pushed more frequently?

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk

[FedexMike]

This is the main reason I'm getting the Prime. Updates! Some people are still on froyo and have no idea when Gingerbread is coming and ICS, they can forget about it. That's the reason people go to ios. Update is available, everyone gets it. Google needs to shut down all these android phones coming out every day. It's killing it with the fragmentation!!

[GrillMouster]

But if they find something wrong with it such as bugs. Isn't it better they send it back for bugs to be fixed? What if ATT approved a buggy update won't people complain then too?

Often the reason carriers delay updates have nothing to with bugs. Some times they spot things that they perceive as vulnerabilities, because they could allow users to get around their high-priced add-ons, like tethering (which is native in Android, but VZW intentionally handicaps it to force users to pay more). Additionally, the carriers hold back updates for business reasons, like encouraging people to buy a new phone to replace their old ones rather than just upating it.

[mikestorm]

Why are the carriers to blame?

Buggy OS updates usually translate into oceans of pissed off customers and the carriers receive the brunt of customers' ire. So, carriers take their sweet time making sure OS is stable 8 ways to Sunday to spare themselves that headache.

Of course often times they still end up releasing a hot mess (ahem, GB Thunderbolt update).

[nybmx]

The above doesn't seem to answer the question about why other phone manufacturers seem to have their updates pushed more frequently?

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk

That's the thing I'm curious about myself. I'm just hoping that the talk of quicker updates and less fragmentation starting with ICS will hold true.

[jerrod6]

So is Google going to update the original Nexus to ICS soon after it is released?