Android 4.0 updates: It is all about the money
zdnet.com
zdnet.com
The point isn't that it's "about the money"- every decision a major company makes is. It's that it's short sighted- Samsung may yet lose money because people don't trust them any more.
Not saying I agree with it, but there is a possible logic in there. A dangerous game, though, and it's not like Samsung is teetering on bankruptcy- I don't see what would warrant them to behave this way.
It's true that there is a subset of people who just buy the cheapest thing available — but there's also a pretty sizable segment of the population who might not be able to evaluate for themselves whether or not a phone is a good buy, but who do know that their "techie" nephew told them Samsungs are bad.
(I'm confused why this is fluctuating so wildly in the votes. Is it really so controversial that some products succeed on the strength of their brand rather than just price?)
It's true that there is a subset of people who just buy the cheapest thing available — but there's also a pretty sizable segment of the population who might not be able to evaluate for themselves whether or not a phone is a good buy
Absolutely. But the latter are the minority.
Unlike a lot of communities you might have visited, Hacker News tries very hard to keep the debate intelligent and civil, which requires a lot of self-policing. Your comment was a little more brusque than most people here prefer. Here are a few tips:
• Please make your points politely. You don't have to tiptoe around with your pinky out, but just try not to be rude. Saying things like "First of all, get your facts straight, Android troll" and "Get off Android's nuts" will get you downvoted even if everything you say is correct. (I didn't downvote you, by the way — we can't downvote responses to our own comments, for fairly obvious reasons.)
• If something seems ridiculous, give it a second look and try to find a way that it might make sense. For example, in this particular instance, the first sentence of my comment was a pretty transparent joke. I expected anyone reading a nerdy site like Hacker News to realize that nothing in that sentence was true. The second half of the comment dropped the joke and stated my point directly: A good reputation can pay huge dividends.
• If I had in fact been trolling, this kind of angry response would be precisely the wrong thing to do. Please don't continue unproductive conversations — if you suspect someone is trolling, just leave it be. In fact, even if they're not trolling but just stubbornly wrong, leave it be. Let that thread die. Accept that sometimes people are wrong on the Internet. Fanning the flames will only drag the signal-to-noise ratio even lower than it already is.
What percentage of iPhones are compatible and upgradeable to iOS 5 release on day 1 ? A very high percentage.
Of course, but I'd say that it isn't a valid comparison- how many Samsung iPhones were updatable on day one? None, because they don't exist.
Apple (and this applies to their computer business too) benefits greatly from a totally synchronised hardware and software platform that excludes absolutely every third party. Android is a totally different beast.
You're right though- "Mr. and Mrs. Average" might be asking these questions because what do they know/care about the different approaches Google and Apple take? But also, what do they care about software updates? I'm not sure what the answer to that is.
Android on the other hand is launched as open source, and then the manufacturers have to take it and upgrade to it. What Google could do is keep Android theirs for longer, maybe call it beta, too, like Microsoft does with Windows as well, and 6 months later they could launch it at once with many manufacturers.
It's won't change the timing, only the perception that everyone got Android faster.
Then we could say that day 1 for Samsung's Android 4.0-based software is the day that Samsung updates the first of their devices.
There is for sure a problem with many phone manufacturers not supporting their devices as long as they could. But this has nothing to do with the software that runs on the devices. When it comes to "time until update", the comparison with iOS and Android makes little sense.
Because iOS is a complete operating system, while Android is just the base of Samsung's operating system.
Some of the core applications of the device are not part of android. Some are proprietary from Samsung. Some are proprietary from Google and they get updated about once per month, even if the Android version you are running is not the most recent.
I'm personally more concerned with locked bootloaders and the like because as long as the latest version of Cyanogenmod can easily be installed on my phone, I'm good, but for non-hackers being able to officially upgrade to at least the next major version (assuming it releases within 1.5 years of the phone) seems fair.
Motorola has since reversed course on the bootloaders and is being bought by Google, so I'll probably give them a second chance someday, but your basic point is solid -- these decisions do impact whether or not the consumer will stick with your brand in the future. I've seen it from friends as well as from my own situation.
Screw me once, shame on you, screw me twice, shame on me.
One option would be to remove TW - the nexus s and galaxy s are near identical in hardware spec but the nexus s will be updated to ICS. The main difference being the nexus s is non-TW. However, for samsung, this is not really a viable option. Going from TW to ICS is a major change - things work differently under TW than stock android.
Their best "option" (ignoring costs) would be to find a way to minimise the amount of RAM TW uses and enable ICS on these older devices.
The galaxy s has already received froyo and gingerbread upgrades. What do people think is an "acceptable" upgrade timeframe?
One thing that hasn't been mentioned is that if the buyout of Motorola Mobility is approved, I think you'll see Gootorola performing updates as well.
The situation isn't dire. The handset manufacturers are going to find that they're painting themselves into a corner.
I have a nexus one, which will not be updated. I don't really care, but it is not my main phone either.
The margins on Androids simply aren't high enough to justify the costs of making one-time customers into fans or repeat buyers.
20 million devices, $30 for the ICS update, 5% take rate = $30 million dollars.
Considering random teenagers in web forums can produce pretty good functional ports there's no way it will cost Samsung more than a few hundred thousand dollars to do the development work. Maybe they have to give the carriers a cut to cover their support costs/retraining/etc. Still a good financial incentive for Android OEMs not to abandon their older devices as quickly.
And if they care that much, they may even prefer the custom ROM, without TouchWiz.
Just the battery in the phone will last barely two years and you'll spare yourself a lot of troubles by buying new phones.
-less models/SKU (by a multiple fold)
-less customizations (ie use stock Android)
That way you can focus on making your customers happy.
I'm sure Apple loves nudging people to buy a newer iPhone, but no informed observer should be surprised enough to be angry about lack of iOS 5 on these several generation old devices.
I have and use a 3G myself. On the whole, it has been well supported since 2008.
Can you name a handset that received official software updates for longer than the iPhone 3G? Seems odd to attack what is probably the longest officially supported phone yet... Sounds like axe grinding to me
This article: "Oh, yeah guys, that makes total sense! And if you do want a new version of android running, you can put in the time yourself! See, everything works for everybody."
Yeah, I get that you can get what you want on your phone, but that doesn't mean that these companies aren't doing their customers a disservice, or that we should just give them a pass.
If this were a desktop OS, there's no way manufacturers could get away with something like not even attempting to bring the most recent version to their customers. (Although that's a weak comparison, I still believe Google could take some lessons from Microsoft in how to relate to manufacturers).