Samsung will not tell us why /when the will update the SM-G930U

[SteelCityPgh]

Also - did Samsung commit to doing the security updates monthly?

They absolutely did, and still proudly say so on their Mobile Security Blog.

It seems my reply with the direct link was rejected, so let's try it this way...

Google "Samsung Mobile Security Blog"
Click on the first result
Click on the 'Introduction' tab
The text reads as follows....

"Current Models for Monthly Security Updates¹:

Galaxy S series (S7, S7 edge, S7 Active, S6 edge+, S6, S6 edge, S6 Active, S5, S5 Active)
Galaxy Note series (Note 5, Note 4, Note edge)
Galaxy A series (A5x)"

The Footnote 1 reads as follows...

"¹ The list of monthly security update models are subject to change as support period expire.
Also, some carriers may only support quarterly updates for all applicable current models listed above."

Being that the Unlocked versions are not Carrier versions, the Footnote does not apply.

 

[Ry]

We can go back and forth all day if you keep asking for official statements. The fact is I'm trying to help others avoid making the same mistake I am now suffering from. Was it my fault for assuming, obviously. Have others made the same mistake, yes. Should this just continue without helping others make more educated decisions, I personally don't think so which is why I want to get word out to not buy unlocked if you have any of the same expectations I have had. You coming back asking each time if Samsung promised anything to me isn't really helpful. If they communicated anything officially, that would be helpful. It's just a message that when this site recommends the unlocked phones, people should be aware of the downside particularly when it's a Samsung US unlocked model

Which is why only these statements seem to be true:

If you want to have a Google Play Services Android smartphone -

• buy Google (Pixel, Nexus) if OS and monthly security updates are important to you.
• buy BlackBerry if monthly security updates are important to you.

No other OEMs match what Google and BlackBerry do.

 

[Ry]

They absolutely did, and still proudly say so on their Mobile Security Blog.

It seems my reply with the direct link was rejected, so let's try it this way...

Google "Samsung Mobile Security Blog"
Click on the first result
Click on the 'Introduction' tab
The text reads as follows....

"Current Models for Monthly Security Updates¹:

Galaxy S series (S7, S7 edge, S7 Active, S6 edge+, S6, S6 edge, S6 Active, S5, S5 Active)
Galaxy Note series (Note 5, Note 4, Note edge)
Galaxy A series (A5x)"

The Footnote 1 reads as follows...

"¹ The list of monthly security update models are subject to change as support period expire.
Also, some carriers may only support quarterly updates for all applicable current models listed above."

Being that the Unlocked versions are not Carrier versions, the Footnote does not apply.

But..

¹ The list of monthly security update models are subject to change as support period expire.

So they're covered. They don't have to say, but could/should say support period changed.

 

[SteelCityPgh]

So they're covered. They don't have to say, but could/should say support period changed.

Sorry, but that's a ridiculous statement to say that it could be because the "Support Period Expired"! The unlocked versions of the phone were only released 8 months ago!

If Android Central truly believes this 'could' be the case, I better see the phone removed from the so-called 'Best Unlocked Phone' list and there should be a front page write up concerning how Samsung abandoned a $1000 phone THAT THEY ARE STILL SELLING before the warranty has even expired!!!

Give me a break!!

 

[Kahligula1]

But..



So they're covered. They don't have to say, but could/should say support period changed.

Are you a moderator or a Samsung apologist? I don't understand why you are defending this obviously non-consumer friendly behavior by Samsung. It feels like you're antagonizing just for the fun of it, so if so, enjoy yourself, glad to make your day

 

[SteelCityPgh]

Are you a moderator or a Samsung apologist?

He's sounding like more of an apologist than even @SamsungMarcos! At least Marcos expresses some outrage even if it isn't real...

 

[Almeuit]

Sorry, but that's a ridiculous statement to say that it could be because the "Support Period Expired"! The unlocked versions of the phone were only released 8 months ago!

If Android Central truly believes this 'could' be the case, I better see the phone removed from the so-called 'Best Unlocked Phone' list and there should be a front page write up concerning how Samsung abandoned a $1000 phone THAT THEY ARE STILL SELLING before the warranty has even expired!!!

Give me a break!!

We are only volunteers who help moderate the board. The opinions of Ry and pretty much any of us are our own. We don't write on the blog side so we don't control what is recommended and what isn't .

Are you a moderator or a Samsung apologist? I don't understand why you are defending this obviously non-consumer friendly behavior by Samsung. It feels like you're antagonizing just for the fun of it, so if so, enjoy yourself, glad to make your day

Ry actually isn't a big Samsung fan. He can admit they make some good phones but I can say with confidence that he is super far from an apologist for Samsung lol .

Everyone just relax. The discussion so far is pretty much trying to figure out if they truly said a time frame for said update. As always Android updates are not guaranteed from anyone that I know of except from Google. They're the only ones who consistently push them out to their user base with their phones.

Samsung are hit and miss when it comes to updates. When I had my S7 Edge on T-Mobile it worked well and I got updates pretty quick in the start but IIRC that has faded into the background now. I am sure the S8 I am getting on Verizon will be the same.

 

[SteelCityPgh]

When I had my S7 Edge on T-Mobile it worked well and I got updates pretty quick in the start but IIRC that has faded into the background now.

Here's the problem though - since the phone was first released, we've only received THREE Security Patches - period. Even though for the S7 and Edge, Samsung promised a Monthly Security cycle FROM THE BEGINNING!

So I'm sure that you can understand our frustrations on this. With your S7 Edge, you are dependent on T-Mobile getting the update from Samsung and then doing their magic before pushing it to you. With the unlocked versions, there should be no excuse as there is no middleman.

 

[Almeuit]

Here's the problem though - since the phone was first released, we've only received THREE Security Patches - period. Even though for the S7 and Edge, Samsung promised a Monthly Security cycle FROM THE BEGINNING!

So I'm sure that you can understand our frustrations on this.

Oh I get the frustrations completely .. But am I surprised that Samsung, who never has had a good track record on updates, didn't deliver? Not really to be honest. I don't trust anyone but Google when it comes to fast updates. Other manufactures promise quick updates and it works for awhile but then slowly fades into the background.

As you said .. I wouldn't be surprised if Samsung just lets it fade and never really gets you a real answer. Most consumers don't care about updates so the outcry isn't big enough for them to feel the pressure.

 

[SteelCityPgh]

We are only volunteers who help moderate the board.

And we do appreciate it!

 

[Ry]

Are you a moderator or a Samsung apologist? I don't understand why you are defending this obviously non-consumer friendly behavior by Samsung. It feels like you're antagonizing just for the fun of it, so if so, enjoy yourself, glad to make your day

I don't need to resort to name calling just because I disagree with someone. It's not personal for me.

I get that you're angry and I applaud the fact that you admitted that you assumed unlocked, non-carrier would mean a quicker path to updates, both OS and monthly security.

I don't know the situation as closely as you do. I'm curious about it, so I asked questions. I actually think it's awesome that carrier models have been getting updates relatively fast - it kind of proves that the carriers shouldn't shoulder the bulk of the blame when updates don't come as fast as people assume they should. The OEMs deserve a good share of the blame as well because if they're not motivated to do the update, or if they haven't prioritized actually building and testing the updates, there really isn't anything for a carrier to block.

 

[SteelCityPgh]

As you said .. I wouldn't be surprised if Samsung just lets it fade and never really gets you a real answer.

Then here's the rub...

How can sites such as Android Central have the gall to leave the phone on their so-called "Best Unlocked Phone" list?

I actually had to go to a backup phone in early March because my employer blacklisted it from our BYOD list because it was so far behind on Security Patches. I originally went with the S7 Edge unlocked because of recommendations from sites like this and others that the unlocked versions would receive better support.

How can Android Central even recommend something from a company that insiders like yourself know how they lie so often? If I, and I'm sure many others, had known about this issue prior, we would have made a different purchasing decision. But yet, knowing this, Android Central continues to recommend it...

 

[davebwi]

Yes read my post 8 or 9 responses back

 

[Ry]

Then here's the rub...

How can sites such as Android Central have the gall to leave the phone on their so-called "Best Unlocked Phone" list?

I actually had to go to a backup phone in early March because my employer blacklisted it from our BYOD list because it was so far behind on Security Patches. I originally went with the S7 Edge unlocked because of recommendations from sites like this and others that the unlocked versions would receive better support.

How can Android Central even recommend something from a company that insiders like yourself know how they lie so often? If I, and I'm sure many others, had known about this issue prior, we would have made a different purchasing decision. But yet, knowing this, Android Central continues to recommend it...

Here's the AC Editor's current list for best unlocked phones. Looks like it was updated this month to include the Galaxy S8 (for Best for Europe). I'll have to double check to see if the content for the S7 changed but here's what it says currently:

Samsung Galaxy S7

The Galaxy S7 is a complete package. All of the hardware features you could ask for, inside a beautifully designed metal-and-glass frame with a wonderful screen. There's something refreshing about the compact body on a 5.1-inch phone, and Samsung has executed it perfectly here, while also filling it with top-end internals.

Samsung's software is improving with every iteration, and when you buy unlocked it isn't burdened by carrier bloatware or customization — it still falls behind on updates when compared to the Pixel, though. The 12MP camera is simple and consistent, and is easily one of the best available.

Though the GS7 is still great, it's been superseded by the Galaxy S8.

Bottom line: The unlocked Galaxy S7 is expensive, but it's worth having over a carrier-bought version.

One more thing: Even though it's unlocked, this Galaxy S7 does work on the U.S. carriers — yes, even Verizon.

Seems like the recommendation over the carrier S7s is that there's no carrier bloatware or other customizations but also acknowledges that updates aren't fast.

 

[SteelCityPgh]

Seems like the recommendation over the carrier S7s is that there's no carrier bloatware or other customizations but also acknowledges that updates aren't fast.

But saying that "it still falls behind on updates when compared to the Pixel, though" is like saying that I don't hit a baseball as well as Willie Stargell. I might not hit as good, but you would still assume that i CAN hit even though I can't. A little misleading, right? Upon reading the recommendation, any normal consumer would think that the same updates as the Pixel are still pushed out, albeit maybe a short time later. Not that the updates are not produced AT ALL. Again, 3 total Security Updates since the phone was released and Nougat nowhere in sight.

If that's what Android Central still considers acceptable support for a $1000 unlocked Flagship phone, then by all means, have at it. It's not my credibility at stake.

 

[Kahligula1]

I don't need to resort to name calling just because I disagree with someone. It's not personal for me.

I get that you're angry and I applaud the fact that you admitted that you assumed unlocked, non-carrier would mean a quicker path to updates, both OS and monthly security.

I don't know the situation as closely as you do. I'm curious about it, so I asked questions. I actually think it's awesome that carrier models have been getting updates relatively fast - it kind of proves that the carriers shouldn't shoulder the bulk of the blame when updates don't come as fast as people assume they should. The OEMs deserve a good share of the blame as well because if they're not motivated to do the update, or if they haven't prioritized actually building and testing the updates, there really isn't anything for a carrier to block.

@Ry, I apologize and did not mean to make it personal at all, I'm sorry about that. I took your responses less as getting the facts and more pointed at the consumer being to blame. tone is abviously difficult at times to get through forums, so I took it the wrong way (my frustration at the whole situation makes that easier to do at this point ). I do appreciate your guys volunteering your time to respond. I just want the value to match the expense and part of that is up to date security patches and access to (relatively) new OS releases

 

[keyslapper]

So they're covered. They don't have to say, but could/should say support period changed.

No, actually. They most certainly are NOT covered. That little CYA clause would do it, but they have posted via a Samsung moderator that they were absolutely not abandoning this phone. That they would be providing updates "soon" or "in the coming weeks" as I posted above myself. And the current official message is that they are committed to monthly updates for this phone. I've seen a few mentions that they previously had this phone (well, phones) on a quarterly cycle, but when enough noise was made (not knowing that it was quarterly, because they never said so), they made a commitment to change to monthly security updates.

Had they not made any promises, even third hand, they might be covered.

So that covers them for the quarterly cycle they had us on from December to March, yeah? Again, not really. The clause could be read to apply, but if you read the community threads, you'll see dozens of people being told to go to Best Buy, or use Smart Switch, or "wait a couple weeks". Not "Oh, that phone is on a quarterly cycle, wait 'til March." That's on them.

We can all try to justify this a hundred different ways, but the simple fact is that Samsung screwed up big time. Their own people didn't even know about this phone in some cases, and the Samsung Experience people at Best Buy had no clue there was a phone still waiting for an update.

And that's just the security - arguably more important than the new version of the OS, which even the slowest bloody carrier in North America started rolling out 4 months ago. And not a single word on why these phones weren't being updated. Just "wait a couple weeks" or "go to Best Buy" or "use SmartSwitch". None of which provided a solution. So months after every other S7, Note 5, and S6 has been rolled out a Nougat update, ours are still on Marshmallow.

You cannot seriously think they're just being inconsiderate, or even just a little incompetent here. This is a full blown case of a screwing the pooch blind and no kind of CYA clause is gonna convince me otherwise.

 

[Dooki]

If that's what Android Central still considers acceptable support for a $1000 unlocked Flagship phone, then by all means, have at it. It's not my credibility at stake.

It might have been $1,000 when it first came out, now it is $450 through Amazon prime. That is a damn fine price for that phone, even if it doesn't get N. It's still an awesome phone with superb hardware, excellent camera and lots of goodies.
It is bad that it hasn't been updated and Samsung needs to be called out loudly for it, but stop calling it a thousand dollar phone.
I paid $740 new last June through TMobile

 

[SteelCityPgh]

It's still an awesome phone with superb hardware, excellent camera and lots of goodies....


....but stop calling it a thousand dollar phone.

First of all, IT IS a great piece of hardware. No one said it isn't. But that great piece of hardware becomes an expensive brick when it get blacklisted by your company because it's so far out of date on Security Patches. Even if it's only $100!

Since Android Central's recommendation was originally published when most of us posting did, in fact, spend just shy of $1000 on the phone, I'll continue to call it a $1000 phone, thank you very much.

 

[SteelCityPgh]

I didnt see your edit before i posted the last reply, so...

I paid $740 new last June through TMobile

So you don't even own the unlocked version?!? And yet you want to criticize what we term it?!? You didn't pay what we did with the expectations we were given by Samsung.