I disagree. This would easily get press coverage, as such a lawsuit would affect Samsung and Verizon sales. Who could trust Samsung with their purchase? Then Verizon even more so, they are no longer the cheap cell phone carrier they once were. If anything Verizon is one of the most expensive. No matter the outcome of the case it is not good for either company as you have said "Where is the signed contract that Verizon and Samsung agreed to provide updates?" yet the consumer is paying premium prices.
This is about consumer protection. Samsung and Verizon are guilty of making false product promises as part of the sale. Instead the companies have left the consumers with a product that IS not fully working. Have you tried using the GPS function? Even after the last update it is sketchy. Or the CAPs error. This is among several other features that others have listed.
Look at it this way, Motorola Zoom tablet ($699) that is for sale right now is missing allot of the features listed but is promised to be made working by future updates. What if those updates do not come because the product duds in the market place or Motorola decides it's too costly to keep the development team working on the drivers?
This is clearly a cause for legal action to prevent companies from making false claims rushing products to market that are not finished from becoming common place in the cell phone market. This would not be a frivolous lawsuit, this is exactly what courts are for!
*sigh*
it is frivolous
what will come is, you buy a phone, thats it, no updates ever, unless we feel like it.
you want updates, buy a new one.
oh if there is a serious software issue we will patch it, but your never getting a newer version of the os, EVER
you bought the phone with 2.1, live with it. no on is obligated to do anything about it. im sure there is something in the contract you signed that says this.
if there is a lawsuit, vzw should have everyright to have the people bringing it pay thier legal expenses when they win or its thrown out.
I doubt a lawsuit would work because of the wording in the TOS and EULA, so it might be more effective to go after them via the FTC and your state's AG office for false advertising, IF you can prove that they made any false representations concerning what OS was on the phone and when it would be updated.
I'm really frustrated myself about the lack of Froyo, but honestly, it is something I fear we will just have to wait for. I use the Thunderbolt, but my wife has a Fascinate and it my frustration comes from her being frustrated.
If you really want to pursue it in court, then you might Google Lawyers and Settlements. It is a newsletter about all the latest consumer and job related lawsuits pending. I think they have a link there where you can state your case and they will see if any lawyers will take it.
Be prepared to be told that it isn't possible though.
mdram4x4 wrote:*sigh*
it is frivolous
what will come is, you buy a phone, thats it, no updates ever, unless we feel like it.
you want updates, buy a new one.
oh if there is a serious software issue we will patch it, but your never getting a newer version of the os, EVER
you bought the phone with 2.1, live with it. no on is obligated to do anything about it. im sure there is something in the contract you signed that says this.
if there is a lawsuit, vzw should have everyright to have the people bringing it pay thier legal expenses when they win or its thrown out.
I don't care much for lawsuits, but sometimes is the only way. Just want to bring to your attention that Verizon in the less 12 months has agreed to refund $52.8 million for overcharging their customers, was fined $25 million by the FCC for overcharging, agreed to a $93.5 million settlement with the government again for overcharging. Your attitude seems to be that Verizon never stated in a contract that an update was coming, so a lawsuit would be frivolous. However Verizon does not prevent it's employees from telling customers that there is an update coming.
Take some time to do a little research on your own, about Verizon's business practices...they seem to accidentally overcharge a lot, it's always a mistake, never on purpose.
How come it is the Silver Contributors that are against any idea of a lawsuit? Look through this post. There seems to be a pattern. Yet the rest of us are stuck with a underperforming product.
In the end it would be to Verizon and Samsung's good to be sued. They need to shape up and not allow this slippery slope to continue. I'm sure Google is not happy watching what is being done with their OS. Google has already started to restrict changes to the Andriod platform in fears of fragmentation and upgrade problems (like the Fascinate).
I've sat by for nearly six months waiting for this promised feature before even starting to complain but now I've given up hope that a update will happen. It is time for the next step. Either sue, contact Google with our promises in hopes they change their agreement, put out press releases and as the previous poster listed the FCC and local state agencies.
ClayR wrote:
How come it is the Silver Contributors that are against any idea of a lawsuit? Look through this post. There seems to be a pattern. Yet the rest of us are stuck with a underperforming product.
In the end it would be to Verizon and Samsung's good to be sued. They need to shape up and not allow this slippery slope to continue. I'm sure Google is not happy watching what is being done with their OS. Google has already started to restrict changes to the Andriod platform in fears of fragmentation and upgrade problems (like the Fascinate).
I've sat by for nearly six months waiting for this promised feature before even starting to complain but now I've given up hope that a update will happen. It is time for the next step. Either sue, contact Google with our promises in hopes they change their agreement, put out press releases and as the previous poster listed the FCC and local state agencies.
because we have been here before, many of us are long time customers, and we know that people basically talk out thier {word filter avoidance}
Then stop being a sheep and join us, we could use your experience.
ClayR wrote:Then stop being a sheep and join us, we could use your experience.
Interesting how two people can see a flock of sheep so differently.
ClayR wrote:Then stop being a sheep and join us, we could use your experience.
honestly, i dont have a need for froyo, my fascinate works great with eclair. i will wait for them to publish an ota update, then decide if i want to install it.
if i had a need for 2.2, i would already have it installed
ClayR wrote:I disagree. This would easily get press coverage, as such a lawsuit would affect Samsung and Verizon sales. Who could trust Samsung with their purchase? Then Verizon even more so, they are no longer the cheap cell phone carrier they once were. If anything Verizon is one of the most expensive. No matter the outcome of the case it is not good for either company as you have said "Where is the signed contract that Verizon and Samsung agreed to provide updates?" yet the consumer is paying premium prices. Verizon and Samsung get their names in the press plenty, and it hasn't created enough impact to get the update out has it? And whether you like it or not, your contract explicitly states that software updates are optional.
This is about consumer protection. Samsung and Verizon are guilty of making false product promises as part of the sale. Instead the companies have left the consumers with a product that IS not fully working. Have you tried using the GPS function? Even after the last update it is sketchy. Or the CAPs error. This is among several other features that others have listed. Show me one document, advertisement or announcement from either Verizon or Samsung that state the update is forthcoming. There isn't one and never has been. This alone makes your suit moot.
Look at it this way, Motorola Zoom tablet ($699) that is for sale right now is missing allot of the features listed but is promised to be made working by future updates. What if those updates do not come because the product duds in the market place or Motorola decides it's too costly to keep the development team working on the drivers? Unlike the Fascinate, both Motorola and Verizon have released both in print and on the verizonwireless website that the Xoom will be upgraded to 4G. Once again, show me one example stating the OS on the Fascinate would be upgraded to 2.2
This is clearly a cause for legal action to prevent companies from making false claims rushing products to market that are not finished from becoming common place in the cell phone market. This would not be a frivolous lawsuit, this is exactly what courts are for! Simply put, no it's not. Your case has neither merit nor evidence to support your claims. The total absence of any print materials, online postings or press announcements from either Verizon or Samsung means you were not deceived. In fact you have print material that clearly states updates are optional.
Start a new topic or ask questions in the open forum.
