Galaxy S and Tab Owners- No ICS for you

[rdowns]

Pretty ****** when a device less than a year old can't run the latest OS.

Samsung has just distributed the worst news of this Ice Cream Sandwich upgrade cycle: the popular Galaxy S smartphone that sold 10 million units last year and the 7-inch Galaxy Tab tablet won't be upgraded to Android 4.0. The company's argument is that they lack sufficient RAM and ROM to run the new OS alongside TouchWiz and other "experience-enhancing" software. This will come as a massive blow to the great many users of the Galaxy S, who would have rightly expected the 1GHz Hummingbird processor and accompanying memory to be able to handle ICS — it's the same hardware as you'll find inside the Nexus S, and that phone is receiving Android 4.0 over the air right now.

Samsung addresses that inconsistency by again pointing to the differing software provision; the Nexus S only has to run the basic Android OS, whereas the Galaxy S has to deliver TouchWiz, carrier services, video calling software, and, in some markets, mobile TV.

HTC had this exact same issue when upgrading the Desire to Gingerbread a few months back, and after some equivocation, it was forced to disable some functions of its own Android skin, Sense, in order to make the upgrade fit. So Samsung isn't alone in making its users suffer for buying a skinned Android device.

Link

 

[r.j.s]

Surely someone in the custom ROM community will make it work.

 

[maflynn]

Surely someone in the custom ROM community will make it work.

I put my money on cyanogenmod to have one for them

 

[*LTD*]

Surely someone in the custom ROM community will make it work.

That's not a viable market solution. Custom ROMs? Really?? What's a "cyanogen." Sounds like a workout supplement company.

Welcome to the wonderful world of universally-licensed operating systems, third parties, middlemen who stuff even more crap onto those universally-licesnsed operating systems, and software makers (like Google) who couldn't be bothered to give a damn.

Android OEMs are too busy racing to the bottom. And consumers are along for the ride.

 

[maflynn]

That's not a viable market solution.

Welcome to the wonderful world of universally-licensed operating systems, third parties, middlemen who stuff more even crap onto those universally-licesnsed operating systems, and a software makers (like Google) who couldn't be bothered to give a damn..

What you consider a negative, is actually one of the strengths of android. for instance cyanogenmod has produced some awesome roms that have extended the power and flexibility of android. Its not a race to the bottom, but rather providing consumers with choice and alternatives.

 

[neiltc13]

Pretty ****** when a device less than a year old can't run the latest OS.

Which one is "less than a year old"?

Galaxy S: March 2010
Galaxy Tab: September 2010

Today: December 2011.

 

[mkrishnan]

There ought to be some sort of Android "Declaration of Independence" that stipulates that (for some kinds of devices), you be able to revert to a more or less "clean" Android installation, like you can when you re-install Windows. Or better yet, make all the stuff that the provider puts on the device opt-in. And then maybe some transition to an open system like upgrading Windows or OS X, where it's out there, and you can get it, and it will install on your device if you meet certain established system requirements.

That's all needlessly complicated, but I agree with downsey. I would be pissed off if I had one of these and I was told I couldn't have ICS.

 

[rdowns]

Which one is "less than a year old"?

Galaxy S: March 2010
Galaxy Tab: September 2010

Today: December 2011.

Pardon me. Does that make it any better?

All I ever hear is excuses from the Android crowd.

 

[*LTD*]

What you consider a negative, is actually one of the strengths of android. for instance cyanogenmod has produced some awesome roms that have extended the power and flexibility of android. Its not a race to the bottom, but rather providing consumers with choice and alternatives.

If you don't mind waiting (for what may or may not happen) this is no problem.

 

[maflynn]

If you don't mind waiting (for what may or may not happen) this is no problem.

cyanogenmod typically produces upgraded roms faster then motorola and samsung so there is less waiting for them then some manufacturers

Edit:
Plus they seem to be more stable and less buggy

 

[vitzr]

It's quite obvious what the intent of this thread is.

Fascinating.

 

[r.j.s]

That's not a viable market solution. Custom ROMs? Really?? What's a "cyanogen." Sounds like a workout supplement company.

Actually, it is a viable solution. Samsung has asked Cyanogen to continue building ROMs.

For all the android bashing you do, you sure don't know a whole lot about the android community. Cyanogen is the biggest custom ROM maker - and usually the most stable - more stable than the OEM ROMs in many cases.

 

[rdowns]

Actually, it is a viable solution. Samsung has asked Cyanogen to continue building ROMs.

For all the android bashing you do, you sure don't know a whole lot about the android community. Cyanogen is the biggest custom ROM maker - and usually the most stable - more stable than the OEM ROMs in many cases.

I don't know about custom ROMS but that is not a viable solution for the average consumer.

 

[r.j.s]

I don't know about custom ROMS but that is not a viable solution for the average consumer.

I really don't think the average consumer is going to care whether they have ICS or not - especially if they are still using a Galaxy S phone.

 

[mkrishnan]

Actually, it is a viable solution. Samsung has asked Cyanogen to continue building ROMs.

I didn't know about this. From what I can find, it looks like Samsung is employing him, but not particularly paying him to do Cyanogen nor officially endorsing or supporting Cyanogen.

You also made me do research on CyanogenMod, and I guess it's exactly what I thought the Android community needs at a minimum already, aside from the fact that it's a small project that moves slowly at this point (and so is still officially on Gingerbread) and that it requires rooting (which, I believe is exploit-based, and although it sounds like they're farther ahead of Android than DevTeam is ahead of iOS at this point, always susceptible to new devices not being rootable).

Really, rooting should be some kind of official option on all Google devices, and then at that point, Cyanogen and anyone else who wanted could function to provide the community whatever they want/need that isn't provided by the device sellers.

 

[maflynn]

Really, rooting should be some kind of official option on all Google devices, and then at that point, Cyanogen and anyone else who wanted could function to provide the community whatever they want/need that isn't provided by the device sellers.

Agreed, but it isn't. I would probably jump on the nook tablet if they had not locked the boot loader. Motorola has a history of encrypting the boatloader,and forcing any updates to be signed by them.

HTC is probably the most developer/hobbyest friendly with many phones easily routable.

 

[r.j.s]

^^^ Yeah, it is usually the manufacturers or the carriers that insist the bootloader be locked or encrypted.

Custom ROMs only require root if the bootloader is locked - if not (some devices are shipped unlocked now) then one only needs to load the ROM through the bootloader.

 

[roadbloc]

I gotta admit, that is quite pathetic. However at the end of the day, if the current version of Android it has on is set to be supported by google for another 3 years or so, I don't see much of a problem.

Otherwise, I'd feel a bit ripped off by Samsung.

 

[Phil A.]

Pardon me. Does that make it any better?

All I ever hear is excuses from the Android crowd.

Wasn't the iPhone 3G still for sale later than March 2010? Don't think that supports iOS 5, does it?

 

[*LTD*]

Wasn't the iPhone 3G still for sale later than March 2010? Don't think that supports iOS 5, does it?

It was also released in July 2008.

 

[ravenvii]

I really don't think the average consumer is going to care whether they have ICS or not - especially if they are still using a Galaxy S phone.

Really? The Galaxy S was released A YEAR AGO. Not two years ago, ONE. Year. Ago.

I only upgrade my phone once every two years because my contract is for two years and I have more sense than to waste my money upgrading phones every year or more.

And guess what? I would care very much that my one-year-old phone can't upgrade to the latest OS, especially when other phones, themselves with lower specs than mine, can.

 

[maflynn]

Really? The Galaxy S was released A YEAR AGO. Not two years ago, ONE. Year. Ago.

I think this is the achilles heel for Android devices.

Manufacturers are pumping out device after device and they cannot support all of them for all of the android releases. Why spend resources on supporting a phone that current last year but has already been displaced by a newer model or models in some cases.

I'm not making excuses for samsung but rather pointing out one issue I mulled about when considered getting an android phone. How long would a company provide updates to the OS.

 

[mkrishnan]

Really? The Galaxy S was released A YEAR AGO. Not two years ago, ONE. Year. Ago.

I only upgrade my phone once every two years because my contract is for two years and I have more sense than to waste my money upgrading phones every year or more.

And guess what? I would care very much that my one-year-old phone can't upgrade to the latest OS, especially when other phones, themselves with lower specs than mine, can.

Yeah, Apple is surprisingly giving on this issue -- the original iPhone ran far enough in updating that it was running an iOS version that was marginal in performance on it (if you wanted it).

I didn't have a 3G, but Wikipedia says that it went on sale on 07/11/2008 and the last OS release for it was 4.2.1 on 11/22/2010. That's two years and four months. Not too bad.

The original iPhone went on sale 06/29/2007 and was last updated to 3.1.3, I believe, around 02/02/2010, which would be 2:7.

I think I'd expect the number to be >2 yr. Hitting a round 3 I suppose would be nice, but that's probably not going to happen while the hardware is improving so rapidly (if you consider the processor upgrades that have happened from the original iPhone to the 4S, for instance).

 

[0dev]

There is no doubt that a custom ICS ROM will be released, but it's still disgusting that Samsung isn't providing official updates for a device of this age. Most users wouldn't even know where to start when it comes to custom ROMs, remember.

 

[KnightWRX]

Pretty ****** when a device less than a year old can't run the latest OS.

Uh ? Both the Galaxy S and the Tab are more than a year old. Where are you getting your information from ?