yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] awwilson21:
I am calling shenanigans. This guy made all of this up. The reason there is no Froyo on Galaxy S is because Samsung changed directions at the last moment. They are working with GB now, and since Nexus S ships with it, I imagine that Samsung chose to push that instead of Froyo. So instead of Froyo now and GB in a year, you'll get GB in the next 2 months, and never get Froyo...

What this guy is saying is ILLEGAL. Samsung CANNOT charge the carriers for an open-source OS... and I highly doubt that Google would allow that... especially since they picked Samsung for the newest DevPhone.

I think this "insider" is just someone trying to get attention.
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] lexcyn:
Considering all Canadian Galaxy phones are now updated to 2.2 your post doesn't make sense. If they were just focusing on GB then we wouldn't have gotten the 2.2 updates.

Also, to the OP, your post kind of doesn't make sense either. Considering the Canadian carriers are a lot smaller than the US counterparts, I doubt they would have paid crazy fees to have a feature update to all Galaxy phones.
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] felacio:
I don't buy that. For one, videos have already been posted promising 2.2 "coming soon". if they skip over Froyo, albeit, to move on to Gingerbread, it's already false advertising. 2.) The Galaxy S line and the EVO where released very close to eachother, EVO got an official Froyo very quickly while Galaxy S, none, have gotten an official update.

and what he is saying isn't ILLEGAL by any means, Samsung isn't charging for the actual Android OS, because THAT is illegal, they can easy charge for anything else surrounding the needed resources to move that to their phones. The OP's explanation makes sense. Across different networks, samsungs has the worst track record for updates period. There has to be a reason. That their policy pushes incremental Android updates into a different tier vs. what a different manufacturer considers is very plausible.

on that note, did anyone see Samsungs official response to PhoneScoop on this?!.. "No like, dude... totally.. I promise... really, bro
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] Step666:
Who's defending them?

All I was doing was pointing out that the OP is a troll, a point which has been proven by Samsung's press release on the matter.

As for the rest of your post, it has nothing to do with anything I said.
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] testacon:
Regardless of whether or not you believe the OP or not is moot. What we CAN say for fact is that Samsung has been caught in many lies in recent history or at the very least deceptive advertising.

I wouldn't trust any press releases that Samsung produces anyway unless it's a new product to purchase...
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] Step666:
I disagree.

This thread is purely about whether or not the OPs claims are true, which they are not.

I'm sure there are plenty of other threads around here that are dedicated to the delays with Samsung's updates for the Galaxy S line and their customers' dissatisfaction but I am not posting in any such thread because I have no opinion on the matter.

I am however posting in a thread on the topic of whether or not there is any truth to the claim that Samsung are attempting to charge US networks for updates to their Android handsets and that is what I have expressed an opinion on.
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] vbetts:
Again, Samsung has done this before. The Moment, the Behold II.
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] joshnichols189:
A statement to Phonescoop is not a press release.

You believe everything a manufacturer tells you?

I'm not saying the OP is right or not, I really don't care.
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] Step666:
No.

But I believe something that makes sense and disproves a baseless accusation that left more questions than answers.
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] vbetts:
No, but again. This isn't the first time Samsung has been late on an update, or even provide a certain update. I doubt that the rumor the op posted is the reason, just Samsung being Samsung.
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] joshnichols189:
Oh, I don't doubt it. Whether or not the OP has the right reason, the point is that Samsung has a horrible update track record, and I plan to fully avoid it :)
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] vbetts:
Exactly! No more Samsung phones for me. :D
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] crypticc:
Any software or hardware company will have limited resource (devs) and if aa project gets delayed resource maybe redirected to different things. i suspect this maybe the real and more likely reason.
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] testacon:
I do agree that this thread sounds far fetched, but to play devil's advocate, I haven't heard the U.S. phone carriers rushing in and defending Samsung either. Samsung issuing a self satisfying press release is no better than a defense attorney claiming their murder client is innocent, Samsung isn't a trustworthy vendor anymore IMO, so I'm not rushing to accept their side of the story. If I hear Verizon, Sprint, AT&T, TMobile or some other 3rd party stick up for them--then maybe I'll cut them some slack and just called them incompetent.

Unfortunately either way it's lose/lose for us...:mad:
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] dangerismymiddlename.com:
I think of it this way: these are not phones; they are general-purpose computers that happen to have a phone function. We expect OS upgrades for our general-purpose computers.
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] nickb64:
Why is it so hard to update?

If they just built the Nexus S, which is basically the same hardware as the GSM versions of the Galaxy S at least, I would think that if they wanted, they could probably skip Froyo and go straight to Gingerbread, though they would have to put some work into their ****ty Touchwiz crap I'm sure, or ditch it altogether. I imagine it'd be harder for them to update the CDMA phones at that point, but I don't really know.
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] kobesabi:
It's newsworthy. Everyone wants to know it...try starting with Facebook/Twitter if you do not know where to look for them.

Televised press conference or *verified* Facebook or *verified* Twitter that is linked from original carriers site give more credibility. Without it, yes I'd still question the authenticity of it as I am in the IT field and knows alot of things can be bypassed. Only fools, blind, or incompetent people would not ignore veracity.

Which post? I do not know which one you refer to.
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] kobesabi:
Exploit like this is one of the reason why all US android consumers MUST have update fast...not half a year late. The article link says Google will not have update fix for it until Android 2.3 (Gingerbread)... Bummer. Froyo is no where in sight. Maybe we should start demanding 2.3 now instead of 2.2.

http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?t=921217

I can see a new exploit stem out of this exploit...but won't say it until I don't use SGS anymore.

At this pace of turtle upgrade, likely android won't be gaining momentum in business sector anytime soon and that a number of folks will just be quarantining Android phone whenever it is attached to their network with all kind of network access lockdown.

If OEM can't do it all themselves, they should release the code more to let XDA help them fix it since some dev already plan on enhancing sec.
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] TekkenLaw:
In India we do not buy devices from carrier but from open market, so the manufacturer is totally responsible for firmware upgrades. I own a Galaxy 3 (lower version of SGS), which I bought after reading about Samsung promise that it would 'soon' get Froyo..didn't happen. Then they promised to upgrade as soon as all SGS users get it..now more than a month has passed, we still have no news..there are rumours that they will release it in April!

To my surprise, earlier this month they launched Galaxy 551 here, which is almost same as Galaxy 3 (with a slide-out keyboard), but has been launched with Froyo! So if they have it tested & running on the new phone, how difficult is it to upgrade an existing, very similar phone?? It is quite clear that they are reluctant to upgrade existing users & force us to buy newer phones. I will definitely think twice before buying Samsung phones again (despite loving my G3)..
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] gpitkis:
I bought my Sumsung Galaxy S Captivate from Rogers 2 days ago and as soon as I've connected it to my laptop I've updated it to 2.2 because I saw that the update is available on carrier site, so may be in Canada it's different than in U.S?
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] vbetts:
Samsung did build the Nexus S, but Samsung isn't providing the updates to it. Google is handling the updates for the Nexus S, where as with the Galaxy S, Samsung is who updates those.
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] Step666:
Try this one or this one.
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] davidbruington:
I can't delete this reply lol

OOPS, I should've paid more attention to what thread I was in! Wrong browser tab ;) sorry guys.
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] bjb_nyj101:
Samsung Galaxy S Vibrant will get Froyo tomorrow, says T-Mobile CMO
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] mAlfunkti0n:
Hate to be negative, but when it's released then it will be news. Otherwise it's just another "promise" that hasn't yet been fulfilled.
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] dorkiedorkfromdorktown:
I think it's mostly likely a little of all of these things.

There's one thing that is not being mentioned. With 2.2 you get tethering. Adding this update would allow all users in the US to be mobile hotspots across all the current cell towers.

The iPhone had tethering for months before enabling it for US customers. Why? Possibly because they needed to add more tower support but more likely the time it took setup a new data plan for it and delaying was allowing them to save the cost of the bandwidth it would incur (thats where a new data plan would transfer the costs to the customer).

In this case the delay in supporting 2.2 might be the same situation. Who knows. In these situations we don't know unless there is transparency. And unless it's a law transparency is up to the companies decision.

Having said that the Galaxy S is nice hardware but being unable to uninstall ATT crapware and unable to get updates to an OS running on what is actually a computer with a cell phone technology on board is unacceptable. These are not smart phones they are computers or computer phones. What is a computer - electronics.howstuffworks.com/microcontroller1.htm.
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] mr72:
Unfortunately, for the time being, the business model in the USA is such that we buy cell phones from the carriers, generally with a heavily discounted price in exchange for signing a service contract. The carrier sees the phone not as a product in and of itself, but as a vehicle for selling services related to their primary business. So the delay in getting "updates" most likely has to do with the carrier not having a business case for the update, regardless of whether the phone manufacturer has a workable update.

The point about wireless tethering is a good one. AT&T, for example, charges extra for this feature, which is included for free in the open-source software. Part of AT&T's plan would be to find a reliable way of turning off the tethering in their roll out of Froyo, and ensuring that they can continue to activate it based on your service agreement (in other words, enforcement of their upcharge for the feature). It is no small matter to take out features and replace them with alternate versions that you have to charge for.

Of course, you may not agree with this policy, and I don't agree with it either. I find that as long as I paid what was asked for the phone and I also continue to pay my bill for services that I have agreed to for the length of my contract then there is no reason that I should not be the owner outright of the hardware and do with it exactly as I see fit. AT&T along with Apple have aggressively opposed this ideal. Apple, in particular, is very vocal about their opinion that even though you purchase a piece of hardware, their copyright on the software delivered on that phone gives them the right to prosecute you if you alter the software (and they are losing this battle in court). There is a long history of this type of business practice not only by phone carriers but other providers of technology products.

The main difference now is that these phones are being delivered with an open-source OS, which technically CAN be altered relatively easily by any user, and this is completely outside of the carrier's control (and also outside of the hardware manufacturer's control). The US carriers are still applying an outdated business model but they have been doing this kind of thing for decades since they enjoy government-sponsored quasi-monopoly so they don't really have to respond to customer demands.

The time will come when we buy our cell phones free and clear of any carrier's influence and then we can do with them as we see fit. At that point we can know exactly who to blame when there are problems. As for right now, I say the most likely culprit for this particular problem is the carrier, and Samsung knows better than to bite the hand that feeds them.
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] mrush336:
why doesnt it surprise me that samsung wants to charge for an open source project. its always about the money with these companies. if all of us complained to samsung maybe they would change thier ways. i just rooted my epic, it wont be long before i do my own rom upgrade.
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] w1nter456:
this is very good information,thank you so much !!
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] autonomic:
2.1 bugs...

There are some bugs in 2.1 which can rather easily lead to thermal overload. The phone doesn't shut down either, and it's a lot easier to do than one might think. I'm not going to post a HowTo on it, but the problem exists. I discovered it by accident. When I did I took it a bit further to see if I could replicate the problem, and I could. I have not taken it to it's logical end, or tested to destruction, but I'm rather cautious now about what state the phone is in when it's charging (hint) out of a real fear I might start a fire if I don't.

I bring this up because as has been noted thermal overload problems are one of the things that can trigger a "critical update". From the cursory research I've done some of these problems are solved in 2.2.
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] bgchz:
Im not rooted and I have 2.2.1 on my phone. Works perfect. The download is here on XDA. You can install it from the stock recovery.
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] Step666:
Does this count?

Samsung Vibrant's Android 2.2 update now available, it seems - Engadget
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] nickb64:
I understand that, but they clearly have some hand in it, making it work on the hardware, which is damn near identical to the Galaxy S phones. All I'm saying is that they should be able to push out an update far faster than they have so far.

Edit: I was seriously considering getting a Fascinate as my next phone until the debacle that has been
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] mAlfunkti0n:
It does count and I'm happy to see them finally make good on a promise!
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] Step666:
Of course, it now begs the question why this thread is still open since it is, conclusively, a pile of... well, you get where I'm going with this.
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] reinbeau:
My thoughts exactly, Step666.
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] Holliday:
Whats more damning of a company? Not putting out updates due to a contract dispute or not putting them out because they are incapable of doing so in a safe and timely manner?

Not only has Samsung soured my view of them in regards to phones. They have soured my view of all their products that rely on software. Particularly Android based devices. This includes Phones, Tablets, TV's, SSD's(firmware makes or breaks these along with the controller) and any other number of devices that rely on software in the coming years.
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] ph00ny:
Because carriers and manufacturers refuse to put vanilla android on their devices. Why would they?
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] wshader:
When it comes down to it the responsiability comes to Samsung. It is a Samsung product and they should support their product. Personally if I was Samsung and was getting stonewalled by the carriers I would toss the update on the Samsung website with maybe a $5 charge and say screw them. No carrier bloatware, just stock android. That would hurt the carriers much more in the long run and provide a massive PR hit with the consumers. Part of the reason Iphone does so well is because Apple supports their product. If Apple provided the updates through the carriers I doubt the Iphone would be as sucessful as it is today. There is no reason for "leaked" updates such as the one for the Epic. Samsung should port the Nexus S build to the various Galaxy S series with current drivers on their website with a disclaimer saying for the $5 your carrier refuses to pay you can have this. Happiness to everyone besides the carriers and truth be told F them.
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] ph00ny:
How does this help them retain their relationship with the carriers? As for iphone, apple only needed to maintain one carrier version. Let's see how well they cater to multiple carriers.

also you do have a choice of buying an unmolested one that could have received the froyo update last year. You just had to pay for it
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] Essenar:
No, they don't. That's what the guy you quoted was saying to you. Samsung has 0% effort involved in updating the Nexus S. Google engineers and Google developers are the ones updating it. It's their "baby" and their flagship. Samsung merely designed it, gave it to them along with the engineering diagrams and full kits and Google said "Okay thanks, see you later."

Samsung probably hardly ever even hears from them. Unless Google called them about the GPS issue like, "Hey what the hell man? We said to make this thing perfect. It says I'm at your location..."

Now, it's entirely possible for XDA developers here to reverse engineer the Nexus S update and customize it for other Galaxy S devices, but that's not Samsung's effort.
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] Step666:
You are aware that even unlocked/unbranded Galaxy S handsets are nowhere near 'stock' Android?

They have massive amounts of Samsung's own bloat-/crap-ware on them, it's called TouchWiz.

Doubtful.

In the long run, it would only serve to burn bridges between Samsung and their customers (ie the networks).

When was the last time you bought your phone directly from the manufacturer?

If Samsung phones weren't available via AT&T, Verizon and the like, how would you personally ever get ahold of them?

Your suggestion would be commercial suicide on Samsung's part.

Plus, it's based on the misconception that the OP in this thread is telling the truth and not a sad little troll like he actually is - the networks are almost certainly not the stumbling block here, it's far more likely it's Samsung who are responsible for the delays.

You are aware that the USA is not the only country in the world?

In the UK alone, the iPhone is sold on 6 different networks and also unlocked - I think that more than proves that Apple can cope with multiple networks.
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] ph00ny:
yes i am.

Seeing how verizon and att are both notorious for adding their own limitation and they utilize completely different networks. It remains to be seen
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] Step666:
The different network technologies is a new thing for Apple but from the looks of things, the other 99% of the handset is identical.

Apart from being locked, the networks have zero say in anything that happens with the software, there is no customisation or anything like that, so very little needs to change to make the iPhone work on Verizon.
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] bpodz34:
This theory was disproved
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] Janis:
I'm in my 40's. I have all too recently figured out not to buy anything based on any promised, contracted or not. Following up on a broken contract, particularly if devised by a group of clever corporate lawyers, makes the whole thing d** near not worth it. Kids, watch your hineys, please.

It's a WYSIWYG world, and the US prides itself on being 'competitive.' Makes me think.

Can we as smart US folk respond to this disappointment by recognizing the essence of the problem? Keep our own promises, and particularly at work, make some tough efforts to nudge our culture in the direction of integrity and timeliness for its own sake?

Sorry, just noticing it's pretty much a US-centric problem....