| 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. |
|
| RE[3]: There are 3 to the dance |
| By Bill Shooter of Bul on 2012-05-09 00:31:22 |
| no, that's already baked into the linux kernel ;) |
 - Score: 4 |
| RE: Maybe Windows 8 will help |
| By cfgr on 2012-05-09 01:59:32 |
| Don't get your hopes up. Part of Microsoft's mandated standardisation on ARM is "securing the boot process". |
| - Score: 2 |
| Google/OSS -- all Pro, no Con |
| By jared_wilkes on 2012-05-09 02:26:52 |
|
Yes, the carriers have little incentive to improve the OS. Yes, the carriers have little incentive to ship the version of the OS Google wants them to ship and every incentive to create their own branded experience even if it is a worse experience. Yes, the carriers are annoyed that certain devices or carriers may receive favoritism. Etc... I don't absolve the carriers of any of these things. But these are obvious, natural side effects of the system, the platform, the ecosystem that Google created. These are the negatives that many of us have been pointing to since 2008 -- even though OEMs and carriers did rapidly roll out several updates for the first couple of years. All of this flows naturally from the system Google created. All of this is the other side of the coin of openness. I don't begrudge the carriers for behaving as they always behaved (or as PC OEMs behaved with Windows prior to the smartphone error). However, I do applaud Apple for saying: we aren't going to do it that way, we aren't going to tolerate the status quo, you are going to operate by our rules. |
| - Score: 5 |
| RE[2]: Maybe Windows 8 will help |
| By Neolander on 2012-05-09 03:34:43 |
| Well, most of Android phones already have a pretty "secure" boot process, I'd say, so it wouldn't change much on this front :) |
| - Score: 1 |
| RE[3]: It's clearly the fault of both |
| By demetrioussharpe on 2012-05-09 05:25:24 |
|
> You're right, I don't live in the USA, and don't have much experience with those carriers. I just don't buy into this idea of companies being "bad". They are just organizations attempting to maximize profits for their own gain, the point of capitalism. If you don't like the deal, walk away. I don't deny for a second that these companies do things we don't like, but nobody makes us buy their products and services. If they are a true monopoly, then that's different maybe. Ok, let's just get this out in the open. I think the reason that you have this point of view is because you probably haven't had to deal with Americana companies in bulk. Let me enlighten you a bit. Currently, it's damned near impossible to be successful in the US without having a mobile phone, information just moves too quickly & you can't always sit in your office all day. So, a mobile phone isn't much of an option these days, it's become more of a necessity. However, when ALL of the companies royally suck, then simply not buying the product isn't an option. The reality of it all is that these devices will have to be purchased from someone & the carrier service must be purchased from somewhere. If all of the carriers suck, then you're pretty much screwed. Nothing else is much of an option, to think otherwise is quite a bit naive. |
| - Score: 0 |
| RE[3]: Maybe Windows 8 will help |
| By demetrioussharpe on 2012-05-09 05:31:51 |
|
> Well, most of Android phones already have a pretty "secure" boot process, I'd say, so it wouldn't change much on this front :) I think what the OP means is that there's not much of a chance of Android running on phones certified for Win8. With the secure boot system in place, there's not much of a chance of anything other than Windows running on these phones. In this way, MS would basically lock you into Windows on your mobile; in the same way as they're trying to do for your computer. |
| - Score: 0 |
| RE[2]: There are 3 to the dance |
| By B. Janssen on 2012-05-09 06:05:30 |
|
> > 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?). The official (never mind the leaks) ICS update was rolled out to the GS2 in the middle of April. Less than a month ago, bit I digress. So, the GS2 is on ICS, but what other phones -- besides the Nexus-line -- are? All I have seen are statements of intent, but no actions yet. EDIT: crappy quote formating Edited 2012-05-09 06:06 UTC |
| - Score: 2 |
| Comment by jimmystewpot |
| By jimmystewpot on 2012-05-09 06:36:12 |
|
I agree with most of the other people who comment along the lines of who cares.. something needs to be done to fix it. I run my own custom roms now because I couldn't be bothered waiting for even cyanogen to get their kit released in a timely fashion for CM9... So far So good.. desire hd with updates that follow AOSP. |
| - Score: 1 |
| RE[2]: There are 3 to the dance |
| By jared_wilkes on 2012-05-09 07:00:39 |
|
"Way before" seems a major overreach. There is truth that non-US carriers may move a little quicker in general, but it is not that substantial. It's just as likely that the even lower-end phones which barely sell in the US, if at all, but are sold in great numbers throughout Asia, are not being updated at all -- never mind in a timely fashion. We are looking at a shift from it taking 1 year to achieve 50% of the latest OS to potentially well over 16 months across all markets. Is it your argument that the US is so "way behind" the EU and other parts of the world that it is primarily responsible for the slow rate of adoption? Or that, subtracting the US, a 9-12 month adoption curve would be much more acceptable than a 12-16 month adoption curve? Edited 2012-05-09 07:03 UTC |
| - Score: 1 |
| RE[2]: There are 3 to the dance |
| By jared_wilkes on 2012-05-09 07:12:01 |
| Just to be clear: We are talking about the difference between 6-7 months and 8-9 months after release of the OS update for a phone less than 12 months old as if one is acceptable and the other is not? |
| - Score: 2 |
| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |