Who's Responsible

[Fritz E]

Moto X was working great. Update screwed up the hands-free texting, memos, alarms, searches. So who is responsible? Google, Motorola, Sprint? They all point the finger and say "We can't go back to an older software version. I don't believe them. SOMEONE can.

 

[Hadron]

Google provide the base OS, Motorola build it for their devices, Sprint then modify it. At the end of the day Sprint are responsible for distributing the update, and testing/signing-off, so I'd personally be inclined to say it was their responsibility to ensure it was working before distribution. But everyone's device has different settings/apps/data, so sometimes there may be problems that depend on a particular device's setup, in which case it couldn't be discovered during testing.

But it depends what you mean by "screwed-up". If the functionality isn't working as it should then that's a problem with the update. If it's working the way it should but not the way it used to (which I've seen other people describe as "screwed-up" with other phones/features) then that's of course not a problem with the update per se.

As for going back to an earlier version, it's not uncommon for the update tools to only go in one direction. You may be able to manually download and flash an earlier version, or it may involve some trickery to make the downgrade run. I'm not familiar with Motorolas so can't advise on that (these things are manufacturer-specific).

One other thought: sometime problems after an update are due to incompatibilties between data from the previous OS and the new OS, which can be fixed by a factory reset (after backing up important data, of course!). So if this is a bug rather than just the way the new software works that may be worth a try.

 

[Fritz E]

THANK you! So, now, the big question ... what can be done when they change the primary basic function of the phone, purchased for voice text, voice calls, voice memos, voice alarm set, voice searches?

 

[mikedt]

THANK you! So, now, the big question ... what can be done when they change the primary basic function of the phone, purchased for voice text, voice calls, voice memos, voice alarm set, voice searches?

A lawsuit?

FWIW I've never had to deal with carrier pushed and forced updates, e.g. Sprint.

 

[Hadron]

THANK you! So, now, the big question ... what can be done when they change the primary basic function of the phone, purchased for voice text, voice calls, voice memos, voice alarm set, voice searches?

In what way are they changed? I don't have this phone, don't use Sprint, so don't know what has changed.

As Mike says, another problem here is that Sprint can force an update on many phones without giving you the option of declining. This is something that is unique to some US carriers, it's not normal Android feature, but could be a problem if you do manage to roll the update back. I guess rooting and installing a custom ROM based on a version you like might solve that, but not everyone is comfortable with that and it may affect your warranty (I think at of each point Sprint were quite reasonable about such things, but don't know whether that's still the case - we need a Sprint user to comment really).

 

[zuben el genub]

Motorola did say before security update, you couldn't go back. I had nothing to go back to. I'd removed most of what I call bloat, and don't see any difference. I'm also not with Sprint. I do, however, have a friend on Sprint's service and she is wild every time they (Sprint) update or upgrade.

If one of any Marshmallow phones did anything about that bastardized external SD card business, it would be a blessing to a few people who are STILL confused even after a year.