Nokia Lumia - Here Comes Denim Firmware

[BlackDimension]

I just updated to Dev Preview 8.1 and installed GDR1 on my ICON today - as I was tired of waiting and figured I would give it a try.  One downside I have noticed is there seems to be a bit of lag in some high graphic use games now, which I assume is due to the lack of firmware update (Cyan), or some minor tweaks that were made to the production versions.  I don't know for sure though.

I think it was worth it, but time will tell if I encounter any problems.  So far other than the slight lag on some games, I have not had any other problems, and am enjoying/utilizing all the new features available.

[Miebeling]

how long does the update take to download/install?

[Tidbits]

BlackDimension wrote:

FCC Consumer complaints have historically and recently forced the hand of the carriers (often Verizon) with the following issues:  unfair billing, bait and switch selling, telemarketing scams, data throttling, dead towers, use of unlocked phones with other carriers, refusing to move phone numbers to new phones, and more.

I wonder what specific rules or laws were in place that hit all of these areas?  Just because there is not a law or rule for it does not mean that there is nothing that can or should be done.  How are laws and rules put into place?  By enough people saying "this makes sense" and a governing official starting the process to make it rule or law.  I, among many others, feel that it is not fair for carriers to intentionally "throttle" or "limit" their customers from updates in a timely manner, especially those that improve the experience and functionality of the device.

Where's the proof of this?  Just because it isn't on your device doesn't mean it isn't finished.  Just because it's on another device doesn't mean it is finished either.  FCC for the past 6 years has done nothing.  If there are rules and regulations in placed.  HTC, Sony, Samsung, Motorola, and a slew of other manufacturers would be in trouble of this in the past 6 years.  Manufacturers already admitted carriers have less control than people make it out to believe.

Let's take the Lumia ICON for example.  Hardware has 4 microphones capable of recording in Dolby 5.1.  However, this does not work without 8.1.  This is listed as a feature on the phone, and the software to support it is available, yet Verizon drags their feet on releasing it.  Customers committing to a 2 year contract for a device should be able to expect expect new features to be "unlocked" or added if the manufacturer has released the software for that device.  How is this different than carriers blocking the "tethering" ability for phones, and charging extra for it as a "feature" - until they got in trouble for that?  If they are intentionally manipulating customers to be persuaded to "buy a new device" because they don't want to release an update that makes an older phone more useful, how is this a fair practice?  How about the new "allow unlocking phones law".  That came to be by CONSUMERS getting 110,000 signatures in a petition to allow phone unlocking to be legal.  I choose to be a consumer that speaks out on what I think are unfair practices by carriers, ultimately manipulating or taking advantage of their customers.

This is all on Nokia.  They released the phone without this in place.  They said it was still in development when they released it.  It is conceivable they are still not finished with it and the reason for the delay.  This is on Nokia camp to express this.  Much like Motorola with the Cliq(NOT Cliq XT) for example.  Motorola told everyone on their own they had trouble with Sharp delivering drivers for the display and was the cause of the delay.  Took 6 months longer than what Motorola would have liked.  They were sued and so was T-Mobile. 

Also Carriers make the SAME amount regardless of what phone you have... They ACTUALLY make MORE money by keeping you on a device.  People FAIL to realize part of their monthly bill is paying for their device.  If you don't upgrade for 4 years you paid 2 devices and only have 1 in your hand. This is coming from Verizon in court stating this back in the late 90's and one of the reasons we have diminishing returns on the ETF.  Manufacturers on the other hand...  Once you buy a phone and you don't upgrade or buy their next latest and greatest...  That's it... Manufacturers need you to keep buying if need be.  They WILL skimp support for their worst selling devices.

I think the underlying problem with all of this is that the rules and regulators forming those rules are behind the times.  Technology is changing rapidly, and there are many questions as to who owns the right to limit a devices capabilities if the manufacturer of that device has released updates that improve upon or fix problems with said device.  This goes well beyond topics of phone device OS/Software upgrades.  It will soon apply to cars, smart TV's, tablet devices, etc.

They are NOT behind the times.  The problem is people believe developing software is easy to do and everything is the same.  If we broke down a lot of the code you'll find out often what is perceived the same is different and at times requires different code.  For example...  CDMA requires Qualcomm signed keys, and any changes to the radio requires Qualcomm to check the code.  This also causes the FCC to go through testing on their own to make sure they keep their licensing and doesn't cause interference.

One more thought.  What would people do if a computer manufacturer, lets say HP or Lenovo, using Microsoft Windows 8 decided to limit the ability to install patches or enhancements on some hardware, but include it on "newer" hardware?  Let's say that hardware was leased by a business, and they were locked into a 2 year commitment.  What then?  Would there be outrage?  Would there be complaints to governing authorities trying to get laws put in place to prevent that kind of abuse or incompetency?  Or - would nothing happen and the business would have to go find another company to lease from and hope they don't do the same thing?

This is easy... computers all use the SAME manufacturers and use the same hardware standard.  Cell phones do not have a standard like computers do.  There's a huge difference between the two markets.  Lenovo, and Asus are the two largest barebone manufacturers.  Dell and HP uses Asus parts.  So until cell phones follow the same standard things are not all the same. 

We can look at the iphone for a prime example.  the GSM version vs. the CDMA version.  They both use different RIL's and HAL's.  The Nexus 5 for US, and the rest of the world is also the same they use different RIL's and HAL's.

Edit I wanted to add... There may be a standard soon for cell phones... Question is...  How popular will it be?

Google Project Ara | Everything related to Google Project Ara

This is an open source standard where it follows more inline with your last paragraph.

[Msb87]

I have been watching and following closely to these and other forums related to this rollout because I actually have and love my 928. I have a question for you. Why do you have such a vested interest in this topic when, from what I have been able to figure out you don't even own a Windows phone. I really don't care what happens to IPhone or Android. I have had both but like my 928 better than both combined.

If someone wants to complain via the FCC why do you care so much?. If people want to try to persuade other people to do the same then you can always try to persuade otherwise but WHY? You have no vested interest.

I agree that the FCC has no jurisdiction on updates but that seems to be the only option to get VZW to even say anything other than "Visit our news page at...." Let the FCC say that the reason is frivolous and put a stop to the reporting. Let's say that enough people did file with the FCC and VZW released the update just to get the "noise" to stop. What would your response be? Mine would be that the squeaky wheel was oiled.

I tend to think that you are doing this simply as a troll. What you do fits the definition perfectly; you have no vested interest in the Windows platform. You oppose people when you have no reason to even be reading the Windows forum other than...??? The strange part is that it is very passive-aggressive trolling. The only other thing I can think of is that you either have a connection to VZW or at the least, a fan-boy even though you say otherwise. Now I will give you the last word because I will not reply to anything else you say to me or anyone else. We will also see if the moderators come to the rescue as well and delete this or "lock" the forum. Cheers.

[Tidbits]

Msb87 wrote:

I have been watching and following closely to these and other forums related to this rollout because I actually have and love my 928. I have a question for you. Why do you have such a vested interest in this topic when, from what I have been able to figure out you don't even own a Windows phone. I really don't care what happens to IPhone or Android. I have had both but like my 928 better than both combined.

If someone wants to complain via the FCC why do you care so much?. If people want to try to persuade other people to do the same then you can always try to persuade otherwise but WHY? You have no vested interest.

I agree that the FCC has no jurisdiction on updates but that seems to be the only option to get VZW to even say anything other than "Visit our news page at...." Let the FCC say that the reason is frivolous and put a stop to the reporting. Let's say that enough people did file with the FCC and VZW released the update just to get the "noise" to stop. What would your response be? Mine would be that the squeaky wheel was oiled.

I tend to think that you are doing this simply as a troll. What you do fits the definition perfectly; you have no vested interest in the Windows platform. You oppose people when you have no reason to even be reading the Windows forum other than...??? The strange part is that it is very passive-aggressive trolling. The only other thing I can think of is that you either have a connection to VZW or at the least, a fan-boy even though you say otherwise. Now I will give you the last word because I will not reply to anything else you say to me or anyone else. We will also see if the moderators come to the rescue as well and delete this or "lock" the forum. Cheers.

that's when people hear complaints about their phones not working right because of XYZ update... catch 22 if you ask me...  Even if Verizon had no hand in the update this will happen... See iPhone as a prime example

[rednibkram]

"I'm trying to tell you that you don't need any update."  REALLY!?  Who are you to tell me what I "need."  There are features that both Cyan and Denim will provide that I actually do need that no existing phone provides at this time.  If Verizon is so PATHETIC that they can't test and update TWO Lumia phones while AT&T can update almost there entire line, then you shouldn't be making excuses or them, unless you are an employee of Verizon, have a contract with Verizon or are a family member of a Verizon employee!  Verizon's update practices are PITIFUL!  I should not have to "be patient" and, yes, there is more to life, however my cell phone IS a very important part of my life!  I use it hourly to maintain my schedule, communicate with co-workers, family, friends and clients.  You pass judgement on people for complaining about not having this update and try to belittle everyone's complaints, yet you have no idea the effect not having this update has on us individually.  We were sold our devices, and chose our devices not based of what the device had at the time of purchase, but what we were promised by sales technicians (Verizon representatives) that the device would receive.  So, YES, we do have a legitimate complaint in that what we were promised is being delayed, and your opinion regarding this delay I can assure you isn't supported by a large majority of Windows Phone customers on Verizon's network!

[rednibkram]

Yes, and AT&T listened to the complaints of their customers.  That is the reason they stepped up their game and released these updates faster.  I have a friend of mine who works at AT&T in the complaint department and verified that AT&T has made changes to the way the update the firmware/software for Windows Phone devices.  That is all he could tell me, but suggested if I'm going to be a Windows Phone user, I should switch back to AT&T as they will most likely be the first to get updates from this point forward.

[#8]

Personally don't care if you reply back, but will set you straight.

I don't have to own the device to comment on it. I have owned Android devices, I own iphones now, we have a Android in our household now. I have owned NEC, Erickson, Motorola, HTC, Samsung and a few others I cannot remember. So you are saying my opinion on a Windows Device doesn't matter? Let's say I go out today a buy a new Windows device, then my posts will then be credible?

My reply is based solely on the numerous posts saying Verizon has to update devices. They do not. No carrier has to give manufacturer updates. You buy a device and it works. They don't give you a card that says phone updates will be provided for life. Your device at sale is what you are entitled to.

Now if the device has an update and you receive it then it was a perk. Not a god given right to have it.

The FCC complaint site lists the categories it covers. A device upgrade is not one of them. Go there are read it.

I am simply stating these types of complaints are not grave as the overcharging on data, service issues with connectivity or billing issues.

It will only be passed on to Verizon wireless and if Verizon replies it will be with deflection. It will be a round robin since the person you speak to will say "We are aware of your situation, and the update will be forthcoming" however they are not giving any definate time frame. So that accomplished nothing. But hey complain.

Another poster was referring to patches etc. Available to computers and if Microsoft since Windows is the number one operating system built the OS properly the first time you would not need update Tuesdays.

When windows 8 came out people bought the new system. However a scant 30 days later Microsoft came out with Windows 8.1 and with that more updates. Think about it.

Now Windows is coming out with another money maker called Windows 9. Then 10, then 110 down the pike.

It is never ending.

If the Windows operating system on home computers is any indication of their phones you would be constantly on updates and of course since there is carriers in the equation the complaints will be flooding in.

I posted a analogy of my new car. The dealer said my computer onboard was fully up to date. However less than a month I believe in 22 days my console informs me of a firmware update. That update cost me $175 so who should I complain to after spending $40,000.00 on a new car?

The FTC? The Departmart of Motor Vehicles? The State Attorney Generals Office? The Consumer Protection Board? You tell me. There is no recourse. I could file numerous complaints but the reply will be it is not a safety issue and the firmware update is not actually required. Just like it is on the Windows Phone. It is a convenience update for improved functionality. Not a required update.

The FCC has address other issues with the carriers and yes rightly so. But for a convenience update no its not something they will bother with.

As long as the posters on the thread are civil why would the thread be locked or comments be removed?

Read if you want or don't want. Trolling is not happening but I am entitled to my opinions and will voice them when necessary.

Happy Friday!

[rcschnoor]

Elector wrote:

I posted a analogy of my new car. The dealer said my computer onboard was fully up to date. However less than a month I believe in 22 days my console informs me of a firmware update. That update cost me $175 so who should I complain to after spending $40,000.00 on a new car?

What a FANTASTIC idea. Have the manufacturers, through Verizon, charge for updates to the OS and do not require the update to be downloaded/installed. THEN people will get the update sooner as the manufacturers/Verizon will have a monetary incentive to get it out to users in a timely fashion.

Updates on computer(major updates at least) have a cost associated with them, why not with cell phones since they are basically mini computers?

[#10]

I see we are back to that "I must be a Verizon employee or have a family member that works for them" statements.

I have never worked for Verizon no one I know works for Verizon, period. I am retired after 38+ years of listening to baseless complaints in government.

A cell phone is not a do all have to have medium. Remember the old days when everyone wasn't walking around with a cell phone in their ears? The world did not end because you need or want a cell phone.

You and others were not given any contract that stated "You will get updates for life" I know I buy my phones to make calls, occasionally search the web or text a friend. It is not the end of the world because my screen don't change colors, or my notifications now flash yellow instead of red. The list goes on.

When its pushed out, if its pushed out then you will receive it. Beating a dead horse will not make it get up and win the race. Its dead!

And now I see this AT&T this and AT&T that. Go to the AT&T forums and read up on the complaints on Windows phone,  some are where is it posts, others are the problems after getting the updates. It is a catch 22 for carriers when they are damned if they do or damned if they don't.

There is more to life than a cell phone.