backtop


Print 29 comment(s) - last by geddarkstorm.. on May 2 at 2:46 PM

Bionic, Thunderbolt, Revolution, Galaxy Tab 10.1 unlikely to get ICS, but will get mild upgrade

Top Android-centric blog Droid Life has picked up an interesting tidbit from "Redditor" "DroidTosser", who posted screenshots purportedly from Verizon Wireless -- a joint venture between Verizon Communications Inc. (VZ) and Vodafone Group Plc. (LON:VOD).

America's top carrier appears to be preparing Ice Cream Sandwich updates to three phones -- the Motorola RAZR, RAZR MAXX, and Rezound by HTC Corp. (TPE:2498)-- as well as a tablet, the Motorola Xoom 3G/4G.

One might suspect that Google Inc. (GOOG) who has almost acquired Motorola, might be playing a bit of favorites, upgrading its soon-to-be-subsidiary to Android 4.0 "Ice Cream Sandwich" first.  That may be the case, but at least one major Motorola handset -- the Bionic -- appears not to be getting the ICS bump.

ICS updates
Some VZW devices -- mostly from Motorola will get a May ICS bump. [Source: DroidTosser]

VZW reportedly has milder Gingerbread updates in testing for the Bionic and for other handsets.  Those handsets also include the Revolution from LG Electronics, Inc. (KSC:066570) (aka, the LG Esteem), HTC Thunderbolt, and Xperia Play from Sony Corp. (TYO:6758).

In a move that's sure to raise some eyebrows, VZW is not giving the Galaxy Tab 10.1 -- which was long reported as the best-selling Android tablet -- an Ice Cream Sandwich update yet, despite giving one to Xoom -- a notorious sales flop.

Are Google and Verizon Wireless giving Motorola "favored nation" status?  You decide.

But for the lucky recipients, the testing should be complete by 5/17, with the Rezound's testing being finished early (5/7).  Thus users can expect within three weeks or so to be sporting the hot new ICS OS, which features a slew of improvements in terms of user interface and core apps over Android 2.3 "Gingerbread", the prior phone release.

Source: Reddit via Droid Life



Comments     Threshold


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

By jimbojimbo on 4/27/2012 4:54:47 PM , Rating: 2
Thanks, Motorola. Now I'm still tied to this phone for another 16months and just have to wait for the Cmod to come out for it. Damn you.
I'd load ICS on it now but I want to be able to record video and they haven't figured that part out yet.




By kleinma on 4/27/2012 5:11:49 PM , Rating: 2
Isn't the droid4 from this year, and also only 2.3?


By retrospooty on 4/27/2012 6:01:39 PM , Rating: 2
"Now I'm still tied to this phone for another 16months and just have to wait for the Cmod to come out for it. Damn you"

Dood, load it , load it now!.

http://blog.hash-of-codes.com/downloads/motorola-d...


By tayb on 4/28/2012 10:28:04 AM , Rating: 5
This is what Android has come to. To access an OS update for a phone that is less than two years old you must rely on a third party mod to make it happen. Pathetic.


By StevoLincolnite on 4/28/2012 3:30:29 PM , Rating: 1
Sad part is, companies aren't capatilising on the OS upgrades, they could charge people for an upgraded OS. - Just ask Microsoft how many Billions they made from that plan in the Desktop space.

I doubt many people would be upset with a small fee in the firm knowledge that their device will be supported for much longer.


By Rukkian on 4/30/2012 11:30:47 AM , Rating: 1
Because there are a bunch of people that think they deserve free upgrades for as long as the have a device, whether that makes sense the company or not.

I would be fine paying a seperate fee if I bought a locked down phone and did not like tinkering, but it would be difficult to figure out how much that fee would be. It takes a like of resources to customize the os for each device and make sure it is near perfect when it goes out. If it is not very good, then support calls would go through the roof. They also have no idea how many would actually pay the fee.

There is a high % of phone buyers that would never have any clue what os a phone has or why they would want to upgrade. Obviously the more that pay the fee, the lower it would be.


By geddarkstorm on 4/30/2012 4:34:51 PM , Rating: 2
No, because Android is a linux distribution, open source, and free (for most intents and purposes). Hence why third party ROMers/Modders can make all these derivatives for phones without getting into any sort of trouble. Don't see anyone making custom versions of iOS or WP7.


By Rukkian on 5/1/2012 12:37:09 PM , Rating: 2
No what? No paying the company that makes the phone to release an upgraded OS? You always have the option to ROM (I am currently running AOKP Milestone 5 on my GNEX), but for those that do not want to install custom roms, I think an option to buy updates would be nice.


By geddarkstorm on 5/2/2012 2:46:33 PM , Rating: 2
There are so many things wrong with your post.

For instance, the companies that make the phone hardware -do not make the OS-. Only Apple makes both the hardware and the OS. And what about the cellular carriers who have to distribute the OS and customize it for use on their network? So, to whom do you pay?

And why would an option to buy upgrades be nice when you get upgrades for free as it is? Companies that are slow to upgrade devices usually are thus because it's -hard-, due to all the diverse hardware platforms. Any ROMer will tell you that. It's very rare to have a ROM that gives the full functionality of the phone. Even official OTA updates/upgrades botch that at times. Every phone has to be addressed individually, and that's a lot of effort, time, and resource that companies that make the phones have to put in to tweaking the OS's they licensed to ensure a good experience on their product and proper functionality on a carrier's network.

Finally, the cost of "upgrading" your OS is -already included in the cost of the phone- you bought. When you bought the phone, you also bought any upgrades that would be ported to it. So why would you pay again an additional amount over what you already paid? It's part of the consumer agreement. But the company retrains the right to no longer support a device--and that's where competition between companies and carriers comes in.


By retrospooty on 4/29/2012 1:31:24 PM , Rating: 1
"This is what Android has come to. To access an OS update for a phone that is less than two years old you must rely on a third party mod to make it happen. Pathetic."

How is that in any way pathetic? You buy a phone for the features it has, not an OS upgrade that may come later that isnt even promised. If you bought a phone based on an unpromised future OS upgrade your just not thinking clearly.

If you do want to upgrade an older phone to the new OS, then there are ways to do it. That is the strength of the open Android platform, not the weakness, and that is why it's overtaking IOS and will continue to do so... If that is too difficult to wrap your mind around, then you just might be a good candidate for an iPhone.


By vision33r on 4/30/2012 10:46:09 AM , Rating: 2
It is pathetic because many Android OEMs are locking bootloaders and preventing custom roms. Motorola is one of them.

Your fanboyism is why the likes of you think Android is winning. Giving away free Android devices is not exactly winning. If Android is winning and beating iOS, why is Apple raking in almost 3x the quarterly profit compared to Google?

Almost 70% of the profit Apple takes in are from iOS devices.

Android's "Zerg" strategy clearly in only winning low-cost solutions and means tiny profit margins.


By Rukkian on 4/30/2012 11:34:00 AM , Rating: 2
Then vote with your wallet - do not muy Motorola until they change their policies. I personally wanted options and did the research, which is why I went with the GNEX. While I like the looks and feel of some Moto products, I will not buy one until they allow us to unlock it.

Moto is really the only major manufacturer not offering at least some phones that are unlocked.


By elleehswon on 4/30/2012 12:43:29 PM , Rating: 2
so, what you're telling me, is that more profit per unit = better product, and better company?

Apple: A tech company that doesn't care about specs. Because we're making more money off of you than those other companies, worship us as your God, because you have made us richer than him.


By retrospooty on 4/30/2012 4:24:23 PM , Rating: 2
"many Android OEMs are locking bootloaders and preventing custom roms. Motorola is one of them"

Really? My Moto Droid 3 runs Cyanogenmod just fine. I have never had an issue nor heard of an un-rootable Android phone.

"Your fanboyism is why the likes of you think Android is winning. Giving away free Android devices is not exactly winning. If Android is winning and beating iOS, why is Apple raking in almost 3x the quarterly profit compared to Google? Almost 70% of the profit Apple takes in are from iOS devices."


Then by all means, YOU go buy yourself an iPhone. I don't care about Apple/Samsung/Google's profits. I want the best phone I can get at a good price. To me that is likely going to be a Galaxy S3 or Galaxy Note. As far as winning, I mean number of phones sold and users in the field. If you want to talk profits, yes Apple is clearly raking it in. That doesnt make me want to buy an iPhone, and it doesnt change the aging IOS with outdated UI and small screen.


Not missing much it looks like....
By 1ceTr0n on 4/27/2012 9:50:46 PM , Rating: 1
Verizon basically refused to get a version of the Galaxy Note, and I wanted it really badly to replace my aged Droid X. So I switched to AT&T last week and got a sexy white Note at Costco with accessories and waived activation fee from Costco for $250. Freaking love this huge thing!




RE: Not missing much it looks like....
By Chadder007 on 4/28/2012 12:21:19 PM , Rating: 2
This is exactly my situation. I have an X but want the Note also.


By Cheesew1z69 on 4/28/2012 10:53:02 PM , Rating: 2
Same


RE: Not missing much it looks like....
By retrospooty on 4/29/2012 1:25:47 PM , Rating: 2
"Verizon basically refused to get a version of the Galaxy Note"

I had heard its coming soon to Verizon... Either the note or a similar product under a different name. Hopefully we will get a newer more efficient CPU on it as well.


By Lanister on 4/30/2012 12:07:18 PM , Rating: 2
I have a Droid X and am up for an upgrade in 4 months so I asked 3 different verizon stores and was told the same thing in all 3, Verizon decided not to get the phone. It seems like they all got a script as they all basically said the same thing "Verizon doesn't believe there is high enough demand for a phone like that", so don't get your hopes up.


Verizon and Google giving a pass?
By seamonkey79 on 4/27/2012 5:52:25 PM , Rating: 3
Or Samsung not creating an update... my Tab Plus has no update, and nothing else of that generation does... Samsung isn't updating and has nothing to do with Verizon or Google...




RE: Verizon and Google giving a pass?
By Jeffk464 on 4/27/2012 7:59:13 PM , Rating: 3
Just go to http://forum.xda-developers.com/index.php, you should be able to find a custom rom thats more up to date. Manufacturers don't want to support their phones, they just want to sell no product.


By seamonkey79 on 4/28/2012 11:07:35 AM , Rating: 2
I spend lots of time there, and I've got a Sense-less ICS ROM running on my Rezound already. The point I was making, though, is that HTC and Motorola already have some ICS stuff going on with their generational products, whereas Samsung instead came out with a new tablet and new phones, while not having and upgrade plans for the older ones.


Galaxy Nexus
By zozzlhandler on 4/27/2012 5:42:01 PM , Rating: 2
"The top-selling Galaxy Nexus (the Nexus S) from Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd. (KSC:005930) appears to be getting no love -- not even a Gingerbread update."

Excuse me? Three things wrong here.

1. The Galaxy Nexus is *not* the Nexus S. The Galaxy Nexus is the current Google phone, the Nexus S is its predecessor.

2. The Galaxy Nexus comes with ICS. It was the first phone to do so.

3. The Nexus S has already been updated to ICS.

Perhaps you misstated the model names?




RE: Galaxy Nexus
By sprockkets on 4/27/2012 7:05:00 PM , Rating: 2
Looks like it was changed to the Galaxy Tab 10.1. This is strange, as it already has ICS on the non verizon version.

I think we know who to blame for this.

Not getting an upgrade to 4.0 isn't as bad as going from 2.3, as 3.0 is pretty much 4.0 minus some stuff. Still...


RE: Galaxy Nexus
By sprockkets on 4/27/2012 8:27:38 PM , Rating: 2
Wait, here is why:

quote:
Writing the software doesn't mean that Google can deploy it immediately, there are operator approvals for devices that are sold and/or supported by operators. Look at the US WiFi Xoom: obviously no operator approval, upgraded to 4.0.3 back in December (the first version of ICS that ran on anything other than Galaxy Nexus) and now running 4.0.4.?


This is a reply to a poster from his original post at the top here:

https://plus.google.com/112218872649456413744/post...


Why does it take so long
By Shawn on 4/27/2012 11:23:45 PM , Rating: 2
Why does it take so long to put ICM onto existing devices?




RE: Why does it take so long
By lagomorpha on 4/28/2012 4:39:53 AM , Rating: 2
I wonder how much of it has to do with creating custom user interfaces that companies seem to love to make their phone stand out but users hate because they often result in software incompatibility.


verizon
By lagomorpha on 4/27/2012 10:03:44 PM , Rating: 2
Glad I waited for the Incredible 4G... any day now...




"The whole principle [of censorship] is wrong. It's like demanding that grown men live on skim milk because the baby can't have steak." -- Robert Heinlein














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