Highlighted

Re: Google Also Responsible For No FROYO?

Novice

Dad-Bill,

 

Oh I get it.  Nothing wrong with a protest if you have something worthwhile to  protest.  This Froyo wining and crying thing is ridiculous, I agree the big guys have failed in getting it out in a timely manner and it "appears" the Fascinate has been neglected. And now Android Central is reporting Gingerbread 2.3.x has been leaked out for the Galaxy S overseas version. But if you want it so bad go out learn how to tweak your phone and get it !

 

And I was kidding about the name spelled wrong, wasn't upset.

0 Likes
Highlighted

Re: Google Also Responsible For No FROYO?

Sr. Member

Jax_Omen wrote:
I dunno, crimey, Samsung hasn't had much trouble adapting Froyo to run on their UI in the rest of the world... heck even Sprint's Galaxy S runs Froyo now, and the Epic *should* be the hardest to adapt, since it not only has a unique radio (WiMax) but also a physical keyboard, which no other galaxy S model has.

Froyo runs just fine on the Fascinate for those customers who have gotten it themselves.  My cousin who works for Verizon has told me the hold up is due to Samsung's UI.  Seems to me if people can get the update themselves and run it without Samsung's UI, process of elimination would dictate that is where the issue rests.  As I have stated previously, Verizon's bloatware is running just fine on other Froyo devices, that would indicate the issue is elsewhere.

0 Likes
Highlighted

Re: Google Also Responsible For No FROYO?

Novice

SFObrien you don't actually think that you or anyone else determines whether or not I have something worthwhile to protest do you? I'm sure that you and everyone else does not have to get someone's opinion or permission before you post an article. If you find that a posting will make your blood boil then may I suggest that you don't read it! Although I've noticed that there are some that really seem to enjoy being confrontational!


Before I posted this article I really did not want this to turn into an argument between those who are for and against froyo.  I actually wanted to find out if Google has any input into new updates. This specifically had nothing to do with froyo itself but has to do with all of the updates from samsung and verizon.


I am still looking for honest unprejudiced input from those reading this post. I genuinely want to know what, if any, input is from Google pertaining to updates.

0 Likes
Highlighted

Re: Google Also Responsible For No FROYO?

Novice

Dad-Bill wrote:

SFObrien you don't actually think that you or anyone else determines whether or not I have something worthwhile to protest do you? I'm sure that you and everyone else does not have to get someone's opinion or permission before you post an article. If you find that a posting will make your blood boil then may I suggest that you don't read it! Although I've noticed that there are some that really seem to enjoy being confrontational!


Before I posted this article I really did not want this to turn into an argument between those who are for and against froyo.  I actually wanted to find out if Google has any input into new updates. This specifically had nothing to do with froyo itself but has to do with all of the updates from samsung and verizon.


I am still looking for honest unprejudiced input from those reading this post. I genuinely want to know what, if any, input is from Google pertaining to updates.


I guess worthwhile was the wrong word.  It doesn't really matter anyway, VZW,Google,or Samsung could care less what us forum ninjas think or post.  They have their money and keep making more!

 

Now back to your topic.  I don't think you will get an answer to your question because nobody really knows. 

0 Likes
Highlighted

Re: Google Also Responsible For No FROYO?

Novice

Thanks for your input!

0 Likes
Highlighted

Re: Google Also Responsible For No FROYO?

Member

Sorry to those who will complain about me 'resurrecting' an older post, and sorry to those who object to other people having an opinion of their own (why do I see a Canadian flag in my mind when I type that?) and sorry to those who think Fascinate owners should just bend over, I don't agree with any of you...........so, deal with it!

 

Now, onto the Dad-Bill's question as to what input or influence, if any, Google may have regarding the release of Froyo for the Fascinate.

 

To start, I will go back to 1983 cos thats when my 'experience' in IT begins, and it's this 'experience' that shapes my opinon. When Microsoft first started pushing out their DOS (not known as MSDOS originally) it was similar to Google pushing out Android, they wrote the 'source' and others tweaked it to fit their hardware. Microsoft did not deal in hardware, they left that to others and so we had other manufacturers - IBM notably as the original MS 'customer' - who built the hardware tweaked the OS and introduced us to the 'Personal Computer'.

It wasn't long before other electronics manufacturers realised the potential market for PC's and dived headlong into the business of making PC 'clones' around the time that MS released DOS 2.0 now begining to be known as MSDOS, 2.1 and 2.2 followed soon after. By now there was a fairly large number of manufacturers selling PC's - Sanyo, Wyse, Hyundai, Silver Reed, to name a few (forgive my memory if I miss your particular favourite) they all ran 'MSDOS' but, and it's a big but, they all ran their own 'tweaked' version of MSDOS. Microsoft didn't write a different version of MSDOS for every different model PC that was being sold, that was left to the manufacturer so we had MSDOS for SANYO, MSDOS for Wyse, MSDOS for Hyundai, etc etc. Microsoft licensed the manufacturer to 'tweak' the OS as necessary to fit their hardware. Yes Microsoft had input, but basically, if you built hardware that would run a version of MSDOS and you had the license from Microsoft, then you did what was necessary to make it work.

We all know what happened over the next 25 years - MSDOS reached Ver 4.x and Windows took over. During that time IBM tried to compete in the OS market with their own 'PCDOS'. We had CPM and eventually Apple, and now we have basically Windows and Apple. Here endeth the history lesson (if you disagree with my version of events then thats your right, I don't really care. Like I said at the begining, I'm basing this on MY experience, not yours!).

 

So, here's my opinion :

 

Google are following Microsofts original model (albeit an accelerated version), they developed Android and licensed manufacturers and, in the USA at least (*** more below), service providors, to allow them to 'tweak' the OS to meet their specific hardware and 'system' requirements. As recent reports suggest, Google will soon tighten their hold on Android by limiting the extent to which they will alow manufacturers to 'tweak'. Those limitations will increase untill Android will be no more 'open source' than Microsoft Windows, if you want to run Android on your hardware then it will be up to you to build the hardware so that it's architecture meets Googles specs. It's a simple, but very efficient, business plan. Develop a product that you can basically 'give away', a 'loss-leader'. Keep improving the product untill you have built a large enough 'loyal' consumer-base, then tighten the screws so that only you can supply that market. With Android, Google's pay-off comes when they have complete control over what you can have on your Android phone and everyone who wants to sell an App to run on that phone gives Google a slice of their particular cake, every search, every route planned through GPS, every bit of media downloaded, comes from Google (yeayyyy no more V-cast). I am certain that Google knew long before anyone else that Verizon would pull their "we want to use Bing so we can get money from Microsoft" stunt, and it's things like that that give Google the perfect excuse (if they needed any) for tightening their hold over the future of Android.

 

So, what was I saying? My opinion, yes! In my opinion, Google have absolutely nothing to do with the delay Fascinate users are experiencing getting Froyo, it is entirely Samsung and Verizon who have dropped the ball, but mostly Verizon (see *** below).

 

*** Outside of the US much tighter consumer protection laws prevented service providors from loading their phones with 'bloatware' the way Verizon have done with their phones - and the Fascinate is the phone with the most bloatware of all (I class Bing as bloatware cos it's useless as a search engine). This restriction on service providors in the rest of the world has resulted in a more 'vanilla' Android experience across the board and as a result of that, the fascinate 'out there' is now getting Gingerbread while we still wait for Froyo. Those of you who argue that the Verizon Fascinate is different because we use CDMA and the rest of the world uses GSM, well, thats a load of poopy. The difference between a phone that uses CDMA and a phone that uses GSM is very limited and dealt with mostly (if not 100%) by hardware not by the OS. Once the radio signal has been retrieved from the ether by the antenna and translated into 0's and 1's the difference between CDMA and GSM is zero (same in reverse)

 

Once again, this is all my opinion based on my experience, agree or disagree as you please, that's your right, just as it's my right to whinge and moan, complain, wine, shout, cry, or whatever I want, about not getting the OS upgarde I was promised when I bought my fascinate.

0 Likes
Highlighted

Re: Google Also Responsible For No FROYO?

Sr. Leader

 


Froyoed wrote:

Sorry to those who will complain about me 'resurrecting' an older post, and sorry to those who object to other people having an opinion of their own (why do I see a Canadian flag in my mind when I type that?) and sorry to those who think Fascinate owners should just bend over, I don't agree with any of you...........so, deal with it!

 

Now, onto the Dad-Bill's question as to what input or influence, if any, Google may have regarding the release of Froyo for the Fascinate.

 

To start, I will go back to 1983 cos thats when my 'experience' in IT begins, and it's this 'experience' that shapes my opinon. When Microsoft first started pushing out their DOS (not known as MSDOS originally) it was similar to Google pushing out Android, they wrote the 'source' and others tweaked it to fit their hardware. Microsoft did not deal in hardware, they left that to others and so we had other manufacturers - IBM notably as the original MS 'customer' - who built the hardware tweaked the OS and introduced us to the 'Personal Computer'.

It wasn't long before other electronics manufacturers realised the potential market for PC's and dived headlong into the business of making PC 'clones' around the time that MS released DOS 2.0 now begining to be known as MSDOS, 2.1 and 2.2 followed soon after. By now there was a fairly large number of manufacturers selling PC's - Sanyo, Wyse, Hyundai, Silver Reed, to name a few (forgive my memory if I miss your particular favourite) they all ran 'MSDOS' but, and it's a big but, they all ran their own 'tweaked' version of MSDOS. Microsoft didn't write a different version of MSDOS for every different model PC that was being sold, that was left to the manufacturer so we had MSDOS for SANYO, MSDOS for Wyse, MSDOS for Hyundai, etc etc. Microsoft licensed the manufacturer to 'tweak' the OS as necessary to fit their hardware. Yes Microsoft had input, but basically, if you built hardware that would run a version of MSDOS and you had the license from Microsoft, then you did what was necessary to make it work.

We all know what happened over the next 25 years - MSDOS reached Ver 4.x and Windows took over. During that time IBM tried to compete in the OS market with their own 'PCDOS'. We had CPM and eventually Apple, and now we have basically Windows and Apple. Here endeth the history lesson (if you disagree with my version of events then thats your right, I don't really care. Like I said at the begining, I'm basing this on MY experience, not yours!).

 

So, here's my opinion :

 

Google are following Microsofts original model (albeit an accelerated version), they developed Android and licensed manufacturers and, in the USA at least (*** more below), service providors, to allow them to 'tweak' the OS to meet their specific hardware and 'system' requirements. As recent reports suggest, Google will soon tighten their hold on Android by limiting the extent to which they will alow manufacturers to 'tweak'. Those limitations will increase untill Android will be no more 'open source' than Microsoft Windows, if you want to run Android on your hardware then it will be up to you to build the hardware so that it's architecture meets Googles specs. It's a simple, but very efficient, business plan. Develop a product that you can basically 'give away', a 'loss-leader'. Keep improving the product untill you have built a large enough 'loyal' consumer-base, then tighten the screws so that only you can supply that market. With Android, Google's pay-off comes when they have complete control over what you can have on your Android phone and everyone who wants to sell an App to run on that phone gives Google a slice of their particular cake, every search, every route planned through GPS, every bit of media downloaded, comes from Google (yeayyyy no more V-cast). I am certain that Google knew long before anyone else that Verizon would pull their "we want to use Bing so we can get money from Microsoft" stunt, and it's things like that that give Google the perfect excuse (if they needed any) for tightening their hold over the future of Android.

 

So, what was I saying? My opinion, yes! In my opinion, Google have absolutely nothing to do with the delay Fascinate users are experiencing getting Froyo, it is entirely Samsung and Verizon who have dropped the ball, but mostly Verizon (see *** below).

 

*** Outside of the US much tighter consumer protection laws prevented service providors from loading their phones with 'bloatware' the way Verizon have done with their phones - and the Fascinate is the phone with the most bloatware of all (I class Bing as bloatware cos it's useless as a search engine). This restriction on service providors in the rest of the world has resulted in a more 'vanilla' Android experience across the board and as a result of that, the fascinate 'out there' is now getting Gingerbread while we still wait for Froyo. Those of you who argue that the Verizon Fascinate is different because we use CDMA and the rest of the world uses GSM, well, thats a load of poopy. The difference between a phone that uses CDMA and a phone that uses GSM is very limited and dealt with mostly (if not 100%) by hardware not by the OS. Once the radio signal has been retrieved from the ether by the antenna and translated into 0's and 1's the difference between CDMA and GSM is zero (same in reverse)

 

Once again, this is all my opinion based on my experience, agree or disagree as you please, that's your right, just as it's my right to whinge and moan, complain, wine, shout, cry, or whatever I want, about not getting the OS upgarde I was promised when I bought my fascinate.


 

Everytime I hear someone complain about not getting the update.  I will always say this... Yes it was promised, but WHEN was never promised.  You'll get it, but you will have to wait for it.  All Android devices are using older OS's including a lot of newer ones coming out.  Currently 2.3.3 is out and how many devices right now have 2.3.3 officially?  That's right 2.  This is what happens when you go open source, and Android isn't 100% open source.  It's ASL which allows people to keep code private. 

 

Consumer protection laws?  Sorry I think of it as consumers who can't think for themselves laws.  If people didn't like what is going on.  Not buying it will do more than buying it then complaining about it.  What will get more attention 10,000,000 people buying a device crying about it, or 10,000,000 people return their devices during their return period because they don't like something?  Regardless of a promise if it didn't have what I need out of the box I would have neve purchased it.  If I wasn't sure if it didn't I would have tried it and made sure it does, and if it doesn't it goes right back.  I rather keep my money and get something that works for me than to hold onto something that doesn't then cry about what it doesn't have.  Seems like a HUGE waste of time to me.

0 Likes
Highlighted

Re: Google Also Responsible For No FROYO?

Novice

Very interesting read. There are a couple of points I am not sure I totally agree with but they are minor enough as to be not worth mentioning. It is notable how Google's action do appear to be very Microsoft-like lately. I guess when you are an 800 lb. gorilla 

you just can't help throwing weight around.

 

The bloat issue is one of my worst pet peeves. Computer manufacturers are finally learning how much the practice is despised by consumers, unless we can easily walk away from providers they will have no real motivation to change.

 

P.S. You didn't mention my ole fav: Tandys running TRS-DOS.

0 Likes