Samsung denies accusations of charging carriers for update

Samsung denies accusations of charging carriers for update

The sagaaround Samsung Mobile and Froyo updates continues with a newstatement by Samsung, which denies accusations of charging carriersfor the Android 2.2 update in a brief reply to Phone Scoop. Thiscomes to deny recent rumors about an agreement that would requirecarriers like Verizon to pay Samsung for an update. An XDA Developerstopic allegedly posted by an insider claimed that:

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

Some of you might have noticed Verion’sFascinate updated, but without 2.2 : This is a result of amaintenance agreement Samsung must honor combined with Verizon’sunwillingness to pay the update fees. In short, Android 2.2 is onhold for Galaxy S phones until the U.S. carriers and Samsung reach aconsensus.”

But the Korean company denied this andpromises more details soon:

"No. Samsung is not chargingcarriers for Froyo updates to Galaxy S. We hope to have more detailon status shortly. Promise!"

We have seen some of the company'shandsets get an update in the meantime, but Sammy's replycomes a bit late as it caused quite a stir and some even claimedto have filed a class action lawsuit. Hopefully, more details willclarify the situation, but whatever the explanation is, it is hardlygoing to be enough if the update to Froyo doesn't roll out soon.

source: Phone Scoop and XDA Developers



1. tedkord

Posts: 17454; Member since: Jun 17, 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)

2. ribbonsalmark

Posts: 84; Member since: Jan 06, 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?

5. downphoenix

Posts: 3165; Member since: Jun 19, 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.

3. Univice

Posts: 39; Member since: Jun 15, 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.

4. luis_lopez_351

Posts: 951; Member since: Nov 18, 2010

people have no patients -_-

6. downphoenix

Posts: 3165; Member since: Jun 19, 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.

7. heyitzme

Posts: 87; Member since: Jan 03, 2011

I'm not a doctor.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit for samples and additional information.