backtop


Print 16 comment(s) - last by ricky0702.. on Jul 16 at 11:38 AM

Developer edition can be purchased directly from Samsung

There are a lot of smartphone users out there that prefer Android because the operating system is open and much easier to hack and mod. If you're one of these Android fans that likes devices that are easy to tweak to suit your own wants and needs, Verizon Wireless is getting a new, highly hackable smartphone from Samsung. 
 
Samsung will be offering a special developer edition of the Galaxy S III exclusively on Verizon through its developer portal for $599. That means you can't simply walk into a Verizon store and purchased the phone; you have to purchase it through Samsung. If you have a Galaxy S III on another carrier such as AT&T, this isn't such a big deal because you have an unlocked bootloader already.
 


 
The problem is that Verizon locks the boot loader on its version of the S III so users can't customize the device on the Verizon network. Samsung is selling the unlocked S III on its developer portal getting around that Verizon bootloader chokehold. Samsung is aiming the device at enthusiasts and professional developers, and is selling the device in conjunction with Verizon Wireless. That means there is no funny business going on.
 
Samsung says the special version the phone will be sold through developer.Samsung.com for $599 when it is available. Exactly when the device will be available, however, hasn't been announced. What we do know is that should you break the device loading your own software, it's not covered warranty and you'll be on your own. Samsung also offers multiple warnings that only experienced users should try to put their own software on the S III.

Source: Android Central



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Why can't there be one phone for all?
By quiksilvr on 7/11/2012 10:28:30 AM , Rating: 4
I am just asking from a technical standpoint. Why can't HSPA+ and LTE be combined together into one device? Does LTE take too much power and we're waiting for a more efficient chip? Is there licensing/patent concerns? Is it too expensive? What is the limitation here?

You would think given the number of these they make, they would try to make a truly universal phone. Granted, HSPA+ is more than fast enough for anyone's needs and CDMA is on its way out (which should have been the case years ago). But there is no denying that LTE is the way of the future.




RE: Why can't there be one phone for all?
By joedon3 on 7/11/2012 10:39:13 AM , Rating: 5
These things are all in 1 phone. The GS3 has HSPA+ as well as LTE. CDMA isn't compatible with GSM, so there are differences with ATT and Verizon, etc... But you can buy world phones from Verizon that has both technologies. And it is more expensive, and more complicated because the major differences in technology.

the major limitation is trying to get a chipset to accept the combination of LTE and HSPA+ on the given bands in the U.S. That is why the U.S. variant of the GS3 doesn't have the Exynos chipset

At the end of the day, Carriers in the U.S are forcing manufactures to make changes to differentiate the device from one another (as seen in the original Galaxy S and the S II) Samsung pulled some weight and wouldn't allow major changes this time around.

Manufactures also are pushing for more power efficient and thinner phones. Adding all these technologies to a phone when only 1 will be used is a HUGE waste of space and power as well.

I hope that mostly answered your questions


By quiksilvr on 7/11/2012 10:55:51 AM , Rating: 4
Wait, now I'm a bit more confused.

In South Korea, the Samsung Galaxy S3 is:
1) LTE
2) 2GB RAM
3) Quad core

This is considered to be the ultimate version. I was under the impression that LTE couldn't work hand in hand with the Exynos Quad core chip, but Samsung made it work (but had to increase thickness to 9mm, which is a minor sacrifice).

...So why didn't we get that here in the states?


RE: Why can't there be one phone for all?
By ax on 7/11/2012 11:57:19 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
CDMA isn't compatible with GSM


Maybe it is not but rumor is that GS3 will support GSM, i.e. will be Global Ready as Verizon calls it.

Motorola RAZR (both regular and MAXX) do that after ICS upgrade. They are listed as Global Ready devices on Verizon web.

I don't think there is a problem making single chip that will support all frequencies and protocols. Bigger issue may be having optimal antennas for that frequencies but apparently this may be done as well.


By ax on 7/11/2012 12:02:27 PM , Rating: 2
RAZR network support now:

CDMA 800/1900 EVDO REV A
LTE B13 700
GSM/EDGE: 850/900/1800/1900
UMTS/HSPA+: 850/900/1900/2100

If rumor is true then Verizon GS3 may get that too.


By inperfectdarkness on 7/12/2012 4:38:34 AM , Rating: 2
Good. Not that I'm a fan of any hegemonic power dictating the market--instead of consumer demands--but having a phone manufacturer doing it will be a refreshing change from having the service providers issuing the demands.

I believe that the market for phones is much more succeptable to competition and new upstarts, and thus it is infinitely better suited to meet consumer demand than the service providers whose domination is all but codified, protected, and spotty service based on region you live in. I really do believe that if the service providers spent half as much time on infrastructure as they spend on issuing demands to manufacturers, US networks would be amazingly good.


By joedon3 on 7/11/2012 10:39:13 AM , Rating: 2
These things are all in 1 phone. The GS3 has HSPA+ as well as LTE. CDMA isn't compatible with GSM, so there are differences with ATT and Verizon, etc... But you can buy world phones from Verizon that has both technologies. And it is more expensive, and more complicated because the major differences in technology.

the major limitation is trying to get a chipset to accept the combination of LTE and HSPA+ on the given bands in the U.S. That is why the U.S. variant of the GS3 doesn't have the Exynos chipset

At the end of the day, Carriers in the U.S are forcing manufactures to make changes to differentiate the device from one another (as seen in the original Galaxy S and the S II) Samsung pulled some weight and wouldn't allow major changes this time around.

Manufactures also are pushing for more power efficient and thinner phones. Adding all these technologies to a phone when only 1 will be used is a HUGE waste of space and power as well.

I hope that mostly answered your questions


By senecarr on 7/11/2012 10:48:34 AM , Rating: 2
The problem isn't just the chip, it is the antennas needed for the different frequencies these things use.
LTE does have the problem that Qualcom tends to have a leg up on baseband technology and thus most LTE phones in the US either need to use a Qualcom Krait with LTE built in (also has CDMA and HSPA+ in the chip, just not the antennas) or pay for the baseband chip that does all signal stuff only and Qualcom isn't giving much of break. Also, yes, having a baseband processor and a different general processor is less efficient, which matters with how power hungry LTE is on its own.
Both Samsung and Nvidia are taking steps to have the baseband processing for LTE inside their CPUs in the future, but it is taking them both time - Qualcom has been doing basebands for years, and owns about 80% of the market of smartphone baseband processors.


Hacker Friendly?
By blueaurora on 7/11/2012 10:52:09 AM , Rating: 4
Meddling Enthusiast maybe... not a hacker. I hacker would get the regular one and make it his/her b!t*h. If it was easy they wouldn't care lol




RE: Hacker Friendly?
By Camikazi on 7/11/2012 12:43:36 PM , Rating: 2
My guess is they meant modders since hackers don't work with these. As for modders they love completely open phones since it does let them do anything they want, dev modders hate phones that have locked bootloaders since it means they can't change kernels or do any fun things on them. Working around a locked bootloader is not fun since if they are encrypted it's pretty much not possible to open them and change kernels (and that is where a lot of the fancy stuff comes from).


Doesn't make sense
By P_Dub_S on 7/11/2012 12:44:28 PM , Rating: 3
What's confusing over all this locked bootloaders junk is that AT&T allowed the SGS3 to be bootloader unlocked but wont let the HTC One X be unlocked and when I last asked HTC customer support was told this was due to AT&T forcing their hand. Doesn't make sense...




RE: Doesn't make sense
By retrospooty on 7/11/2012 2:32:13 PM , Rating: 2
IT makes sense if you work with these carriers. Consider them all pre-manstrual women with bipolar disorder. They are up and down and can never make up their minds.

I remember in the mid 2000's AT&T dumped their name and went with Cingular. The explanation was due to the poor name AT&T has become in the cellular wireless industry. All phone makers had to make new plastics for all handsets including repairs... Then 1 year later, they decided to change back to AT&T to "leverage the well known brand name" LOL. Everyone had to change back again.


Verizon :(
By ihateu3 on 7/11/2012 11:25:32 AM , Rating: 2
I think this is basically a "Fuck you" from Samsung to Verizon since Verizon tried to pass the blame to Samsung for the locked bootloader. I wanna hear Verizon's excuse now.

Somebody please call Verizon and ask about the locked bootloader and them provide them with this information to see what bullshit lies they have now.

Verizon will probably try to make good of themselves with Samsungs own decision, and say something along the lines of "Verizon decided some of our customers need a more open and robust version of the phone, therefore we offer the Verizon unlocked SIII..."




RE: Verizon :(
By theapparition on 7/11/2012 3:13:43 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Somebody please call Verizon and ask about the locked bootloader and them provide them with this information to see what bullshit lies they have now.

Why waste time by trying to call a low level CSR who's only trying to make a living. Do you really think you're going to get an answer?


Bootloader toasted
By Complinitor on 7/11/2012 3:58:04 PM , Rating: 2
The modding community has already toasted the lock. Not going to post links here (no troll from me!) but if you are into this with an Android phone, you know in which forums to look. I'm not going to pay 600 for this when I can get it for 199 and ODIN CWM myself.




By ricky0702 on 7/16/2012 11:38:56 AM , Rating: 2
Should it really come to this? Why does Samsung need to provide a "different" phone for their customers. How would a customer know whether or not he/she is getting a device that has an unlockable bootloader?
read about Galaxy S III “Developer Edition” Coming to Verizon — Hackers and modders rejoice!
http://www.careace.net/2012/07/11/samsung-rlease-g...




"There's no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance." -- Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki