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

Samsung Q990D unresponsive after 1020 firmware update

us.community.samsung.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 580 posts

Re: Samsung Q990D unresponsive after 1020 firmware update

#441

Post by godelski »

Ma8ee wrote: post #403
godelski wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That kinda defeats the point of having a device. Sure it works in some cases but we're talking about a soundbar here and that has to interact with other devices. It's whole purpose is to interact with other devices. Even if it doesn't need to contact the internet you're still going to want it to connect through cables. There's good reason to connect through bluetooth. But why should it contact over the internet? Well…

In my case, my stereo is connected to an inexpensive Airplay adapter. So I do get all the advantages of a connected device, but if the adapter is bricked, I can easily replace just that small device. And more likely, when there’s a new standard, most of my equipment is unaffected.

s/soundbar/airplay adapter/g

I believe you're missing the forest for the trees. My argument is invariant to the specific device we're talking about.

Re: Samsung Q990D unresponsive after 1020 firmware update

#443

Post by boricj »

AlotOfReading wrote: post #419
boricj wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm working on embedded systems and I've seen and heard some horror stories just on the device's side. Piles and piles of pre- and post-reboot shell scripts filled with race conditions against the system's services and themselves. When these break, if you're lucky a factory reset is enough to fix the system, if you're unlucky they become field bricks. I'm trying to buck the trend though and on the new embedded system…

That's a strong start, but be careful if your system ever evolves beyond a single logical processor. You'll need additional orchestration to have reliable updates in a distributed system with semi-independent processors. The update on one might succeed, while another fails. Depending on when the old images were produced, the new images might not be able to talk to each other. Depending on their relative roles in the…

Fortunately, it's a single no-frills MCU running the Zephyr RTOS. It does communicate with another system, but they are so very loosely coupled to the point that we really don't care whatever is running on the other side.

I won't get into details, but in some of the horrors stories I've heard the distributed system happened to be entirely software in nature. There are plenty of creative ways to mess up an upgrade on a uniprocessor system.

Re: Samsung Q990D unresponsive after 1020 firmware update

#444

Post by userbinator »

ed_mercer wrote: post #401
jimt1234 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I drive a 30-year-old Nissan pickup truck for this exact reason. Not sure why, but I get a small sense of joy knowing that the corporate overlords aren't "watching" me drive. Of course they're "watching" me on my phone (as I drive the beater truck), but that's a different story.

That old truck is probably polluting 10-30× more than a modern one. While corporations have their flaws, they have spent time and money making engines more efficient and reducing harmful emissions.

Don't care. They can entice us as much as they want. We will not comply. Some people love rolling coal for that reason.

(My semi-daily driver is over 50 years old.)

Re: Samsung Q990D unresponsive after 1020 firmware update

#445

Post by wnolens »

commandlinefan wrote: post #184

"We understand how frustrating an unresponsive soundbar can be." Isn't this about the most condescending thing they can start with?

It smells like corporate communication training. "Affirm the customer. Express that you hear their concerns and empathize"

Re: Samsung Q990D unresponsive after 1020 firmware update

#446

Post by userbinator »

0xFEE1DEAD wrote: post #360

Someone on reddit [0] mentioned that they updated their device via USB and hadn't encountered any issues. If that's true, then it might actually have been the previous firmware update that silently bricked the device. Or maybe Samsung only test in a controlled lab environment without real world signal interference. In any case, it's mind boggling how a multi billion dollar company lacks proper rollout strategies. I h…

Where on earth would I even have to go to find a place without there being any 2.4Ghz signal interference?

Inside a microwave oven.

Re: Samsung Q990D unresponsive after 1020 firmware update

#447

Post by godelski »

jimnotgym wrote: post #335
Ma8ee wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the obvious solution is to isolate the device from the world. Most of my stereo is isolated from “the world”, and some parts are close to 30 years old. Why does a soundbar need contact with the internet?

Why does a soundbar need software? An active speaker with a jack plug would work just fine

Welcome to the world of embedded devices.

Sure, you could do everything through a static circuit and require things being fed with speaker wire. But if you add a microcontroller you're going to be able to do much more, get better sound quality, and protect your equipment. Do your speakers have batteries? Do they plug into wall? Either way you can better control power levels. Do you want to boost bass? Fix corrupted signals? Do you want to process signals from anything other than a bare wire?

Sure, you don't need a microcontroller in a speaker. But we also don't need them in our cars. You don't need them in your fucking kettle. But personally, I find them useful and considering how cheap they are it's worth the basically $0 increased price.

See my other argument. The issue isn't that there's a microcontroller in the speaker. The issue is bricking the device. Don't confuse the means in which a bad actor operates with the bad actor themselves. You'll never stop the bad actor by just banning everything tool they abuse. You'll end up with nothing.

Re: Samsung Q990D unresponsive after 1020 firmware update

#448

Post by londons_explore »

userbinator wrote: post #446
0xFEE1DEAD wrote: post #360

Someone on reddit [0] mentioned that they updated their device via USB and hadn't encountered any issues. If that's true, then it might actually have been the previous firmware update that silently bricked the device. Or maybe Samsung only test in a controlled lab environment without real world signal interference. In any case, it's mind boggling how a multi billion dollar company lacks proper rollout strategies. I h…

Where on earth would I even have to go to find a place without there being any 2.4Ghz signal interference? Inside a microwave oven.

Actually doesn't work particularly well. I suspect signal reflections destroy the signal.

You get similar problems in other larger metal boxes, eg caravans. In a caravan, short high data rate packets are transmitted properly, but bigger packets get lost because they interfere with a reflection off an internal wall.

Re: Samsung Q990D unresponsive after 1020 firmware update

#449

Post by abdullahkhalids »

bhaney wrote: post #414
mh- wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The app enables other features like changing EQs, etc.

Yeah, I'm not sure why I'd want that on my headphones themselves. I just set it to a neutral EQ during initial setup, and now I change the EQs elsewhere in the audio pipeline (music app, mixer, etc) just like we were all doing before the advent of headphones with their own apps.

The EQ settings should depend on what you device you are using to listen - your headphones or your phone's internal speaker - according to their natural response curves.

I don't think major music listening apps will switch your EQ automatically settings based on your listening device. So either you are doing that manually every time you switch devices, or you set your headphone EQ directly.

In any case, the software around this is not clean, and has lots of room for improvement.

Re: Samsung Q990D unresponsive after 1020 firmware update

#450

Post by londons_explore »

Hackbraten wrote: post #281
ryandrake wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate this idea that software "rots" all by itself when it's just left on a device and is impossible to keep working. I would at the very, very least expect my device to work exactly as it did on day one, for the next 50 years, assuming I don't change the software. It's bits on a flash drive! It doesn't rot, outside some freak cosmic ray from space flipping a bit. If you're saying the software stops working because…

Certificates expire.

I think there is a strong argument to simply not checking certificate expiry dates in embedded hardware.

Just keep using the expired certificate forever.

Sure - that means if someone leaks the private key that everyone worldwide needs to do a firmware update to get security.

But that's probably less user harm than everyone worldwide needing to do a firmware update to replace an expired cert, and having a dead device otherwise.

Post reply on HN