Android Updates, Who's Responsible?

[MagicAndroid]

In the updates thread has spawned a multi segmented, very passionate debate.

The main question that needs to be resolved is "Who is responsible for updates" or lack of them.

This does not have to be a black and white issue but 3 parties take some credit for each device, so who does what.

My opinion:

Google is responsible for their branded devices as well as providing all devellopers with the tools needed to create the next version on their phone.

IMO, Google fulfills this. It is apparent from the Nexus one and also all the modding communities releasing quick updates. Google should not become like Apple. If they want to do something to improve they should make their tools a little easier (more robust) to tackle multiple hardware so implementation on different phones is a cake walk.

Second comes the manufacturer. The manufacturers job is to make new phones to sell to wireless network carriers. Once they ship it to the carriers technically it is not their problem anymore. Where they go wrong is their UI customization that starts to deviate from the main Android release. It is their every right to do so to an open source device however you think they'd have more forethought into the matter and the trouble it might cause for updates.

Now comes the carrier and unfortunately i'm going to use Rogers as an example. While some of you believe it's still fully an HTC device, I disagree. It's now a rogers phone made by HTC. Rogers now needs to sell it to the customer, trouble shoot it for the customer and UPDATE it for the customer. While their sales team can handle the sales, their tech departmant can talk you thru a problem, they can't take the tools from Google and make their own update. So they call HTC back and strike a deal. For payment HTC will create a new update and ship it out for Rogers.

While HTC does in fact make the update, they only start when Rogers pay them and they must comply with what Rogers wants of it.

I seriously doubt that like us, Rogers sat on the edge of their seat waiting for an update. While HTC did take a while to make it, Rogers probably only submitted the order a couple of months after 2.1 was released. I believe it's this lack of commitment to the customers that delayed 2.1 for the most part.

Furthermore the fact that Rogers locks down their device on multiple levels not allowing us to easily do our own updates is an oxymoron.

I stand that Rogers is 80% to blame for the lack of updates. They glazed over 1.6 and offered 2.1 a year late, much after the fact that 2.2 had come out. The rest of the update falls with HTC and Google with 15% and 5% respectively.

 

[BingoRingo]

In the end though, if the manufacturer doesn't make the update, the carrier can't do anything about it. And this sucks.

 

[MagicAndroid]

In the end though, if the manufacturer doesn't make the update, the carrier can't do anything about it. And this sucks.

I agree 100% but when you have headlines like Vodafone getting 2.2 and Rogers saying that's the end of the line you have to wonder.

In that case I would not put any blame on Rogers if they TRUTHFULLY inquired to HTC and HTC said "no".

 

[mjschmidt]

I'd like to suggest that there are two different disagreements going on.

From the other thread (and a previous thread that was hijacked with the debate) it seems there is; 1. the general disagreement over who is ultimately responsible for the updates; and 2. the belief held by some that we are "whining" and being "hard" on Rogers.

On the surface they might seem to be the same thing, but the first is an academic debate (like defining "Truth", or arguing the language of a law instead of its "spirit") while the second is more practical, specifically when one wants to create change.

Disagreement 1:

As far as who is responsible for the actual update, that seems obvious. HTC has to modify the OS it receives from Google to work with the hardware, so ultimately HTC is responsible for the update.

(In this case I am defining Responsible as being the ones who actually have to do it. Google can't do it alone, neither can Rogers. It must be done by HTC).

Usually you could leave it at that, but in the case of the Magic on Rogers, it becomes muddied by the fact that Rogers requested that HTC modify that software further than just the HTC UI changes (and hardware considerations).

If Rogers had not requested further changes to the OS, then we're only talking about HTC's UI changes, and making it work with the hardware. In this regard many people like to make the distinction between a "Google Experience" phone, and a non-Google-Experience phone.

The updates for a GE phone come from Google. They certainly go to HTC first, to make it work with the hardware, but then go back to Google. as long as Sense UI isn't included, then the only modification necessary is for the hardware. This would be the case with the HTC MyTouch3G (US version of the Magic).

I'm not sure if the MyTouch ever got Sense UI, maybe someone knows?

If Rogers had not requested any modifications, and Sense UI was added, then the blame for no updates would lie with HTC.

The crux of the whole argument, however, is that Rogers requested modifications to the OS.

While no one would confirm it, there must be a cost to having these modifications done. Even if there is not a charge for it to Rogers, there is certainly an investment of time on the part of HTC (and time is money in business) so a cost none-the-less.

Subsequent updates would need either for these Rogers modifications to be stripped out, or to be redone in a new version. That is ROGERS fault, not HTC! HTC did not add Rogers modifications without Rogers requesting them.

So, in an ideal world, we would blame Google alone for not insisting on consistency from manufacturers, but this is not an ideal world. Certainly Google must share in the blame, and HTC as well, but this started because Rogers didn't do their homework, and didn't understand Android (and how updates would work with it).

If Rogers had left it alone, it likely would not have been this difficult to get the update, and it it were as difficult, at least the fault would actually be HTC's and not Rogers.

Disagreement 2.

The second disagreement I've seen is that we are being too "hard" on Rogers, and/or that we are "whining", that we should be directing our ire at HTC.

As mentioned above, Rogers' decision to modify the OS is one very good reason why we should take this up with Rogers, and not HTC, but there is another good reason.

I have seen some posters in the other thread debating the "economics" of the issue, and how not supporting updates is a business decision that is best for HTC and Rogers. That may very well be, and underlying that is the simple philosophy that a company should (and usually will) do what's best for its bottom line (making profit).

If a company is then justified in doing what's best for its own interests, surely it follows that, in a capitalist society, consumers are within their rights to do what's best for their own interests.

In this case, it is in our best interest to go after Rogers (regardless of whose fault it is) because Rogers is the company that is going to listen to us. I've said this repeatedly, and some people choose to ignore it. WE have next to no influence with HTC. They are a global company, and the business of a small percentage of Android users in a country with a small population is mostly irrelevant to them on their larger scale.

At our scale, however, we have influence with Rogers. We are their direct customers, and in this era of increased competition, they want to keep our business. If they are not only at risk of losing our business, but the potential business of those who read online about the issue of the updates, then they are more likely to respond in order to keep that business.

Rogers is in a position to influence HTC, as they are in effect a larger customer than the individual users. So it is in our best interests to put pressure on Rogers, who in turn put pressure on HTC, to get change.

The simple proof of this idea is that when we complained to HTC, they blamed Rogers, and indicated on the HTC web site that they had no intention of updating the Magic beyond 1.5, but when we put pressure on Rogers, we ended up getting the change we desired... an update beyond 1.5.

In closing, I'd like to ask the critics if they plan to root their phones, or use the Rogers official update. If you root, then you can be as righteous as you like, but if you take advantage of the work of the "whiners" you criticize, and install the official Rogers update, then you are being hypocritical.

 

[drifter136]

The question is, how much is Vodaphone paying HTC for that 2.2 update? With roughly 60x the customer base, it could be much easier for Vodaphone to absorb that cost than Rogers, who just spent a hefty chunk of change on 2.1.

At the end of the day the blame/responsibility goes back to Google, IMO. It's the whole Android model that's to blame. The closest real competitor to the Android model is Windows Mobile, which rarely updates, and when it does, you're buying a new handset because it's a major update. The other big ones, iPhone and Blackberry, along with Palm and several others, are all proprietary. They produce the hardware and the software, so it's not an easy comparo. iPhone just makes two versions of iOS, the iPhone 4 version, and then softens it up for the reduced power of the 3's and ships it out.

With Android, there's so many hardware combinations and proprietary hardware in use in its phones that it's just not that simple. If Google specified that Android phones all had to use this processor family and that camera family and that screen family, it would be simple, but we wouldn't have innovations like the Xperia's 8MP camera or the Samsung Super AMOLED screens, among others.

From here we can go on to then blame the manufacturers for not putting out new drivers for their old hardware and so on and so forth, but they've been put in that position by the Android development model...an open OS that's open to changes (both hardware and software) by whoever chooses to use it. You take the good with the bad. If you want the flexibility that Android brings to the table, you have to accept that for official updates you may be stuck with whatever manufacturer you chose deems to make financial sense to give you.

But being on an Android phone, and being an open OS, the community will continue to support your phone, and that's a possibility that other platforms simply won't have, because they don't have this open source model. That's the big advantage of Android. Not the official updates from your manufacturer, but the power that's put in the hands of the users that know what they're doing.

 

[mjschmidt]

@drifter136:

I think we can all agree that ultimately the fault for the OS splintering and updates lies with Google, but that's a different argument. It has been suggested in other threads that in the specific case of the Rogers HTC Magic, that we should not have been harassing Rogers over it, but HTC instead.

So, if you want to debate who is ultimately responsible for the hodge-podge of Android OS versions, then i will agree with you completely that the fault lies with Google.

If, however, it is a matter of criticizing those of use who pestered Rogers to pressure HTC for an update, then I will take issue with that position and disagree as per the points outlined in my previous post.

In the specific case of the HTC Magic from Rogers, Rogers' decision to have HTC modify the OS, and Rogers lack of understanding of Android, placed Rogers in a position of being responsible for that decision, and the need for subsequent updates. Further, in this specific case, it has been proven that pressuring Rogers instead of HTC actually resulted in the resolution we sought, an update beyond 1.5 for the HTC Magic.

Those of us who have corresponded directly with Rogers management (and even had dinner with some of them) have stated repeatedly that it would be an advantage to Rogers in the Android market if they could offer a phone with a vanilla version of Android, ideally a Google Experience phone (something they have not yet succeeded at procuring).

 

[drifter136]

I guess I just feel, the more I research and read and hear from the people with various levels of connections, that if the carriers and manufacturers became more willing to leave the door to root more open (meaning you can't accidentally walk through it, but someone who knows where to look won't have a problem finding it) this all becomes a moot point. It's becoming more and more apparent that if you want an "old" device to stay current, there will always be people in the community with the same goal that have the skill to make it happen.

If the carriers and manufacturers would get over the proprietary mindset brought on by the iPhone's and Blackberries of the world, and realize that this is the whole point of an open source OS, we would be much better off and it would take all that heat off the carriers and manufacturers to keep these things up to date beyond a "reasonable" time frame....which is another issue that's bound to spark debates.

But yes, it can be argued that this specific case comes down to Rogers not fully understanding what it was getting into with Android, and I suspect it also didn't anticipate the passion and enthusiasm for the platform that it would spark.

 

[mjschmidt]

...and I suspect it also didn't anticipate the passion and enthusiasm for the platform that it would spark.

Oh, I can confirm that!

As far as root goes, I have asked Rogers specifically about their position on rooting. They do not officially prohibit it, but do point out that rooting will 1. void the warranty (with HTC and with Rogers), and 2. deny you technical support for the phone.

They are justified in that position, in my opinion.

In the case of the HTC Magic, there was an extenuating circumstance that made the rooting issue different from other Android phones, that being the 911 Bug.

Even though other ROMs took care of this bug, Rogers cannot endorse a non-official ROM, and since they considered themselves at a legal risk (because of the bug, in the event someone had to call 911) their only option was to enforce an "official" ROM.

The fact that the ROM broke root was incidental, and to be expected. Every manufacturer kills (or tries to kill) root with each update. That's a separate issue to take up with the manufacturers.

In this case, though, because of the 911 bug, and their fear of being sued, they felt they had to force users to specifically have this official ROM and no other, at the risk of having phones on the network that could still have the bug.

The flaw with their argument, and I've pointed it out to them repeatedly, is that their willingness to allow other phones (Android or iPhone) on the network with non-official ROMs (and no waiver) is tacit approval of any phone (including the Magic) not having an official ROM.

They disagree with me, but only because they can. They claim not to be able to determine whether or not a jailbroken iPhone is on the network, and given the number of iPhone users, it is unlikely they would cut off data to those users for having JBed phones.

So, as far as Root goes, Rogers unofficially doesn't care, as long as the user understands that they have no warranty, and will get no tech support, and as long as the phone doesn't have a bug, or the potential for the bug.

The irony of it all is that after enforcing the 911bugfix, and cutting data to people without it, it is possible not only to root the post-911 Magic, but to do so in such a way that you don't lose data, and don't need to sign the waiver.

 

[j12n]

Bear with my analogy:

I go to BestBuy and by an HP laptop running Win7 and connect to the internet with Rogers Highspeed. Four vendors involved, who's responsible for updates to Win7 OS? Every vendor get's their piece of the pie, Microsoft manages Win7 updates, HP provides driver updates etc. Rogers provides network service so nothing to do here - maybe provide firewall and spam filtering to protect themselves.

Now lets look at the HTC Magic. I buy the HTC phone from Rogers on a subsidized plan. Google provides base Android (for free). HTC takes the base Android and layers in their drivers and UI stuff. Then they layer in Rogers proprietary software and branding.

Who's responsible for what:
Google - responsible for moving base Android along. They seem to be meeting this criteria with continual revisions, new features etc.

HTC - It would be in their best interest to provide updates so their users are happy and continue to buy HTC hardware in the future.

Rogers - Had HTC brand a phone for them w/ proprietary software etc. Major mistake (I hope some VP got the Axe for this oversight)! Now you own it Rogers, and it comes down to your contract w/ HTC and your relationship with them and some groveling. If you had gone stock HTC Magic then you would be off the hook.


So what lesson can be learned from this:
1. Rogers, stop branding phones. Sell Android phones like the Nexus One and/or negotiate a better contract with the device manufactures for specific upgrades. Hire some better lawyers.

2. HTC (Motorola, et al.) When you pull code from the Google repository (for free), you own it. If you want repeat customers then establish a proper release cycle where customers are happy. The vendor that demonstrates this the best will get my future business. If Android isn't working out for you then go back to WinMo or build you own OS - then see how business is. So far the Google/Nexus One seems to be the goto phone.

3. Google, you provide a free operating system that has made HTC et al. buckets of money and given them a fighting chance again iOS. You brought back Motorola from the dead. I see no fault to you.

Flame away sconnelly and all...

 

[MagicAndroid]

^^^

This is almost EXACTLY how I see it.

Google is not at fault. Like I said, if Google was at fault it'd be apparent by the lack of updates from the community. But the community is thriving and doing a quite fast and good job so if they can do it, why not the big companies. Google is tightening the vice a bit with 3.0 by supposedly making a UI that doesn't need modding. No more MotoBlur or Sense. This means that manufacturers will only need to do hardware compatibility checks and send it off.

As for Vodafone:

Vodafone: HTC Magic NOT getting Android 2.1 update – but 2.2 may come EuroDroid

Rogers please refrain from adding shit to the phones. If you want put them as apps in the market. People who want them can get them and those who don't won't have their ugly appearance on the phone.

 

[ccrashh]

Bear with my analogy:
I go to BestBuy and by an HP laptop running Win7 and connect to the internet with Rogers Highspeed. Four vendors involved, who's responsible for updates to Win7 OS?
....
1. Rogers, stop branding phones. Sell Android phones like the Nexus One and/or negotiate a better contract with the device manufactures for specific upgrades. Hire some better lawyers.

I agree with your assertion that Rogers should stop branding phones. In fact, they should sell them already rooted. Why wouldn't they? A buyer can not simply get a phone from Rogers and sign a 3 year contract, then turn around and cancel it without paying a penalty anyways. If I pooch my phone because I dicked around with it, so be it. If I screwed my PC up, I wouldn't expect the vendor or my internet provider to be on the hook for support.

In my case, my phone's manufacturer (Samsung) came up with an update to 2.1 for my phone (Galaxy Spica). Why should I have to jump through hoops to update my own phone? Why would Rogers care? I actually had a tech support guy state that an updated OS may or may not work on their network. Say what?

 

[agitpropre]

A couple of observations:

On "whining": all corporate entities thrive on feedback. They pay big money for market research. The comments made on sites like this one are free market research. Even "bad" comments are valuable because they can indicate a valid response from a group of consumers. There is no whining, only feedback.

The work done by some members of this community to contact Rogers directly and lobby for change is a contribution to the entire community and I, personally, am very grateful for the time and effort put it.

On "responsibility": with respect - responsibility is a misnomer, except as far as there is any contractual responsibility; I pay Rogers for a set of services and they deliver (or not). That's the end of the arrangement.

However - if they want me to be a repeat customer they probably need to provide a little bit more to get me to come back (and to not badmouth their service to everyone I can think of). Am I am inclined to stay with Rogers because of the quality of service I have had so far? No. The service has not met my (I think) reasonable expectations of regular, clear communications, updates to the software..etc., especially when one of the selling points for Android was the openness/community-based upgrades "revolution". I appreciate the one-time fee reduction I saw on my bill...but I would have much preferred the entire 911 issue and forced update had been dealt with in a positive way ("let us help you") rather than the agressive "update or be cut off" approach.

I have an expectation that my software will be updated regularly. I think that is reasonable given the state of the art in computing which strives for constant improvement. The fact that my Magic has not been updated beyond 1.5 - and that I have been prevented from easily updating it myself through a perfected spl etc. - indicates to me that the company with which I have a contractual arrangement - not Google, not HTC, only Rogers - is not really that interested in keeping my business. That, of course, is a business decision on Rogers' part; it may be that there is no good economic reason to try to keep me happy. That probably reflects the lack of competition in the marketplace...

 

[j12n]

*** Message to Rogers (Mary) ****

This community of people are here collaborating, brainstorming, providing feedback because we love Android and want our cellular experience (with Rogers) to be better.

If you are a forward thinking company you will engage and foster this community. Twitter and Facebook is a nice start but only just touching the surface.

Here are some new ideas:

- Make us Beta testers of new OS upgrades. I would have been happy to Beta test 2.1 for you. Turn your internal QA test around and allow them to manage this type of program. Save money and time.

- If upgrading to Android 2.2+ and 3.X is not economical, why not be straightforward with us. State this fact then possibly ask us "Would you be willing to pay {some nominal fee} to get the 2.X upgrade?" If a large number of people would be willing to pay 5 or 10 dollars to get an OS upgrade then the numbers might work.

- Don't be evil. I know you have to protect your corporate image but screw this, we know when you're lying. Don't play the blame game and say things aren't possible when clearly they are. Anything is possible, but you have to try.

- A lot of us are technical people, how about a contest to make the "best Rogers theme" or "best app" - winner gets free data for a year or some crap. Crowd source!

- How about you release a phone where you actually allow the community to manage the OS. This would be very interesting. You would provide the hardward, source code and specs. You would have a small team to manage the "official" release cycle and the community would provide the development, mods, etc.

I'm just spitballing here but what I'm saying is think outside the box. You could become the "coolest" cellular company on the planet.

PS. I've been a Rogers customer for 15 years. I like you and want you to be successful. I didn't buy an iPhone but held out for the Android. I had much hope and excitement around Android because of it's openness and community approach, but this has been dashed. I'm loosing the faith...

 

[thewhitewizard]

I've had mixed feelings on who's at fault for a long time.

- I'm pissed at Google, because they got the ball rolling on fragmentation, allowing carriers and manufacturers to alter Android to such an extent that we rely on them and not Google for the next iteration. This is one case where i wanted them to be more like Apple and control the OS update path for all phones themselves and leave the carriers to design themes or apps or extensions to alter the look/functionality to their style/branding. I can only assume tho that this approach wasn't adopted was for Android to cover a wide array of phones to saturate the phone market more quickly, which it has. Double edged sword.

- Rogers or HTC, who do i blame more? In this case it's Rogers. As others have commented, the second Rogers decided to stick their logo on the phone and have their logo pop up on the splash screen, they earned the right to get beaten up on this. HTC is its own mess with the Sense UI and if i bought the phone from a cellphone store and it was simply HTC Magic... my beef surely would be with them. BUT This is a Rogers HTC Magic+ and now Rogers owns the burden of work to get me my update. True it is still an HTC manufactured product and to use a computer analogy, if i bought an all the parts for a computer and built it myself, and a part goes wrong, i have to deal with the individual manufac warrenty of that part BUT if i go to Best Buy and get a DELL box, everything in the box is DELL's responsibility to no matter the individual parts because DELLs name is on the box. Putting your name on something has consequences.

- HTC should carry the sole blame for the update path for the Magic. Take Rogers out of the equation for a second. Just look at the rest of HTC's phones (minus the Nexus 1), or any other manufac's phones. They all have their own layer (sense,motoblur,etc..) mucking up the upgrade path. As has been pointed out, they dont care about updates, just pushing new phones, so without a push from carriers, they wouldn't be bothered. To take the computer analogy further, when we buy a DELL, we dont expect them to provide the updates to Windows, thats microsofts job. You pay for the hardware, and it should run whatever the latest version of OS is out there, barring hardware spec limitations. Period. End of story. You don't buy the DELL and find out you cant install VISTA or Windows 7 and are stuck on XP because of DELLs magic desktop interface. It's sheer laziness on the part of HTC to provide continual updates to their hardware as long as the OS specs are still within reason.

Google seems to be taking some steps moving forward and now applying minimum spec levels for Andoid OS's, so if your scren is 320x480, you're not going to see 3.0 on your phone ever. At least you'll know. Also heard they want to reign in the layers (sense/blur) and limit the carriers to a more themelike/extension system, but core OS updates and apps would be OTA by google. at least thats the hope.

Finally, i think it should be mandatory that all phones by given a upgrade path limit so consumers can factor it in their decision. If a person walked into a Rogers store and saw the HTC Dream many moons ago and read on the card something like this:

Rogers HTC Dream
OS: Android Current Version: 1.5 OS Update Cycle Life: 1.5
$49 on 3 yr contract

I think no one in their right mind would have bought the phone, knowing it wasn't going beyond 1.5. I think as long as the current model is in place where carriers and phone manufacs are the bottleneck in getting the latest iteration of the OS, it should be required that they specify within reason at the point of purchase how far they will support the update path of the OS.

 

[thewhitewizard]

apparently im not the only one who's asking google to stymie this $#!7 pronto.

When is the next "pure" Anroid phone? Nexus Two? - Android Help

 

[schuchwun]

Since Android is supposed to be an open source OS shouldn't the community be able to pitch in from time to time even though most devices are closed source and proprietary. Look at some old Motorola phones (V3, V551, et al.) that had a HUUGE modding community that had no barriers hardware and software wise (piracy aside) and was successful, on the other hand android has a huge community too but when you have closed devices like the magic, et al, and barriers put in place by the carrier to prevent modding it sort of defeats the purpose...

 

[GreatBigDog]

It will be interesting to see over the next several months which phones do get updated. As Mary had stated in the other tread

"HTC indicated that there will be no further OS upgrades beyond 2.1 for the Magic device"

HTC has stated publicly that any device that was introduced in 2010 will receive Froyo (Android 2.2) but has not indicated anything yet about older devices. I won't count the Google branded MT3G in with the Magic as Google is the one responsible for any Rom's on that device. I will however be watching for ANY offical announcements from ANY wireless provider that has the HTC branded Magic. If I see that HTC is providing another wireless carrier with an Android 2.2 update to their Magic I will certainly call RogerMary and Rogers to task on it.

But before that, I can't really see any reason that Rogers is responsible for "Asking for an update beyond 2.1". Let's face it, It's been over a year since the Magic was introduced on the Rogers network, I'm surprised that it's still available for purchase, most devices don't have that long of a shelf life.

gbd

 

[sconnelly]

It is fine to have personal opinions but some of the above opinions do not reflect what is really happening.

Yes, I understand that it is as though Rogers is the only one you have any influence over. That may be true.... but what I get annoyed about is the hate directed towards them, as if they are one big, evil company that lies. It really is quite an immature attitude. I really believe that, as a whole, Rogers is no different than any other customer service oriented company. That is, they really try to please their customers because they understand that only by doing so, they can keep you as a customer.

Have there been f'ups? Absolutely! The Android platform is one perfect example.

Is Rogers responsible for you not having OS 2.1 on your Magic? NO!
Why? Because the proof is in the fact that NO OTHER MAGIC (or equivalent) has OS 2.1!
Okay, that isn't why... but I am too busy to report the 'why' from the other thread.

Is Rogers responsible for the perception that they are responsible for the release of the latest OS on an Android phone? YES!
Why? Because their marketing department is just as f'ed up as most marketing departments in that they tell their customers what they want to hear, rather then the absolutely truth! This is known as truthiness (invented by Stephan Colbert); that half truth, half made up.

Can Rogers improve this Android situation by lowering the expectations of their customers? YES!
Rogers must communicate to their stores and resellers that customers must understand that Android phones are NOT iPhones, and that their is NO GUARANTEE that their Android phone will receive timely updates or any further updates at all! Furthermore, updates are the responsibility of the hardware manufacturer, not Rogers.
Simple easy-breezy solution to all this nonsense.

Is Rogers finally learning? YES, I THINK SO!
From Redboard:
RogersMiranda says:
September 2, 2010 at 1:57 pm
Hello,
The Captivate does not have a front-facing camera.
Also, Rogers will not be preloading any apps on the device. Instead, we are providing three shortcuts on the device that lead to the Android Market where you can choose to download our most popular apps including urMusic, Rogers on Demand (RODM) or My Account.

This may be a trend for all new Android phones. I think they realize the resource cost of customizing.

Finally, the all important question to answer.....
Is this problem unique to Rogers? NO!
In other words, are there other "I WANT MY 1.6" fights going on with other carriers, hardware manufacturers, and/or countries? YES!

One example of many frustrated Android owners, see this link: How I got Android 2.2 by de-branding my phone | PC Pro blog

I am no Rogers fanboy, and I do not really feel sorry for them, but I do just feel as though Rogers was sucker punched!

 

[mjschmidt]

sconnelly: As mentioned in my first post in this thread (scroll up) in this specific case Rogers is to blame, and they are responsible for the simple fact that they had HTC customize the ROM for them.

If the HTC Magic had come to us with Android and Sense UI only and no Rogers branding (or Exchange support), then you would be correct, and our gripe would be with HTC.

However, because Rogers made the decision to modify the ROM, and because it would need to be modified again for updates because of that original Rogers-requested modification it is thus Rogers fault.

You said: "It is fine to have personal opinions but some of the above opinions do not reflect what is really happening."

Well, it is NOT opinion that Rogers asked HTC to modify Android for these phones! That is a FACT plain and simple. So it is not opinion to say that Rogers is responsible, when it is because of their modifications that further updates were an issue.

As far as Hatred towards Rogers, not all of us have reacted with hatred. Most (if not all of us) have reacted with extreme anger which is completely justified.

As for no other Magic phones getting 2.1... the MyTouch 3G, and the French Magic are apparently getting _2.2_.

Quite frankly, why do you care if Rogers was "sucker punched"? They are a business, a big one, and they should have done their due diligence. Nothing we've said about them through this whole debacle was untrue, and they still could have said "No" to which we would have no recourse.

So how exactly were they sucker punched? How were they "hurt" by this, and why do you care?

 

[bigfoot13442]

I have had lengthy conversations with representatives from both HTC and Rogers and each one blames the other.
Rogers says that it is not their fault that HTC isn't providing updates. The Rogers rep also stated that Rogers will no longer be buying phones from HTC. I don't think the rep that I was talking to had the knowledge or authority to tell me this, but they did anyway.

HTC says it is not their fault, Rogers did not request the update.

I don't think that there is an answer to this debate since both companies are blaming each other.

I don't believe it is Google's fault, because Android is open source. HTC decided to make a device for the platform with their hardware and modifications. Google is not responsible for making this open source OS compatible with another company's hardware.

Despite whose fault it is, Android is still an awesome OS and this will not deter me from buying another Android phone. It will, however, prevent Rogers and HTC from getting anymore of my business.

 

[BingoRingo]

Since Android is supposed to be an open source OS shouldn't the community be able to pitch in from time to time even though most devices are closed source and proprietary. Look at some old Motorola phones (V3, V551, et al.) that had a HUUGE modding community that had no barriers hardware and software wise (piracy aside) and was successful, on the other hand android has a huge community too but when you have closed devices like the magic, et al, and barriers put in place by the carrier to prevent modding it sort of defeats the purpose...

It can be done, but the X10's bootloader needs to be cracked first. I think some people are working on it, and I might be wrong but I think they did it but it's buggy, i.e. step 1 is done but they still have to work hard.

 

[sconnelly]

I have had lengthy conversations with representatives from both HTC and Rogers and each one blames the other.

You are not speaking with the right people.

This is a problem that every carrier is realizing (or will eventually have to deal with). Consider that fact before blaming Rogers.

If you insist on 'blaming' Rogers, then perhaps you could say that you don't have OS 1.6 because of a decision they made. I am guessing they decided to bypass OS 1.6 for economic reasons.

I do know with a great deal of certainty that originally Rogers had no intention to pay to update these phones; they originally underestimated the value of Android OS updates. Prior to this, all phone OS's were static. New features always required new hardware. That was the model prior to the Android. iPhone is different because it is entirely in Apple's domain. I think Rogers learned a lot in the past two years.

I don't think that there is an answer to this debate since both companies are blaming each other.

False logic. Of course blame can (and should) be placed, if only for the sake of accountability, and ensuring that this doesn't happen again. Every stake holder is to blame in varying degrees.

Roger's part in this fiasco is:
1. Poor communications with their customers (that includes telling customers what they want to hear, rather than what is!)
I should be the one writing this/defending them! Damn it! Someone
from Rogers should chime in and tell everyone what their part in this
was!

2. Insisting on minor customizations that simply slow down the process.
NOTE: Rogers has since made changes and the new Captivate, for
instance, will not have Rogers customizations.

HTC (or any manufacturer) and Google - I think I have said enough about these two already.

I don't believe it is Google's fault, because Android is open source. HTC decided to make a device for the platform with their hardware and modifications. Google is not responsible for making this open source OS compatible with another company's hardware.

As long as you keep believing that, and worse, agreeing with this philosophy, this whole Android update fiasco will never-ever end with current or future Android phones!

It will, however, prevent Rogers and HTC from getting anymore of my business.

This is your most unreasonable statement!

So, Mr. BigFoot man/beast, which carrier are you going to change to? Which one did not make a mistake with HTC (for sake of argument) and is, and always will offer the latest Android OS within a month of Google's official release. Betcha can't name a better carrier.

Hey, I don't want to fight... my sarcasm is tongue in cheek...

 

[sconnelly]

However, because Rogers made the decision to modify the ROM, and because it would need to be modified again for updates because of that original Rogers-requested modification it is thus Rogers fault.

You said: "It is fine to have personal opinions but some of the above opinions do not reflect what is really happening."

Well, it is NOT opinion that Rogers asked HTC to modify Android for these phones! That is a FACT plain and simple. So it is not opinion to say that Rogers is responsible, when it is because of their modifications that further updates were an issue.

With all due respect, the mere fact that no other carrier is offering anything beyond OS 1.6... in other words, OS 2.x is not available on any Magic (or equivalent) phone makes your statement kind of moot.

As I already stated, Rogers choose not to update to OS 1.6 for various [sound] reasons. It is not my place to give those reasons. However, Rogers should officially tell everyone why they decided to skip to OS 2.1.

As far as Hatred towards Rogers, not all of us have reacted with hatred. Most (if not all of us) have reacted with extreme anger which is completely justified.

This forum is not the only place where Android users are expressing their opinion. There has been much, much worse 'anger' directed towards Rogers personnel.

It is all really ridiculous, IMHO... seriously, there are more important issues than a damn phone with an older OS!

Hey, I was 'burned' too... I was told by a Rogers employee that my update experience would be similar to that of the iPhone. I had specifically asked this question b/c of my prior experience with the HTC Touch (WinMobile). It seems that HTC was the liar in this sitch as well.

Quite frankly, why do you care if Rogers was "sucker punched"? They are a business, a big one, and they should have done their due diligence.

That is hardly the point! I just want people to understand truth, as opposed to rumours, and exaggerations. Besides, Rogers is no more 'evil' than Bell, or um any of those new so called anti-establishment phone companies.

Tell me, if you were in charge at Rogers, how would you have done your due diligence? Easy to say in hindsight and from the outside... but this is almost a case of philosophical unknown, unknowns... see: Unknown unknown - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Good fun reading, highly recommend it]

Changing subject a little bit, About OS 2.1, I guarantee that many of you will not be satisfied with this OS. Many developers (including my own company) are now reconsidering Android b/c of OS 2.2 (no more base memory limitation). OS 2.2 is the beginning of some game changing changes to Android (despite its minor update status).

This may all be moot b/c Gingerbread (vastly improved graphics acceleration) is expected to be the first worthy of commercial apps platform. Unfortunately, Gingerbread will actually require a new phone.

 

[TriC]

I know with the Samsung S I get my updates from Samsung and not my carrier.. and they pump them out fast. using a program from Samsung called KIES. just plug my phone in via USB and check for updates..

 

[bigfoot13442]

You are not speaking with the right people.

I understand that. Which is why I stated that the rep didn't have that authority. My point was, they shouldn't just say that.

If you insist on 'blaming' Rogers, then perhaps you could say that you don't have OS 1.6 because of a decision they made. I am guessing they decided to bypass OS 1.6 for economic reasons.

Not that I am blaming Rogers, but yes, I didn't get 1.6 because of a decision that someone made. I wasn't happy about that either.

I do know with a great deal of certainty that originally Rogers had no intention to pay to update these phones; they originally underestimated the value of Android OS updates. Prior to this, all phone OS's were static. New features always required new hardware. That was the model prior to the Android.

That is not true. I had a Sony Ericsson that was updated several times.

False logic. Of course blame can (and should) be placed, if only for the sake of accountability, and ensuring that this doesn't happen again. Every stake holder is to blame in varying degrees.

Not placing blame and blaming everyone I would consider the same thing. So ok.

So, Mr. BigFoot man/beast, which carrier are you going to change to? Which one did not make a mistake with HTC (for sake of argument) and is, and always will offer the latest Android OS within a month of Google's official release. Betcha can't name a better carrier.

I can't name a better carrier. My problems with Rogers go deeper than this issue, but that is off topic. This is the cherry on top.
As far as HTC, I think I would be moving to Samsung. They seem to be on top of updating the Galaxy S so far. I can't comment on the future of their updates simply because it is the future. They could drop support for it tomorrow for all I know. All I can go on is what I see now.

I don't think it is unreasonable, for whoever is responsible for putting out updates, to provide customers with every update until their specs are no longer supported. If for no other reason than customer satisfaction.

A happy customer will return and spread the word. Ask Apple.
(disclaimer: I am not an apple customer in any way shape or form, but they do have a very loyal customer base)

Hey, I don't want to fight... my sarcasm is tongue in cheek...

No hard feelings. lol