| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |
| AT&T, Google duke it out over who causes Android upgrade delays |
| By Thom Holwerda on 2012-05-08 17:55:28 |
| This is fun. The number one iOS carrier duking it out with the company behind the world's most popular smartphone operating system. Last month, Google's lead for the Android Open Source Project, Jean-Baptiste Queru, more or less blamed carriers (see comments) for Android's upgrade woes. Yesterday, AT&T's CEO Randall Stephenson retaliated, blaming Google for the delays. And yes, Google already responded to that, too. |
|
| Excuses, excuses |
| By WorknMan on 2012-05-08 18:31:17 |
|
You know, it's funny... while Google is busy whining and blaming the carriers as to why it can take 6 months or longer for Android phones to get updates, Apple doesn't seem to have this problem. Of course, one can point out the obvious fact that Android has 9 million devices vs Apple's few, which is like Linux Evangelists blaming developers and vendors for lack of certain software and hardware drivers. But in the end, all of this posturing and bullshit doesn't matter to end users like me. What DOES matter is results, and Google needs to find a way to FIX it. As it stands, the only Android phone I would ever consider is a Nexus, for this very reason. Apple has proven that it IS possible to work around the carrier issue, and they manage to ship without crapware all over their devices too. Disclaimer: Before anybody labels me an Apple fanboy, I would like to point out that my phone is a Galaxy Nexus :P |
 - Score: 1 |
| This is what happens when... |
| By bowkota on 2012-05-08 18:31:36 |
| https://twitter.com/#!/arubin/sta... |
| - Score: 1 |
| It's clearly the fault of both |
| By thegman on 2012-05-08 18:58:59 |
|
First to Thom, there is nothing "low" about a mobile phone carrier, it's just a collection of people, some rich, some not, doing their jobs and providing a service. The service may be crap, and it may be expensive, but it's not "low", it's just a service, get over it. Whose fault is it? Clearly both. One sells a phone to a user, and one provides the OS. Neither have shown interest in providing timely OS updates. It's not really in the hardware maker's or carriers' interest, as they would rather you bought a new phone. It's in Google's interest, probably, but not enough to bother doing anything about it. Don't like it? Don't buy it, it's now "low" or "wrong", it's just incompetent, and we're all that in our own ways. |
| - Score: 0 |
| RE: It's clearly the fault of both |
| By Morgan on 2012-05-08 19:14:31 |
|
> Whose fault is it? Clearly both. I agree wholeheartedly. But: > First to Thom, there is nothing "low" about a mobile phone carrier, it's just a collection of people, some rich, some not, doing their jobs and providing a service. The service may be crap, and it may be expensive, but it's not "low", it's just a service, get over it. You sound like someone who has never had mobile phone service from one of the Big Four in the U.S. They can, and given the slightest opportunity, will screw over their customers if it means earning a fraction of a penny of added revenue. It's disgusting and despicable, and I find it bewildering that the MVNOs and prepaid carriers -- some even owned by those big players -- can provide much better customer service and lower prices while leasing spectrum from the main carriers. That alone should tell you just how much money they make off of consumers all while enticing them into heavy handed contracts by offering a $500 device for "free". |
| - Score: 9 |
| RE: Excuses, excuses |
| By kwanbis on 2012-05-08 20:11:42 |
|
What do you mean "apple few"? As far as i know, apple controls 30% of the smartphone market, while android controls 50%. Obviously is apple vs samsung+htc+motorola+lg+wha tever. Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S2 running AOSP 4.0.4. ;) |
| - Score: 0 |
| RE[2]: Excuses, excuses |
| By rjamorim on 2012-05-08 20:14:02 |
| Few different models, obviously. That makes development much simpler. |
| - Score: 7 |
| RE[3]: Excuses, excuses |
| By kwanbis on 2012-05-08 20:32:02 |
|
You are right. But I believe the problem here is with the manufacturers themselves, cause they love to make 50 different phones per year each, that ironically you can hardly differentiate. So, if instead of making 20 phones, HTC makes 3 a year, it would be easier for them also. But again, you are right. Edited 2012-05-08 20:33 UTC |
| - Score: 4 |
| RE[4]: Excuses, excuses |
| By phoenix on 2012-05-08 21:00:05 |
|
HTC is starting to go down the "less is more" road with their new One line. There's the One X and the One S for 2012 (at least so far). Unfortunately, there are still 2 variations of each (LTE and non-LTE) with separate SoCs in each (Tegra3 for non-LTE, S4/Krait for LTE). But, 4 phone models is still better than the 20-odd they had for 2011. |
| - Score: 3 |
| There are 3 to the dance |
| By B. Janssen on 2012-05-08 21:40:28 |
|
This strikes me as odd. For Android this is a three-way setup, while with Apple this is a two-way setup. Google delivers Android to the OEMs, who deliver the hardware to the carriers. It's not that hard to see that the OEMs play an important role in this situation. Those have to bring the updates to their hardware first, before the carriers can delay anything. So, why do European market or "unlocked" devices suffer long update cycles, too, if the (US) carriers are to blame? |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE: There are 3 to the dance |
| By Thom_Holwerda on 2012-05-08 21:44:01 |
|
> So, why do European market or "unlocked" devices suffer long update cycles, too, if the (US) carriers are to blame? The international SII got ICS way before the US variants (do those even have ICS?). |
| - Score: 3 |
| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |