Which are the most reliable manufacturers and US carriers when it comes to Froyo updates?
Note that in this report made by Computer World only Froyo updates between June and December of 2010 are counted, i.e. handsets that were launched with Android 2.2 or were updated to, say, 2.1 in this period, are not taken into account.
The most reliable Android manufacturer when it comes to Froyo updates is... HTC. The Taiwanese smartphone vendor has proved again and again that it's quietly brilliant, and this data shows it once more - 50% of all HTC phones were updated to Android 2.2 between June and December 2010. Second in this table is Motorola with 15.4%, while Samsung is third with 11.1%. Sony Ericsson, Dell and LG are off the Froyo updates' table, since none of their handsets tasted Froyo in the said period.
The "average wait in days for Froyo updates to begin" chart shows that Moto is the best in this category with an average score of 54.6 days, while HTC is close second with 56 days. Sammy is third and its customers have to wait three times more to get Froyo (if they do, you know) - 159 days.
Since the release of the first Motorola DROID, Verizon has turned into a stronghold for Android devices (although the Verizon iPhone may change a thing or two), so it's not particularly surprising that Big Red has the highest percent of Android 2.2 updates between June and December 2010 - 33.3%, and is also the fastest carrier to deliver the tasty Froyo desert - 58 days in average. Second is Sprint - 28% of the third largest US carrier's Android handsets received Froyo - a process that took (on average) a hundred days. Third is T-Mobile, and disappointingly, only 12.5% of its Android phones got Froyo in the above mentioned period. Furthermore, the owners of these handsets that were eventually updated to Android 2.2 had to wait 112 days on average.
Conspicuous by its absence is AT&T, and, indeed, the second largest US carrier failed to send the Froyo treat to any of its Android handsets. Remember, though, that this was in the days of the iPhone exclusivity, and the most intriguing AT&T phones that are set to come soon are all Android powerhouses, like the AT&T ATRIX 4G, the Samsung Infuse 4G and the HTC Inspire 4G.
These are the facts, and they speak volumes of which manufacturers and carriers are Android's best mates. When you buy a phone, it's vitally important to know which phone makers and carriers are best in providing updates, so we hope this summary facilitates your choice.
source: ComputerWorld via Electronista
1. JG (unregistered) posted on 14 Jan 2011, 09:55 0 0
I would love to see a report like this every year. It might be good to update with each new Android release from Google so we know what has been done with the previous release.
2. narley posted on 14 Jan 2011, 10:20 1 1
I agree fully.
My HTC Incredible runs like a champ and never has any issues every other person and their dog has with Motorola.
Hence my disappointment in the Thunderbolt... 1 Ghz?
... come on HTC welcome to 2011, you're behind already.
3. Sniggly posted on 14 Jan 2011, 11:03 1 1
You didn't even read the goddamn article. It's not about whether phones are reliable, it's about whether they're being updated on a timely basis. And Motorola's phones are fine, most people who have issues with them created the issues themselves in my experience.
Oh yeah, and while you praise your own 1ghz phone for it's snappiness, where do you get off telling HTC that they need to have something with a faster processor already?
10. Itzatlas posted on 14 Jan 2011, 17:14 1 0
He's right so your the moron.
4. ribbonsalmark posted on 14 Jan 2011, 11:13 1 0
Among other things AT&T also blocks updates to 2.1 which manufactures have already released. AT&T is just plain awful when it comes to customer relations and get their customers updates that have been proven to work globally be it and update from 1.6 to 2.1 on the Sony Ericsson X10A or an update for Windows mobile phones that can go from 6.0 to 6.5 or 7.0. AT&T you win the crappiest customer relations award. What do you have to say for yourself?
5. downphoenix posted on 14 Jan 2011, 12:44 0 0
The LG Optimus handsets were stock 2.2, why is LG at 0%? Is it only considering early Android handsets like the Ally as far as these figures are concerned?
13. ladyhaly posted on 17 Jan 2011, 05:53 0 0
Read the article please. It says newly released phones for 2010 with 2.2 on stock were not taken into account.
6. Jeromeo posted on 14 Jan 2011, 12:53 0 0
I think the lower amount of updates have less to do with T-Mobile and more to do with companies like Samsung:
8. Rawrzellers posted on 14 Jan 2011, 15:47 0 0
I have a mytouch 1st gen and I got froyo a looooooong time ago.
9. shmeesicle (unregistered) posted on 14 Jan 2011, 16:53 0 0
Samsung needs to step it's Froyo game up. What is this stupid 2.1 revision my Fascinate picked up this morning, and why isn't it 2.2? Really?
11. arqjav1 (unregistered) posted on 14 Jan 2011, 19:39 0 0
I have a Motorola Milestone and we haven´t got the froyo update,and don´t when is coming out, unfortunely my phone restart a couple of time in the day sometimes after making a call I have seen in some blogs that this is do because of the 2.1 update and something to do with the boot loader.
12. Jasneet (unregistered) posted on 15 Jan 2011, 01:43 0 0
Samsung and T-Mobile suck in every field...