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

31–40 of 101 posts

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

#31

Post by JonnieCache »

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?

Forget the mods, you can download and flash any stock rom you like, leaked straight from samsung: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=846913

You're right, the mods are all pretty disastrous IMO.

Also if you're worried about those leaked 'stock' roms, theyre just TAR files afaik, people on that forum regularly pull them apart and diff the binaries against those compiled from samsung's official source code which you can get here: http://opensource.samsung.com/reception/reception_main.do?me...

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

#32

Post by qjz »

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 got an X10 for free with upgrade over the holidays and love it. It makes me wonder if all the talk about version upgrades is mere noise. I'm relieved not to be affected by the Android SMS bug in Froyo, so will happily wait until it is fixed. Even if my phone ever sees an upgrade to Eclair, I probably won't notice with AT&T's customizations, which I like quite a bit. It's funny to hear the X10 described as a loser when I like it more than the iPhone. Oh, well, I liked XP more than Vista, too.

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

#33

Post by mindslight »

ergo98 wrote: post #23
mindslight wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

You're assuming that there's a decent amount of people who both have a pressing need for an OS upgrade and wouldn't revolt at the manufacturer charging them to access what is primarily a free update from AOSP. Furthermore, once one person pays $30 for the upgrade, that image can be freely passed around the tinkering communities, so the manufacturer has an incentive for even stronger consumer-hostile DRM.

(Yes, integration takes work, but that's exactly why manufacturers need to push their modified code upstream so it can be tested/changed along with the rest of AOSP. A carrier-blessed release should take QA and some minor bugfixes instead of a horrifically large merge-and-debug.)

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

#34

Post by fakespastic »

I own an Evo 4G (Android 2.2) and my wife owns an Epic 4G (2.1). I have noticed no difference in their usability at all, aside from a few hardware-specific quirks. I'm somewhat indifferent to the Android dot-releases, and am not seeing much in Gingerbread that I care too much about, either, aside from the improved task management.

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

#35

Post by fakespastic »

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…

Perhaps future Android devices should have universal upgradeability, and all the carrier has to do is update a table enabling the upgrade for your device - at your own risk. I'd be willing to take it.

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

#36

Post by ergo98 »

qjz wrote: post #32
ergo98 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 got an X10 for free with upgrade over the holidays and love it. It makes me wonder if all the talk about version upgrades is mere noise. I'm relieved not to be affected by the Android SMS bug in Froyo, so will happily wait until it is fixed. Even if my phone ever sees an upgrade to Eclair, I probably won't notice with AT&T's customizations, which I like quite a bit. It's funny to hear the X10 described as a loser w…

I am talking purely from a market perspective. The X10 was hotly anticipated and was set to make waves...but then it was announced that it was coming with 1.6 and that balloon deflated almost instantly. It is a gorgeous device, but a simple software misstep seriously hobbled its adoption.

Dell has suffered the same outcome for its entrants into the Android field. Clearly they were trying to enter the market on the cheap and it hurt them.

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

#37

Post by evilduck »

spidaman wrote: post #11
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.

Regarding "It seems safe to say, then -- no big surprise -- that aside from considering a phone's manufacturer, going with a higher profile, top-of-the-line device will improve your odds of receiving regular OS upgrades..." The Epic 4g has been Sprint's flagship phone, still running Eclair. I'm regretting not going with the Evo at times.

I'm on Sprint with a Samsung Moment, forever stuck on 2.1. The Moment was officially dropped by Samsung 9 months from release with the only recent update being a fix* to the radio driver because the CDMA radio would die so badly it couldn't call out (including being unable to call 911...an FCC violation) and it required a reboot to fix.

Sprint has been known to replace it for free with an HTC Hero if you throw enough tantrums and demand enough replacements of the same model, but really, Samsung is to blame here. I will never own another Samsung phone and have prevented others from buying them as well. I've personally given up hopes of the problem ever being rectified, but I'm switching my family to Verizon/iPhones at the end of my contract.

* It didn't really fix anything. The radio still dies randomly, just slightly less often.

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

#38

Post by nollidge »

yock wrote: post #3
spidaman wrote: post #2

Some galaxy S handsets have Froyo (see http://pages.samsung.com/ca/froyo/English/?pid=ca_home_subba... ) others don't, like my Epic 4g. Is it really politics or QA challenges; no official word has been forthcoming.

Your link is to the Canadian site for phones configured for Canadian carriers. Not to be pedantic, but the content of the link is specific to the business practices of US carriers.

U.S. Cellular at least just announced it will be rolling out Froyo on a bunch of their phones: http://www.gizmocrunch.com/android/4707-android-froyo-htc-de...

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

#39

Post by kenjackson »

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…

In fairness to Samsung they do incur non-trivial cost doing this.

Imagine this situation Verizon says, "Our Samsung Galaxy S phone must get 2.2" while Sprint says, "No need". Should Sprint have to pay for what Verizon is getting?

The issue is that you're going to pay, whether its Samsung or HTC. Some companies will build the price into the phone, others will price it in some other way (or some companies could eat the cost -- but that's probably not sustainable).

Charging directly to the end user seems like the best way to do it. If I want 2.2, then I should pay for it, and if I'm happy with 2.1 why should I pay for other people to get 2.2? But short of that, charging the carriers makes sense.

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

#40

Post by rufugee »

Just bought a Vibrant last week. After all the reported issues...I'm on the fence on whether to return it. It's a beautiful phone and seems faster than my Droid 2...even running Eclair. Still, the GPS is weak to non-existent at times, and although I can upgrade the phone myself I'd rather have an official version. Ugh.
Post reply on HN