x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA

Samsung Galaxy S and Galaxy Tab not getting ICS

Posted: , by Victor H.

Tags :

Samsung Galaxy S and Galaxy Tab not getting ICS
Just recently, Samsung updated us on its Ice Cream Sandwich (ICS) update schedule and which devices are getting it and to our great disappointment the Samsung Galaxy S and the 7-inch original Galaxy Tab are not in there. The latest models of the company are, of course, getting the update: the Samsung Galaxy S II, S II LTE, Galaxy R, Galaxy Tab 10.1, Galaxy Tab 8.9, Galaxy Tab 7.7 and Galaxy Tab 7.0 Plus. But that’s little consolation for those owning Samsung’s 2010 flagship or Samsung’s first tablet.

Interestingly, the Nexus S, which is very similar to the Galaxy S, is getting ICS. Why is it so then that the Galaxy S is not? Samsung explains that it’s because of a combination of factors: using the TouchWiz skin, included video conferencing sotware, additional widgets, carrier software and localization, which all make it hard for Samsung to deliver an update. Except for that, the Korean company refers to issues with RAM and ROM management.

This only confirms fears about even further fragmentation on Android with ICS. The new version was supposed to fix the issue, and it’s very disappointing to see a very powerful handset like the Galaxy S be left in the gutter so soon. Apple in contrast has delivered its newest iOS 5 software to the iPhone 3GS which was released in 2009, a year before the Galaxy S.

Of course, you can always visit the crafty XDA Developers and flash a custom ICS ROM, if you’re tech savvy, but the majority of users aren’t and that’s where the crux of the problem is. What’s your reaction to that - are you disappointed, or are you just fine with having Gingerbread on the Galaxy S?


75 Comments
  • Options
    Close






posted on 23 Dec 2011, 02:49 1

1. Tatperson (Posts: 58; Member since: 21 Oct 2011)


Capable phones not getting new android updates... Just like the Motorola Atrix 4g and Motorola Atrix 2...

posted on 23 Dec 2011, 03:06 1

4. Gemmol (Posts: 792; Member since: 09 Nov 2011)


No need to jinx, I have one of the phones you just listed. I understand you being realistic, so I can not fault you for that. I hope what you say may not be true, but part of me would not mind, in my opinion 2.3 is a great OS, it gets what I need done daily and by time I am ready to update, I hope there would be a phone with a 1080p screens and a quad core chip inside.

posted on 23 Dec 2011, 03:55 4

13. bobfreking55 (Posts: 866; Member since: 15 Jul 2011)


Samsung explains why: ( I read on GSMarena. just sharing guys)

Both feature Samsung's TouchWiz customizations which run pretty deep (they include things like custom widgets, video calling and so on), and they also have country-specific customizations (like the ISDB-Tb Digital TV tuner for Brazil) along with carrier-mandated changes.
All those customizations will not run smoothly on the older hardware if ported to Ice Cream Sandwich, with limited RAM and ROM storage pointed out as problematic.

which sucks. they should have just removed touchwiz etc.

posted on 23 Dec 2011, 08:36 2

36. Retro-touch (Posts: 273; Member since: 24 Oct 2011)


Samsung treats users like whores. Just use and throw them away. Man I'm pissed it took me forever to save for my SGS!!

posted on 23 Dec 2011, 16:26 2

58. btbotimtim (Posts: 188; Member since: 08 Dec 2010)


iphone 3gs got 2 upgrades from ios3.0 to 4.0 to 5.0. samsung also gave 2 upgrades from android 2.1 to 2.2 to 2.3.
U just don't realize it and just complain whenever you don't get what you think you deserve.
Try to understand other sides.

posted on 24 Dec 2011, 01:41

65. ardent1 (Posts: 2000; Member since: 16 Apr 2011)


Samsung screws 10 million consumers because of its software. Now Samsung has 10 million walking advertisements of why you shouldn't spend money on Samsung products. Even MicroSoft users don't have this problem.

posted on 23 Dec 2011, 03:16 4

7. Sniggly (Posts: 7305; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)


What are you talking about? The Atrix got updated to Gingerbread and it and the Atrix 2 have undecided fates regarding ICS.

posted on 23 Dec 2011, 03:35 1

10. Tatperson (Posts: 58; Member since: 21 Oct 2011)


Sorry if I sounded a bit negative, but I was quite dissapointed with the fact that Motorola didn't add the ATRIX and ATRIX 2 to the confirmed ICS upgradeable devices list.. but I must agree that 2.3.4 for the ATRIX is good.. only if we were given the 2.3.5 that comes with the RAZR and bionic..

posted on 23 Dec 2011, 03:43 1

11. E.N. (Posts: 2610; Member since: 25 Jan 2009)


The specs for the Atrix and Atrix II are high enough that ICS should be a give in. Although 2.3.4 may be good, I don't think it would be right for the phones not to get ICS. Especially the Atrix II which just released.

posted on 23 Dec 2011, 03:46 1

12. Sniggly (Posts: 7305; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)


Well, we're still not condemned to no ICS. As I recall the TI processors work better than the NVIDIA Tegra 2 with Android overall. I mean, the speed should be there, I'm just worried that the processor architecture may be incompatible.

Still, I'm not shouting doom and gloom yet. I think both phones stand a chance of getting ICS; I just hope that it happens on the same timetable as the updates for the Razr/Bionic/etc.

posted on 23 Dec 2011, 03:03 9

2. baldilocks (Posts: 753; Member since: 14 Dec 2008)


Yeah, fragmentation and slow updates are the norm for Android. The only thing keeping more people with Android are the larger screens, cheaper phone selections and customization options.

posted on 23 Dec 2011, 03:18 12

8. HTCiscool (Posts: 449; Member since: 16 Jul 2011)


Those are quite big factors

posted on 23 Dec 2011, 10:17 3

45. EclipseGSX (Posts: 1719; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)


The average user does not care about updates. I have an ICS rom on my EVO and (most) of my non-techy friends had no idea it even existed or even what versions of Android or iOS are even on their phone

posted on 23 Dec 2011, 14:34

48. Lucas777 (Posts: 2137; Member since: 06 Jan 2011)


just because they dont know it exists doesnt mean they wouldnt want it... i think it is pretty crappy of samsung to unsopport 1 year old phones before anybodys contract is even up... that is just sad of samsung

posted on 23 Dec 2011, 16:04 2

54. EclipseGSX (Posts: 1719; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)


True, but I was referring to balds comment about what he thinks are the ONLY reasons people stay on Android which isn't at all true. I seriously doubt any average user looking at a new phone is going to say "I won't get the latest OS on this phone? Never mind, I don't want it."

posted on 24 Dec 2011, 01:35

63. ardent1 (Posts: 2000; Member since: 16 Apr 2011)


Bigger screen = more juice needed = shorter battery life.

Bigger screen = need for faster processor = more juice needed = shorter battery life.

Those bigger screens come at a cost.

posted on 25 Dec 2011, 13:37

74. Lucas777 (Posts: 2137; Member since: 06 Jan 2011)


u r right.. they just expect it.. and android does not deliever on that

posted on 23 Dec 2011, 03:03 8

3. HTCiscool (Posts: 449; Member since: 16 Jul 2011)


Ok, they cant just abandon the SGS, its got good enough graphics hardware to run ICS, and more then 10m people own the phone, so, they need to update the SGS. XDA probably wont abandon it but I thought it should at least get ICS officially...

No one really gives a damn about the original Galaxy Tab though...

posted on 23 Dec 2011, 13:14 1

47. SleepingOz (unregistered)


It's THAN, you stupid!

posted on 23 Dec 2011, 14:45 1

49. HTCiscool (Posts: 449; Member since: 16 Jul 2011)


Hey man, go troll somewhere else or get a life, no one cares about spelling mistakes, in case you haven't noticed

THIS IS THE INTERNET!!!

posted on 24 Dec 2011, 16:23 1

70. SleepingOz (unregistered)


So what when this is internet? Does this change the fact that you're a dumb who can't make any difference between then and than and who doesn't know when to use them correctly?

posted on 23 Dec 2011, 16:21 1

57. btbotimtim (Posts: 188; Member since: 08 Dec 2010)


good thing about SGS is there are a lot of devs because the phone was so popular when it was released.
Samsung really gave 2 upgrades. it was released with 2.1 and now it is 2.3.

posted on 23 Dec 2011, 03:07 1

5. HTCiscool (Posts: 449; Member since: 16 Jul 2011)


Ok, they have to update the Infuse 4G, it was a great phone, before the SGSlls and the Vivid came the Infuse and the Atrix were the only decent options on AT&T, so the Infuse must be updated.

posted on 23 Dec 2011, 03:09 4

6. HTCiscool (Posts: 449; Member since: 16 Jul 2011)


This is why I like HTC, unlike Samsung, their entire company focuses on mobile products, so they invest the most resources into making their software good and optimized, and their products bug-free,

posted on 23 Dec 2011, 08:09 1

32. Retro-touch (Posts: 273; Member since: 24 Oct 2011)


The most annoying issue is that Sony Ericsson will be updating their phones that have identical specs to the SGS and Samsung claim they can't do it. F@#K Sammy and their useless reasons. 10 million people forked out good money and they can't support their coveted Galaxy phones that broke records for them. I'm already running ICS on my Captivate and its buttery smooth. Does that make the guys at XDA geniuses????

http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1362092

posted on 23 Dec 2011, 09:51 2

42. taz89 (Posts: 2014; Member since: 03 May 2011)


i dont think htc,moto or sony are going to be updating there 2010 models,so far they have only announced there 2011 models just like samsung,so they are all as bad as each other..all these manufactures number 1 priority is to put there skins on and if they cant get there skins on then they will not be updating.thats why we have the nexus phones cause we know they are likely to get the updates..if you get a skinned phone you should not be surprised if you dont get the update.thankfully we have xda where we can get unofficial stock ics for these unsupported devices which will be even better than if they had recieved offical ics with a skin on top...my guess is many people who come to these sites would probably put a custom rom with stock ics even if they had updated the galaxy s officially.

posted on 23 Dec 2011, 03:32 3

9. Sniggly (Posts: 7305; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)


Seriously? You're lamenting the fate of the original Galaxy S's software? Dude, the Captivate is a year and a half old now, and its cousins on the other carriers aren't far behind. Let's recap:

The first wave of Epic 4G users will be eligible for an upgrade starting June 31st this year.

The first Fascinate buyers will be eligible to upgrade starting May 8th.

The first Vibrant buyers will be eligible to upgrade starting May 21st.

Last, but not least, the first Captivate buyers will be eligible to upgrade starting March 18th.

Also, the 3GS may have iOS 5, but every single one of them turning up in customers' hands at my store is laggy as hell, and they're coming right out of the box displaying significant stuttering and lag. My nephew's Captivate may have Froyo still, but I'll be damned if it isn't almost as smooth as my Atrix. I'd really much rather have him keep a non frustrating user experience than get a few new features at the cost of nearly killing his phone.

I mean, a couple of the killer features on ICS aren't even possible to use on the original SGS series, like Face Unlock and Hangouts.

Also, the fragmentation problem won't increase. App compatibility will largely stay the same for the SGS series; sure, the next wave of high end games will run like s**t on them, but apps are being updated to run well on ICS AS WELL AS the other versions of Android out there.

In short: the SGS is on its way out (especially as other, newer phone models are being sold for free) and will be almost completely retired this time next year, and its capability will not be reduced in the meantime by a lack of ICS update.

posted on 23 Dec 2011, 03:58 2

15. E.N. (Posts: 2610; Member since: 25 Jan 2009)


You make a lot of really good points, but I'm sure you can understand the disappointment of some of the users. You mentioned above the first wave of users, but May - July is a long way to wait. I know a few people who bought their phones a little bit later and now will have to wait to fall/winter 2012 to get a new phone. Of course some good features on ICS won't be compatible with older models, but there are features that are compatible.

Phones like the Atrix 4G and Atrix II shouldn't have undecided fates. It should be a give in that they're going to updated.

posted on 23 Dec 2011, 04:17 4

16. Sniggly (Posts: 7305; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)


I agree that it's frustrating that Motorola still hasn't announced which phones they're upgrading to ICS; however, they never really did announce such information before pushing soak tests to customers before. Which, again, is frustrating, but it's really a business strategy they're following: better to underpromise and overdeliver.

Think about it: what if Motorola says "Yes, we're updating the Atrix to ICS!" Then, during testing, they realize that ICS will absolutely murder the battery, slow the phone down to s**t, and has a host of bugs which can't be reconciled with the other included software and hardware. Now they suddenly have to A) work on a solution to introduce a bug free/neutered version of ICS, or B) announce that they can't update the phone after all.

I mean, look at the Bionic debacle. As someone who's been in a similar position to Motorola before regarding promises and such to customers, I forgave them when they had to delay and redesign their phone so it wouldn't have a 2 hour battery life/overheat on people. I preferred that they put out a product that works-and it pretty much has. However, more and more people cried for blood as the Bionic got pushed back, and then it was finally released-and overshadowed completely by the RAZR.

I actually suspect that the people crying for the BIONIC to be released ASAP killed their own experience. If the outcry to "GIVE US OUR BIONIC NAO!!!" hadn't been so bad, they may have simply shelved it completely and then announced the RAZR as a replacement, or rebadged the RAZR as the Bionic. However, people demanded the Bionic, and they got the Bionic. And then Motorola released the RAZR, because as a company it would've been suicide to let the Bionic be the best phone they released in 2011.

So for Motorola it's basically a situation of "Damned if you do, damned if you don't." I prefer they don't promise me anything; that way I'm not disappointed if they can't deliver.

As for the SGS, I think the main issue is that Samsung would have to make serious compromises to get ICS to work on all the original variants. The phones were designed almost 2 years ago, they were never intended to run ICS. I'm not saying it's impossible, but for Samsung the liability is too great if the update is screwed up. The Nexus S update has already been delayed indefinitely because enough users were experiencing issues with it, and hell, it's less than a year old.

Bottom line: if Samsung can't get the update to work with the user experience it already set up on the original SGS series, then I think nixing any update for it is the smart route to take.

posted on 23 Dec 2011, 04:28 2

19. HTCiscool (Posts: 449; Member since: 16 Jul 2011)


You are probably right about the SGS thing, but with Moto's deal, I think they were just trying to get the Bionic off their neck to focus their full resources on the RAZR. There are a huge number of disappointed Bionic users that wished they had waited for the Razr, Nexus or Rezound.

They should have definitely made the Razr and announced it as the Bionic, then customers would have been more forgiving of the fact that Moto delayed the Bionic for around 10 months.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories