x PhoneArena is looking for new authors! To view all available positions, click here.
  • Home
  • News
  • Samsung denies accusations of charging carriers for update

Samsung denies accusations of charging carriers for update

Posted: , by Victor H.

Samsung denies accusations of charging carriers for update

The saga around Samsung Mobile and Froyo updates continues with a new statement by Samsung, which denies accusations of charging carriers for the Android 2.2 update in a brief reply to Phone Scoop. This comes to deny recent rumors about an agreement that would require carriers like Verizon to pay Samsung for an update. An XDA Developers topic allegedly posted by an insider claimed that:


“Samsung, however, considers it [the update to Froyo] a feature update, and requires carriers to pay a per device update fee for each incremental Android update.


Some of you might have noticed Verion’s Fascinate updated, but without 2.2 : This is a result of a maintenance agreement Samsung must honor combined with Verizon’s unwillingness to pay the update fees. In short, Android 2.2 is on hold for Galaxy S phones until the U.S. carriers and Samsung reach a consensus.”


But the Korean company denied this and promises more details soon:


"No. Samsung is not charging carriers for Froyo updates to Galaxy S. We hope to have more detail on status shortly. Promise!"


We have seen some of the company's handsets get an update in the meantime, but Sammy's reply comes a bit late as it caused quite a stir and some even claimed to have filed a class action lawsuit. Hopefully, more details will clarify the situation, but whatever the explanation is, it is hardly going to be enough if the update to Froyo doesn't roll out soon.


source: Phone Scoop and XDA Developers


7 Comments
  • Options
    Close




posted on 19 Jan 2011, 09:24 2

1. tedkord (Posts: 4489; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)


They are not charging, it just takes a while for these things. It's not easy to take a fully functional OS update and make it slow and buggy to Samsung's standards. Then there's months of testing to be certain it freezes at least once a day, that TouchWIZ lags to the proper amount, and that available RAM doesn't accidentally drift above 50mb.


I hate Samsung. (Love Android, though)

posted on 19 Jan 2011, 09:39 4

2. ribbonsalmark (Posts: 84; Member since: 06 Jan 2011)


I find this more interesting and troubling than the 2.1 update for the Sony Ericsson X10A on AT&T. So here is what I am trying to figure out. The Carriers have no problem with the update, an update is available but not being distributed. With the SE X10A a global update was released everyone but AT&T has agreed to distribute the update and there have been no global problems with the update since its release back in November. So the real question comes down to this, who should control the operating system updates. The manufacturer, the carrier or the developer. In this humble developers opinion it should be the developer. The operating system updates should be in the sole hands of Google. As horrible as the makes me feel I think there is more purpose to it that way than the way the android system is handled right now. Android should be a strip build. Much like how you can install windows or linux on any computer so should you be able to do so with Android. Let the Android OS but none dependent on manufacturer or carrier. Let Google release strip builds of Android, Giving each phone the basic features of any android OS, let each build contain the means for have WIFI, 3G, 4G, making calls, txt, browser and all other universal android phone features. This way a customer can choose to use the manufactures build of the Android OS with all the bells and whistles that the manufacture adds, ie drivers, User Interface, and whatever else have you or they can choose to use the strip down version maybe a little lack luster but for phones capable of running new Android OS builds and not have to wait for the manufacture to catch up or a carrier to release the update we could choose to update and then wait for the bells and whistles to get there. Lets remember these smartphones are not cheap, 500 to 1000 dollars retail, they rival the costs of most computers and laptops. Should we not be able to have the same say about operating systems on these devices as we have on our PCs?

posted on 19 Jan 2011, 20:19

5. downphoenix (Posts: 2293; Member since: 19 Jun 2010)


Agreed, one of the reasons I almost didnt go with Android is because of how updates are done. Windows Phone is through Microsoft directly, so regardless of phone model you are virtually assured you will have the most up to date version. Android, after 6 months on the market you can pretty much count out new upgrades unless its a popular device.

posted on 19 Jan 2011, 12:37

3. Univice (Posts: 22; Member since: 15 Jun 2010)


Totally agree with ribbonsalmark - the carriers and manufacturers have too much say and get in the way. The carriers need to focus on supplying a network for people to use, and quit gouging everyone by forcing them to buy high cost packages they don't use. Place a digital meter on all accounts and charge that amount to the user just like a utility. Let customers choose any "extras" like insurance or other services. The manufacturers need to focus on building devices that use the OS "raw". If they want to create a fancy interface - sell it as an app, then the customer can choose which interface they want to buy. People should be able to upgrade the OS on their devices without the manufacturers intervention. Both - the device manufacturers and the carriers need to GET OUT OF THE WAY.

posted on 19 Jan 2011, 16:46

4. luis_lopez_351 (Posts: 951; Member since: 18 Nov 2010)


people have no patients -_-

posted on 19 Jan 2011, 21:18 3

6. downphoenix (Posts: 2293; Member since: 19 Jun 2010)


clealry people have no patience that they feel it is unfair to wait SEVERAL months for an update Google made available to carriers/manufacturer back in early summer or even earlier.

posted on 20 Jan 2011, 12:07 2

7. heyitzme (Posts: 87; Member since: 03 Jan 2011)


I'm not a doctor.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories