Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 24th Dec 2011 13:00 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless "Earlier today, Samsung revealed that it won't update the Galaxy S, its most successful smartphone to date, to the latest version of Android. You might shrug and dismiss that as just more evidence of Android's inherent fragmentation or the need for buyers to beware, but I take grave issue with it. This is a decision based not on technical constraints, as Samsung would have you believe, but on hubris." This. A gazillion million thousand times this. Also: "It's simple: make a large high-end device, a smaller value device, and a QWERTY device. Maybe one or two other specialty form factors, tops. That's it. Update them once a year, and keep the names the same." It would make updating a hell of a lot easier. We don't need the Samsung Galaxy SII Epic 4G Touch Sensation.
Thread beginning with comment 501293
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Speak by spending $$
by kaiwai on Mon 26th Dec 2011 01:21 UTC in reply to "RE: Speak by spending $$"
kaiwai
Member since:
2005-07-06

You may keep your new car 5-10 years. The manufacturer won't offer any upgrades at all during that period. If you want an improvement in performance, handling, braking etc you have the choice of either paying for modifications via a 3rd party or buying a new car.

If you don't expect a $100k car to get upgraded why would you expect a $100 phone to be upgraded?


Because smart phones run sophisticated software that have bugs and security holes - as a consumer I expect that they provide software updates to address those short comings in a timely and responsible manner. Sorry, you're comparing a physical product to something (software) that can be replicated over and over again via the distribution channels (internet) for a few cents. The situation isn't even comparable.

Edited 2011-12-26 01:22 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Speak by spending $$
by Neolander on Tue 27th Dec 2011 23:11 in reply to "RE[2]: Speak by spending $$"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

And for the mandatory car analogy : if a Toyota car has a software bug that makes the brake pedal ineffective, as happened earlier, Toyota better push an update quickly in order to fix that security issue.

Edited 2011-12-27 23:14 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Speak by spending $$
by zima on Sat 31st Dec 2011 18:54 in reply to "RE[3]: Speak by spending $$"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

And for the mandatory car analogy : if a Toyota car has a software bug that makes the brake pedal ineffective, as happened earlier, Toyota better push an update quickly in order to fix that security issue.

(emphasis mine)

You know, this hardly ever happened, with any manufacturer (not only Toyota was "involved" in the past)... the "breakaway acceleration hysteria" (and similar) emerges once in a while, usually when the media circus picks up the claims of some incompetent driver who wants to escape the blame.

Curious how it's virtually always somebody, well, old - and, when the records are available (CCTV recording showing the brake lights never lighting up throughout the accident, also in cars where that's a simple switch on the brake pedal, with no software/computers in-between; or when "black box" functions became available) it was not even once what the driver claimed...

...most of the times, the ~senile driver simply panicked (confused acceleration for brake pedal, in panic pushed the "brakes" even harder, desiring to stop, which of course only had wildly opposite result)

Also curiously, it seems to happen virtually only in few places with mass adoption of automatic transmissions in passenger cars (maybe they do "disconnect" people a bit too much from having actual control and "feel" of their vehicle)

And brake systems didn't really yet cease being mostly hydraulically connected, I believe.

Reply Parent Score: 2