Google Changes Tack on Android
online.wsj.com
online.wsj.com
I sit here seven months after Google released the source to ICS, and still the T-Mobile Samsung Galaxy S II has not been upgraded to Android 4.0, and today the rumor is it will be at least another month before TMo and Samsung can get their act together.
Android may have lots of Google induced issues, but it certainly seems that 90% of the issues most users have comes from terrible carrier bloatware and infrequent, late, or just never occurring carrier updates.
No matter how you spin it, Android OS updates are one big pile of fail, even if you buy a Nexus device.
Actually, you can look at this as an aliasing issue in the data. The 3GS and Nexus One were both the "oldest" supported phones at the release of a major OS version, and that happened about just about exactly 2 years for both of them. One fell on one side of the support decision and one on the other.
The "pile of fail" flameage is beneath this site. Stop that, you're polluting our nice community with your garbage. Argue. Don't sling poo.
With my G2 it took 12 months from Gingerbread being available to it being on the phone. I'm now using a Nexus but that sadly means no wifi calling.
If you want ICS anyway, CM9 and AOKP are coming along reasonably well for the Sensation (including the T-Mobile variant), but that's only a temporary solution, of course.
It's absurd that I as a developer am forced to release for 2.2 at this point. 95% of my iOS customers are on 5.0 or better, and 88% of them are on 5.1 which came out in March. I think roughly 20% of android is still on 2.2, and most are on 2.3. Seems pretty silly when 4.0 came out 7 months ago.
I'm sorry for not including that in my comment, you're absolutely right. That's what I get for netflixing dr. who while browsing HN.
Manufacturers and carriers would have to upgrade fewer times (and hopefully more devices), and the vast majority of users should only be 1 version behind.
Carriers have absolute control over the consumer sales channels, and that gives them all the power. The carriers demand extreme control over the hardware and software pushed through those sales channels, and the manufacturers (other than Apple) have no choice but to give them that control because that is how you win in this business. Just ask Samsung, who made $5 billion last quarter selling devices running outdated Android 2.x. Or ask HTC, who got crushed by the carriers after offering devices with unlocked Android bootloaders.
If you're a manufacturer, you win by being the one who makes the carriers the most money per customer per month.
So how does ICS help Samsung make more money for Verizon? How does upgrading old devices to ICS help Samsung make more money for Verizon? If you're Samsung, that's the only question you're trying to answer.
The reality is that ICS does not help Samsung or any other manufacturer make more money for Verizon, and that's why ICS adoption has been so low.
The problem is that the manufacturers (other than Apple) have little desire to change this business model. If (and when) Samsung begins to defy the carriers, LG and Motorola and HTC will trip over themselves to take Samsung's place and become the next darling of the carriers.
I generally agree with you about the power of carriers, but this HTC bootloader thing is an irritating myth. Samsung's devices have been consistently more hackable than HTC's for the entire period in question, not to mention that they topped it off by hiring cyanogen. HTC has had their issues (too-large device portfolio, not matching the SGS2, etc.), but bootloaders were a blip, either way.
In the US. But here, on the other side of the pound, there's hardly any carrier specific additions or subtractions to/from android, just the manufacturers. The big EU markets have some (like Germany, France, UK), but unlocked phones are still always available, and many customers opt for those.
I think you're right about the situation when talking about North America, though.
Personally I've been burned by both HTC and LG on slow or no updates, so I will never by an Android phone that's not a nexus device again.
Edit: Unlocked and unbranded nexus device.
For the most part, US carriers (including AT&T and US Tmo) have not yet released official ICS upgrades.
http://www.phonesreview.co.uk/2012/05/14/us-galaxy-s2-4-0-ic...
If Google can make this kind of thing easier, I'm all for it.
http://prepaid-phones.t-mobile.com/prepaid-plans
I've been hesitant to promote it in case it gets oversubscribed and T-Mo shuts it down...
FWIW, If you ever need to conserve your high speed data plan, you can switch to 2G. That way you can still have your data on, but it is un-metered.
Also, check out the plans details closely. They don't mention it, and the 1-800-T-Mobile CSRs won't tell you, or don't know, but you can't tether on this plan, at least, not if you're using the Samsung Galaxy SII and probably not with any/most Tmo phones (unless you decide to root the phone and disable/uninstall/freeze the TetheringManager app.)
Actually what I like is that my bills are even less than $30 per month. Because I am often, many weeks, almost entirely in a heavy wifi environment, I just don't prepay the next 30 days until I really know I need a GSM phone service. Most days I use either GrooveIP, or CSIP to make calls over wifi. If I am not in a wifi area for a few hours, calls go to google voice. AND if I know where I am driving to, I can even use Google Maps when I am not in a wifi zone by precaching the map data in Google Maps. (And even if I don't have prepaid GSM minutes, 911 will still work.)
If you don't pay for the phone number at least once every 90 days, they recycle the number.
For the past seven months, my T-Mobile charges have been $60.00. Not each month. Total.
At the very least this will raise the bar so everyone else will have to do better.
> no extra skins
What they could have done is make it possible to turn off. And sell it in the Android market for other non-Samsung devices. (If it is that good then other people will want it.)
I think that most people who understand what that means would want it, but how many are really savvy enough understand?
It doesn't matter! If they don't then Google's direct approach will be a commercial failure, and nobody is any worse off.
But remember that the people who write reviews, publish articles and are the recommender in their circle of friends and colleagues are more likely to care about this sort of thing.
The only real solution to this problem is for Google to become an MVNO and start selling cheaper cellular service (cheap enough to get people to switch en masse and bring about some real change in the market).
There are also other carriers in the US with cheap plans if you're willing to shop around.
This by itself would now be difficult for me. I have an unlimited (grandfathered) data plan from Verizon with 4G. I know several people who have it now, and they would never go back to 3G. Any MVNO that Google creates is going to have to support the latest technology.
There have been rumors of Apple creating their own cellular company - now would be the right time. Create a 4G-only cellular company that provides unlimited (HD) voice, texts, and data for one flat rate, Apple-style, with no contracts.
between google and apple surely there is enough influence that together they can bully the carriers into sucking less.
Also, that available primarily online only phones don't sell nearly as well as hands on, in person sales.
This strategy seemed to have not worked so well earlier. I guess seeing how subsequent Nexus devices going through the carriers have been mangled, lack upgrades, etc -- leads them to think they just have to do it anyway, and try for the long game.
My guess is Verizon will block this point-blank, and refuse to activate the phones. It'll take a change in the legal landscape to compel them to do so. They already have Android phones coming out of their ears, plus the iPhone, so they have no need to play nice with Google, particularly if Google isn't willing to use Motorola to play hardball.
Or to put it another way, if they've really stopped playing nice, wouldn't Google end up making that argument?