Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why U.S. Galaxy S Phones run Android 2.1

forum.xda-developers.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 101 posts

Re: Why U.S. Galaxy S Phones run Android 2.1

#21

Post by ergo98 »

ergo98 wrote: post #13

The conflicting interests issue is really a problem in the Android space. As has been shown time and time again, vendors really don't want the burden of keeping your handset up to date forever because there is nothing in it for them, aside from perhaps avoiding too much negative press. Naturally people are going to compare it to iOS, where updates are free and rapidly disseminated. The difference there is that there…

Just as one aside on this, it's pretty clear by now that it isn't simply a matter of doing a source control get and the vendor's work is done.

Aside from simply having technical insight into the individual ROMs, you needn't look further than the disaster that has been Sony Erricson and Dell's Android entrants to see the truth in this -- those vendors came out with devices running dated Android versions, turning possible winners into catastrophic losers, eviscerating sales of the Streak and X10.

If they could have just done a merge and they were done, obviously they would have.

So now we're getting to the point where it seems that makers like Motorola and HTC have started to build up a significant Android talent pool, and that bodes well. Despite the constant incantations that Android is free, I wouldn't be surprised if the in-house development costs rivaled or exceeded what something like Windows Mobile cost to license.

Re: Why U.S. Galaxy S Phones run Android 2.1

#22

Post by w1ntermute »

yock wrote: post #18
w1ntermute wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm as frustrated as the next guy that my Captivate is still running Eclair, but stuff like this doesn't really get us any closer to a solution. Maybe you already know, but you can get an unofficial Froyo rom from xda-developers. And before people jump on me about how it won't work for their mom or next-door neighbor - this is just a tip for fellow HNers, in case they didn't know already.

Everything I've read is that the UX on the custom roms isn't exactly breathtaking. Am I mistaken?

I prefer the stock UI, which should be available for all phones. I don't have a Galaxy S phone, so I don't know if TouchWiz is available with any of the custom roms for them. Either way, that info should be on the xda-developers website.

Re: Why U.S. Galaxy S Phones run Android 2.1

#23

Post by ergo98 »

mindslight wrote: post #20
ergo98 wrote: post #13

The conflicting interests issue is really a problem in the Android space. As has been shown time and time again, vendors really don't want the burden of keeping your handset up to date forever because there is nothing in it for them, aside from perhaps avoiding too much negative press. Naturally people are going to compare it to iOS, where updates are free and rapidly disseminated. The difference there is that there…

> I would happily pay $30 or whatever for each major update if it motivated the vendor to have an interest in keeping it up to date. That would just be a different user-hostile incentive. The path forward is for Android to actually become consumer open source (GPL3). Let device manufacturers concentrate on shipping hardware and adding any new device drivers to a public repository. Updates can then be directly applied…

That would just be a different user-hostile incentive.

How so? It aligns interests in virtually every way.

Re: Why U.S. Galaxy S Phones run Android 2.1

#24

Post by adovenmuehle »

yock wrote: post #18
w1ntermute wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm as frustrated as the next guy that my Captivate is still running Eclair, but stuff like this doesn't really get us any closer to a solution. Maybe you already know, but you can get an unofficial Froyo rom from xda-developers. And before people jump on me about how it won't work for their mom or next-door neighbor - this is just a tip for fellow HNers, in case they didn't know already.

Everything I've read is that the UX on the custom roms isn't exactly breathtaking. Am I mistaken?

I'm not sure what you've read but you can have regular "stock" functionality (minus Sense, MotoBlur, TouchWiz in most cases) in a custom ROM. It's really up to whoever puts the ROM together what theme or differences it has. Some are good, some are bad.

In CyanogenMod's case, you can have the stock feel with more options.

Re: Why U.S. Galaxy S Phones run Android 2.1

#25

Post by mtarnovan »

This is a very unhealthy trend for Android. Development will be much more costly and difficult if the user base is split across many different API levels. This article contains some insight (if you can get past the bs title...): http://techcrunch.com/2011/01/17/ios-android-breakdown/

Re: Why U.S. Galaxy S Phones run Android 2.1

#26

Post by mikeryan »

marshray wrote: post #8

Gee, I'd kind of liked Samsung because they seemed to focus on delivering good technology at a good price. I'd figured they perceived themselves as something of an underdog in the past (perhaps relative to the Japanese tech industry). This makes it seem like they're hiring Marketers and MBAs who think the best plan is to try to squeeze as much as they can out of their contract customers (the cell carriers) rather tha…

I'd figured they perceived themselves as something of an underdog in the past

They don't. Samsung is an 800lb Gorilla in the CE space. They are the biggest seller of HDTV's in the US (though Vizio is closing fast) and the second largest manufacturer of cell phones worldwide.

Samsung is also starting to throw its weight around a lot.

Re: Why U.S. Galaxy S Phones run Android 2.1

#27

Post by jsz0 »

ergo98 wrote: post #13

The conflicting interests issue is really a problem in the Android space. As has been shown time and time again, vendors really don't want the burden of keeping your handset up to date forever because there is nothing in it for them, aside from perhaps avoiding too much negative press. Naturally people are going to compare it to iOS, where updates are free and rapidly disseminated. The difference there is that there…

I might pay $30 for a major update but simply going from 2.1 to 2.2 or 2.3? Absolutely not. There aren't enough new features to justify this. The idea of mostly paying for bug fixes is totally unacceptable to me. I'll throw my SmartPhone in the garbage and go back to whatever free-with-contract junk phone they offer before I get held hostage for security and bug fixes.

Re: Why U.S. Galaxy S Phones run Android 2.1

#28

Post by blinkingled »

yock wrote: post #18
w1ntermute wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm as frustrated as the next guy that my Captivate is still running Eclair, but stuff like this doesn't really get us any closer to a solution. Maybe you already know, but you can get an unofficial Froyo rom from xda-developers. And before people jump on me about how it won't work for their mom or next-door neighbor - this is just a tip for fellow HNers, in case they didn't know already.

Everything I've read is that the UX on the custom roms isn't exactly breathtaking. Am I mistaken?

Talking about Epic 4g specifically (which is a Galaxy S phone) - I updated to Sprint test release of 2.2 (DK28), converted to EXT4 from the absolutely horrific RFS and then updated to Quantum ROM. It is a lot better - lags gone, battery life improved a lot, and to your question - I also have the stock Epic UX with TouchWiz. If you want all the Sprint apps along with TW UX - There is another ROM that was recently updated - TrulyEpic 1.2.

But Samsung sucks - I am not going to buy anything they sell - even ignoring all of the rumors they have badly botched up by not updating to 2.2 for all of their US Galaxy phones for so long.

Re: Why U.S. Galaxy S Phones run Android 2.1

#29

Post by Zaak »

samstokes wrote: post #16
Zaak wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Summaries of Android upgrades by manufacturer and carrier: http://blogs.computerworld.com/17649/android_upgrades http://blogs.computerworld.com/17650/android_upgrades_carrie... tl;dr, Your best bet for upgrades is a high-end HTC phone on Verizon. If you go with Samsung or AT&T, you're out of luck.

Surely your best bet is an unlocked phone running vanilla Android, rather than any carrier-customised variant? Every carrier customisation has to be ported to the new version each time the OS gets upgraded.

I agree. Though the only unlocked vanilla android phones I know of are the ones from Google. Good devices, but limited selection.

Re: Why U.S. Galaxy S Phones run Android 2.1

#30

Post by 1010011010 »

ergo98 wrote: post #21
ergo98 wrote: post #13

The conflicting interests issue is really a problem in the Android space. As has been shown time and time again, vendors really don't want the burden of keeping your handset up to date forever because there is nothing in it for them, aside from perhaps avoiding too much negative press. Naturally people are going to compare it to iOS, where updates are free and rapidly disseminated. The difference there is that there…

Just as one aside on this, it's pretty clear by now that it isn't simply a matter of doing a source control get and the vendor's work is done. Aside from simply having technical insight into the individual ROMs, you needn't look further than the disaster that has been Sony Erricson and Dell's Android entrants to see the truth in this -- those vendors came out with devices running dated Android versions, turning possi…

"I wouldn't be surprised if the in-house development costs rivaled or exceeded..."

I wonder how much of those costs go into Sense, Motoblur, Touchwiz, etc. Shipping stock android is surely less labor-intensive.

Post reply on HN