Lawsuit: Samsung, T-Mobile delay Android updates on purpose

updated 04:40 pm EST, Fri January 14, 2011

Class action suit hits Samsung, T-Mo on Vibrant


A class action lawsuit was filed late Thursday by an XDA-Developers forum member over Samsung's allegedly intentional delays of Android 2.2 upgrades for the Vibrant. The complaint accuses both of violating the Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act for promising an update in the short term but delaying to the point where the Vibrant 4G would ship with the OS already onboard. The two companies hadn't lived up to promised fixes and was saving them for a new model, the new plaintiff said.

Aside from being locked out of recent features, the earlier attempted GPS fix hadn't fully solved the problems with poor positioning. Reliability and other bugs also persisted in the current Android 2.1 build. Samsung had promised 2.2 for all Galaxy S variants in the US in the "near future" on launch in June but hasn't rolled out any of them in the country, instead pushing updates in Canada, Europe and other countries.

Customer representatives have even been combative when asked about the problems, the forum member said.

Neither Samsung nor T-Mobile has commented on the lawsuit.

If certified as a class action case, the suit could bring the issue of Android fragmentation to a head. Samsung has historically been slow to push Android updates and has often, if informally, been accused of deliberately withholding updates in hopes of driving early hardware replacements. Phones like T-Mobile's Behold II were denied upgrades past 1.6 for supposedly insufficient specifications despite comparable phones getting 2.1.

At least some of the delay comes from Samsung's insistence on a custom interface and apps that prevent it from simply providing a straightforward upgrade. The Vibrant's equivalent with a pure version of Android, the Nexus S, has already had a minor update and should get any releases from Google as soon as they're available.

Google has repeatedly tried to deny any splintering effect in Android but has also made false statements about users having access to the same apps across versions. Without 2.2, the Vibrant can't use all of Google's Voice Actions as well as many of Google's own apps. Some third-party apps likewise require the new features.


By Electronista Staff

Other Articles

toggle

Previous Comments

    Comment buried. Show
  1. facebook_Justin

    Via Facebook

    Joined: Jan 2011

    -10

    comment title

    Seriously, when do people stop suing? I'm not a fan of Android but c'mon this is just dumb. You could have bought a freakin' high end T-Mobile smartphone or an iPhone for the price of this lawsuit that came with your desired firmware.


  1. TujuMaster

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Nov 2009

    +7

    I have this phone and I agree 100%...

    This lawsuit was necessary. I want the iPhone but AT&T and Verizon don't have coverage in my area so this was the best option. I was disappointed, however, when Samsung and T-Mobile delayed the upgrade. I hope this suit compels Samsung and T-Mobile to get their act together. I say sue them.


  1. global.philosopher

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Sep 2010

    +1

    iPhone on all carriers should solve all these prob

    Once they are on them then hopefully those who want to complain about their bloated phones with no available updates have no one to blame but themselves.


  1. facebook_Steven

    Via Facebook

    Joined: Jan 2011

    +2

    "Open"? Really?

    So Android is being touted as "open", as in, you can download the source code, make modifications, compile it and then... what? Put them on your phone?

    Apparently open ends just shy of "useful".


    Comment buried. Show
  1. testudo

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Aug 2001

    -11

    Re: "Open"? Really?

    So Android is being touted as "open", as in, you can download the source code, make modifications, compile it and then... what? Put them on your phone?

    Since when did 'open' mean "I should be able to take it and update the OS on my cell phone!"? And since when did a phone become a device one should be able to update to any variation of some OS they want it to?

    Oh, and if you can mock Android because it's 'open' but you can't update your phone because the hardware is locked down, can others mock Apple for locking out iPhone 2G owners from using iOS 4? Shouldn't those users have the right to upgrade? Oh, right, because it's Apple's hardware. That's the same reason jailbreaking is scoffed at here. "Apple should be able to say what can and can't run on their device. Just like the maker of a piece of medical diagnostic equipment can keep people from installing TRSDos on it". But that apparently doesn't apply to Android phones.

    And I just love how people here act like there's more than 100 people out there who would even want to download and modify Android or any other OS and install it on their device.

    Apparently open ends just shy of "useful".

    It is very useful. Look at how many different devices and manufacturers are looking at using it with their hardware. That's the point of 'open'. It allows it to be used by whomever in whatever way they want.

    Plus you have all these people able to review the code to make sure it is secure, as opposed to Apple Microsoft, whom you just have to trust their OS is 'secure'.

    And I don't see you complaining about how Darwin is open but not very useful.


  1. DiabloConQueso

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jun 2008

    -6

    One question...

    Were the purchasers of these phones guaranteed a number of software upgrades or otherwise told explicitly that they would be entitled to their phone's operating system being upgraded over time?

    If not, then this is simply a case of, "What? You mean there's something BETTER out now? Waah!"

    I understand Samsung's got egg on their face for lying, and that the phone may be technically capable of running an upgraded OS, but seriously -- unless these folks were promised upgrades, I don't see the justification behind a lawsuit. The phone works just as good today as it did on day 1. Were these people promised that it would work even better over time?


  1. patrix

    Junior Member

    Joined: Sep 2006

    +2

    fragmentation or custom interfaces has nothign to

    Why did the article have to bring that up. If for example a custom interface was a stumbling block in updating the OS, there would be NO Galaxy S on Android 2.2 anywhere in the world.

    Fact: Canada has it
    Fact: Europe has it
    Fact: Japan'S Galaxy S came with Android 2.2 preinstalled, no need to update!
    Fact: HTC Sense is a pretty complex and involved custom interface yet they were the first to update many phones and have the highest number of updated phones yet

    Conclusion: custom interfaces don't slow down Android updates, S***** companies/policies/gambits do.


Login Here

Not a member of the MacNN forums? Register now for free.

 
close
Photo
toggle

Network Headlines

toggle

Most Popular

10 Most Read

Recent Reviews

iHome iW2 AirPlay speaker

iHome generally isn't known as a luxury brand when it comes to audio, but it is prolific -- the company's docks and speakers are every ...

Logitech Ultrathin Keyboard Cover

One of the iPad's main weaknesses has always been productivity. It's not a question of apps; while it has taken a little time for a na ...

Logitech UE Air Speaker

If maybe a little more slowly than Apple would like, AirPlay is becoming a staple of the wireless speaker market for iOS devices. The ...

toggle

Most Commented

10 Most Discussed

 
toggle

Popular News