# Reader Discussion: OEMs, Carriers, and Updates



## SolsticeZero (Nov 2, 2011)

This is the reader discussion for the news article Reader Discussion: OEMs, Carriers, and Updates



> It's no secret that carriers and OEMs seem to take an eternity to release software updates for their phone. After all, it can be pretty upsetting when you pick up the latest phone only to have last generation software for months. But why does it happen? What's holding them back? We want to know what you think on the issue.
> 
> We'll just use the big three as an example: Motorola, HTC, and Samsung. Each of these manufacturers releases about a dozen (if not more) Android devices per year. Most of these devices will probably never see a software update. Sure, that might be expected for some lower end devices, but why should the flagships suffer the same fate? Ice Cream Sandwich has been out for quite some time now, and we've yet to see but a handful of devices get the update. Custom UIs are more than likely the biggest culprit. Motoblur, TouchWiz, and Sense have become standard for the big three.
> 
> ...


----------



## SolsticeZero (Nov 2, 2011)

Personally, I love the idea of an AOSP option on all phones, but it could alienate the carriers and OEMs from Android a bit if Google were to require it.


----------



## -TSON- (Jul 24, 2011)

It's equally Google's fault as it is OEMs and carriers. OEMs should not be releasing devices that they don't plan on supporting, first of all, & the ones that they do plan on supporting, they have to reskin and retweak over and over and over with every update. You'd think a company like Google would by now realize "Oh, skins are slowing them down..." and either allow OEMs to make skins & widgets & whatever that are independent from the rest of the system (think MIUI themes & most apps) and simply just have to worry about getting drivers and stuff going. They shouldn't have to recode Sense for GB coming from Froyo or ICS coming from GB. It's a waste of time.

& All that I approve of the carriers are really doing is stress-testing the stuff (which QA teams at OEMs do, but whatever), to make sure it doesn't release as a bug-riddled mess. However their "strategic planning" is often advising the OEMs to not update some less popular devices/legacy devices, which is just plain stupid. This is a huge spiraling mess that is both fueled by Google, OEMs, and carriers, but also spoon-fed by all three and all they can really do is point at each other when approached. But it's everyone's fault.


----------



## Jotokun (Sep 24, 2011)

As much as I hate skins, I'm not sure that's a good idea to get rid of them. Many people like Sense and are willing to buy phones with it. Even in the world of unofficial roms, we have things like MIUI. If every phone were AOSP, updates might indeed happen a little faster, but still be at the whim of the carriers. At that point you have the issue that Android becomes just another OS to choose from. Why would a manufacture choose Android if its as customizable to them as, say, WP7 which doesnt allow any at all?

Having two official firmwares, a skinned one and an AOSP one sounds good on paper, but then you have the issue of carriers approving the update. Two updates mean taking twice as long at a minimum. If AOSP is to deliver faster updates, it needs to be at the complete expense of a skinned firmware, they cant co-exist. Alternatively, the AOSP firmware could be offered direct from the manufacture and be made to install manually which would (and should) deter the masses, but chances are the carriers would balk at that and cause issues for the manufactures when signing deals on carrying future handsets.

At the end of the day, the issue is going to remain as long as we have subsidized phones and network incompatibilities (GSM vs CDMA, same tech on different frequencies/bands, etc.). I cant speak for the rest of the world, but in the US we know they're quite unreasonable in regards to device freedoms so the only way is to completely go around them on the phones themselves by not buying subsidized models. That or hope for an unlocked bootloader and AOSP roms.


----------



## bowtoy (Mar 9, 2012)

SolsticeZero said:


> This is the reader discussion for the news article Reader Discussion: OEMs, Carriers, and Updates


 Rockin ICS on My (Top of the Line) Fascinate which also waited 6 months after scheduled for froyo. Paying cash makes no difference ( I did ) you still get screwed by the three.I think Manufacturers should be required to honor warranties on rooted devices that they decide to never update after promising the customers updates to get them to buy. If not, they should at least be REQUIRED to update for a reasonable amount of time ( 18 months seems reasonable for high end maybe 12 on lower end devices ).


----------



## WA_Bob (Aug 2, 2011)

It's in the best business interest of the OEM folks to put their newest and best software on their newest devices, and that includes the newest Android OS. So, I'm annoyed with having to wait but resigned to it when I have a slightly older device. Until the latest and greatest phones come out with the "Newest" software, all you can do is either A) wait or







Root and beat them to it.


----------

