After initially deciding it wouldn't update Galaxy S phones to Ice Cream Sandwich last week, Samsung has now (supposedly) given some semi-official lip-service to vocal Galaxy S and OG-Tab owners who have been clamoring for an official update to Ice Cream Sandwich. The English-speaking side of Samsung's media arm hasn't commented on the alleged statement as of yet.

According to a translation of the Korean source articles, Samsung has officially committed to "reviewing" the "possibility" of an Ice Cream Sandwich update for its Galaxy S phones, as well as the original Galaxy Tab. If that's not a concrete statement almost completely assuring that Samsung will, at some point, say something about this topic again, I don't know what is.

You can probably guess what my stance on this whole debacle is: who really cares? "Well, Samsung Galaxy S and Tab owners, of course!" Great. I'm sure there are plenty of people super excited that their 1.5 year-old phone, which they're probably going to get rid of in six months, will maybe get an update to the newest version of Android by the time they do get rid of it. While this isn't true across the whole world (2-year contracts being most popular in the US), there's little debating the fact that by the time a device is 2 years old in the fast-moving world of smartphones, that it will already look woefully outdated.

But let's say they do go through with it. It will take Samsung at least a quarter before an update is finalized for the regular European version of the phone. Tack on an extra quarter for US version tweaking and carrier approval, plus the weeks it usually takes for a rollout to happen. At that point (Summer 2012), I can almost guarantee anyone still using a Galaxy S will simply not care if it gets a new software update, because the phone will look like a destroyed hunk of plastic and will either be a hand-me-down or a $50 purchase from Craigslist. Not to mention, an update would almost certainly require the end-user to wipe their device clean, something those who aren't constantly flashing ROMs get ill at the very idea of.

Meanwhile, people who are buying Samsung's Galaxy W (a popular mid-range budget phone) right now all across Europe, Asia, and the Middle East, will never get Android 4.0. Six months from now, which phone will have more users? I think the answer is obvious. And yet, the phone which will be at its designed end of life at that point is the one under consideration for an update, while the budget phone will almost certainly never get one, even though it's far newer. Really, guys? Here's a list of relatively popular high-end Samsung phones released since the Galaxy S that won't be getting Ice Cream Sandwich:

  • Captivate Glide
  • Stratosphere
  • Galaxy S 4G (not a true Galaxy S phone)
  • DROID Charge
  • Infuse 4G

If you include budget Android phones, the list grows exponentially. I'm sorry, what exactly makes them less worthy of getting an update to Android 4.0? These phones are newer, generally have better hardware, and will be in service much longer than any original Galaxy S phone out there. These handsets are clearly far more objectively deserving of updates than your scuffed-up Captivate that would barely fetch $75 on eBay.

The counterargument is the sheer number of Galaxy S devices sold means that far more people are being left un-updated than the previously listed devices. I agree that there are probably a significantly larger number of Galaxy S users out there than even all of those devices combined. But the last time I checked, simply because there are more of a particular class of person, in this case Galaxy S owners, doesn't mean they are somehow more deserving of a certain benefit.

In fact, I bet DROID Charge owners, who bought what they thought was a cutting-edge phone back in May of this year, are probably a lot more pissed off than Galaxy S owners - and a lot more justifiably so.

Listen, I'm not saying you shouldn't expect updates when you buy a high-end phone. But there are reasonable limitations to this expectation. A vocal group of Galaxy S owners have taken it to a point where it's no longer reasonable. Getting bogged down with old hardware forces Samsung to divert valuable resources from development on new hardware. You can't have your cake and eat it - there's a cost-benefit analysis going on at every level of a corporation, and where you give, from somewhere else you have to take. As a company making so many different devices, Samsung has more decisions than any other Android manufacturer in this regard.

It really comes down to this: do you want Samsung to be more like Apple (and now maybe HTC), make far fewer devices and offer consumers far fewer choices, with longer waits between those devices (such that they can justify software maintenance costs), or would you like them to push the envelope and get new technology to market faster? People loved the Galaxy S because it was the best Android phone on the market when it was released. It's not anymore. The bleeding edge cuts both ways, and sacrifices have to be made to stay on it.

David Ruddock
David's phone is whatever is currently sitting on his desk. He is an avid writer, and enjoys playing devil's advocate in editorials, and reviewing the latest phones and gadgets. He also doesn't usually write such boring sentences.

  • Zaeem

    David, your words are filled with poison. You don't own a Galaxy S and you don't live outside the U.S. How can you even begin to think that you are worthy of taking a stance on this topic?

    First of all, the Galaxy S most probably HAS sold more units than all those other units combined and will CONTINUE to do so in the near future.

    Tell me, honestly, how many other AMAZING phones can you buy in this price? Super AMOLED, 1GHz processor, 512 mb RAM, 8/16 GB memory, etc. Sure, there are lots of phones with the same/similar specs but we all prefer the Galaxy S. The sheer number of sales show that.

    There are even MORE of us who can't afford new phones. We're not all rich, you know. The Galaxy S is our saviour! It makes us proud to own a Samsung device. How do you think we feel when the Iphone 4 (with almost the same specs) touts the latest version of iOS and we're stuck with Gingerbread? I bought this phone to beat the Iphone 4 and it DID!

    We need this new weapon called ICS in our arsenal in order to keep that crapPhone buried deep where it won't surface! In order for us to do that, Samsung needs to back us up.

    • David Ruddock

      I don't really see an argument here other than the fact that, because you can't afford a new phone, a company should spend money to keep the one you bought up to date into near perpetuity. I don't recall that being something they even remotely promised.

      • Zaeem

        Look, David- not everyone is born rich and companies should NOT have the sole purpose of just taking money from consumers.

        We're talking here at AndroidPolice- ANDROID. Why are you so persistent about Samsung turning into Apple? Apple overprices crap products but markets them well. Samsung has great devices and it fully supports Android. Do you want us to keep spending and spending and spending like Apple gets its consumers to? Right now, I'm not in a position to chip-in for a new phone but knowing that Samsung is taking care of its consumers, I'm damn-well willing to buy the Galaxy S3 or even the Galaxy Nexus.

        If the Galaxy S, the device that was the first to put all others to shame, doesn't get some loving, then what do you think it bodes for the rest of the Android phones? Yeah, they all signed an 18-month contract. Blah, blah, blah! Android will DIE OUT if this is the attitude of companies! Do we want open-source to die out? Hell NO!

        Samsung NEEDS to do this- not only for themselves but for the Android community at large! It gives us hope!

        • Jim

          The truth is, like it or not, companies DO in fact have the sole purpose of making money by selling customers product. They either do that, or they dry up. There are a few things they need to invest in to keep the sales engine going, such as advertising, R&D, and some support to keep the consumers coming back. As a consumer I’m liking the idea of some extended support, but it can’t go on forever. There has to be a cut-off, as companies stay in business only by selling new product, not by supporting old product in perpetuity.

          I carry a Nexus One, which will not be getting ICS, so in part I feel your pain. But on the other hand, regarding not getting ICS, so what? Everything my phone did well before ICS was released it still does well after the ICS release. Yeah, ICS does offer a few new features, but none of those were all that important when you and I chose our phones. So what makes those features so important to have now? Why is an ICS upgrade, as opposed to a bug fix or maintenance update, in such demand? I gather for many people, the perception is that since their phone should be able to support it, that an upgrade should be made available. Understandable. But considering the time and expense or OEM and carrier customizations and testing, some unpopular decisions need to be made at some point for each product. First and foremost, the phone needs to work as advertised. So apart from any promised upgrades to the next Android version, as long as your handset does what people bought it to do, how are consumers hurt by not getting ICS?

      • https://plus.google.com/112562624243055818615 Sean

        I got up to the bit about people only having 6 months on their contract (because that's the most popular in USA).

        I'd understand if this was a published paper, and only distributed in USA, but it isn't.

        Remember that stat the Samsung came up with, about the number of SGS IIs they sold BEFORE it was released in North America? That should probably be something to consider next time.

        And I know here in Britain, they are still pushing the original Galaxy S as a cheap contract phone £15 p/m for 18 Months on 3UK last time I checked?

    • Tee

      Compared to iPhone 3GS which DID get the iOS5.0 update, the SGS must officially be updated to ICS. Otherwise it's byebye to Samsung and hello to Nokia in a couple of years.

      I am to update my phone to ICS, since the phone is rooted. But if this is the general future for all Samsung phones, bad for them...

  • http://mobiputing.com Brad Linder

    You're assuming all Samsung Galaxy S owners bought their phones on the first day they went on sale. Both the phone and tablet were still available until recently, so there are plenty of people that are probably still under contract for the next 12 to 18 months.

    Also -- while there are plenty of people who buy a new phone as soon as their contract is up, there are also an awful lot of people who like to hold onto their device until it's no longer useful.

    I bought a Nexus One in February 2010 and went with the contract-free option because I figured I'd want to be able to upgrade without paying a huge penalty. But here were are almost two years later and I just haven't seen anything in new phones that really makes me feel the need to sign a contract or pay $500 or more for an unlocked phone.

    • David Ruddock

      I'm looking at it from the manufacturer's perspective - the fact that Samsung still sold them for some time is unfortunate for those locked in, but what's more unfortunate is that those people were so uninformed in their purchasing decisions as to buy it so late in the game.

      The thing that no Galaxy S owner seems to want to admit to is the fact that not only did Samsung never promise to keep the device updated for a certain amount of time, but that their expectation of this is completely arbitrary. Not only do you pay for living on the bleeding edge, but you pay for cheaping out, too - I sure as hell wouldn't expect a phone I got for $50 or less on contract (even $100 or less) to get much in the way of software support. It's the sense of entitlement that bugs me more than anything.

      • VibrantOwner

        From a manufacturer's point of view you lose customer loyalty or recommendations when your products have significant issues and product updates are quickly abandoned.

        As a Samsung Vibrant owner (T-Mobile Galaxy S variant) who's never really gotten a GPS lock, semi-frequent device stutter, and only Froyo I am extremely hesitant to say good things about Samsung. In fact, I caution people to do significant research when considering Samsung. The Galaxy S and its variants are flagship phones. If Samsung doesn't care enough about a flagship phone then it's a safe bet they couldn't care one bit about their cheaper phones.

        Samsung is going to become the poor quality cheapo brand of phones if it keeps this up.

      • Souvik Kar

        It is not a question of being uninformed. Some places do have different dynamics than the US. Over here in Canada the contracts run for 3 years and the carriers do not often bring in the phone when it is introduced. Rogers is one of the biggest carriers and they still don't have the Galaxy Nexus. Only recently they started selling the Galaxy S2. The Nexus S was made available only in May of this year almost six months after the US.
        The manufacturer does get hit with customer dissatisfaction. Whenever I recommend an android phone to anyone I tell them to buy a Nexus device. I know that my recommendations have minuscule impact to the overall success or failure of any product, but I am pretty sure I am not the only one.
        What baffles me is why are you opposing this? If you think it is a question of using limited resources wisely, I am pretty sure Samsung is already thinking about that. I would rather push the manufacturer to stop spending time on their bloatware/UI which is what makes it costlier for them to support all these older models. I would rather push the carriers to not add their own bloatware. If the carrier and the manufacture insist on locking the hardware then I don't see why I am not entitled to get some updated software for something that I am paying hundreds of dollars.

        • David Ruddock

          So, you're telling a company to stop differentiating its product. Overlays are the only reason Android took off - because manufacturers could essentially take a "naked" OS and brand it. You can only have so many "pure Google experience" devices before it starts becoming a race to the thinnest profit margin, like the PC business, and guess what - that results in boring hardware, low build quality, and mediocre end-products. If you want all Android phones to perform alike, good on you, but I'd rather have competition that promotes adding value, not on creating a uniform experience across all brands. That's just a terrible idea.

          As for contracts and device availability, guess what - that's not the manufacturer's fault, it's your carrier's. Why should Samsung have to pay in the form of unpromised software support for the fact that your carrier is unwilling to reduce the amount of risk it's hedging (and lowering its hardware costs) against customer churn? That seems totally arbitrary, and frankly, entitlement-minded to me. Yeah, it sucks that Canada and other countries may get stuff later than everyone else and still end up paying the same price, but I don't see how that digs any moral hooks into Samsung - your gripe is with your carriers, not phonemakers.

        • aiden9


          I'd love it if the PC business was "pure experience", where do you buy them? So far every computer for years has been loaded up with bloatware and is a consistent con in reviews.

          There are only boring hardware, low build quality, and mediocre end products for PC's? Maybe if you only do your pc shopping at Walmart, open your eyes a little and you can find plenty of i7s with dedicated graphics and hd displays.

          And yes it is the manufacturers fault, as they build the phones for sale on that carrier. They aren't t-shirts where you just make and can be sold anywhere, phones are specifically made for each carrier. If you don't want to support a phone then either don't make the phone or deal with the backlash for the lack of support.

    • Barry Lance Leo

      Exactly my Galaxy S is only 6 months old and there are so many people like that. I'm already on ICS thanks to teamhacksung but everyone don't flash they need the official update!!

      • http://twitter.com/#!/brandonjnunn bjn714

        I am sure that when you bought it 6 months ago, it was nowhere near the original selling price. They can sell it cheaper because they know the device has to move to end of life and they don't have to invest as much in future support.

  • Interested

    It will get a much better price on CraigsList with ICS installed!

    If I needed a cheap phone, I'd still bloody well want it to be up to date.

    Weak argument; Samsung should be focusing on the user-experience of ALL their customers (within reason).

    F**k the carriers, if you buy a Samsung, you should feel good about your choice. That includes the device's autumn years!

    I just sold my X10. It was a sad piece of crap even when new but, thanks to updated Android versions, it remained useful.

    I will be careful that my next device is easier to keep up to date (not a Sony)

  • Nicolas

    I'll just add that the Galaxy S is still on sale here in Belgium. Proximus offers it in its line-up for 350 euros. I guess to those people, an ICS update would be welcome.

    • David Ruddock

      I'm sure it would, but they're also getting it for half the price of a Galaxy Nexus, what do they really expect?

      • Nathan

        David, with all due respect, what the hell does price have anything to do with it? If they are still selling them anywhere, then the person that buys it would be expecting Samsung to support the device. A customers knowledge level on Android at the time of purchase has nothing to do with a company supporting a product that is still being sold.

        • David Ruddock

          Er, it has absolutely everything to do with price. You don't walk into Bob's Used Phones and grab an old Nexus One that never sold and go, "Hey, HTC is going to support this because I'm buying it new right now, even though it's actually pretty ancient, right?"

          Consumer knowledge is *very* important. You don't buy a used car and expect the warranty to suddenly restart fresh, do you?

          It's sad that many people essentially feel like they're getting screwed by Samsung because they thought they bought a high-end product, but in actuality bought something that was on the chopping block. But you know what, that's on them for not doing research before making a big investment - people are so easily goaded into "Oh, the phone's only $50" sorts of deals with 2-year contracts, when in actuality, they're committing to over $2000 of business with the carrier over that time. I fail to see how it's Samsung's fault that you shackled yourself into a, excuse my language, shit deal.

  • tyler

    If I'm locked into a 2 year contract (3 for a lot of Canadians), I fully expect the carrier and manufacturer to support the phone for the duration of the contract.

    As for getting rid of the phone when I can renew my contract... it's still a perfectly good phone, and I may not want to spend another $300 on a new phone... especially since if you have noticed, the newer high end phones are slowly creeping up $225, $250, and now $299. And then to the cycle repeats.

    • http://twitter.com/trongable Trong

      And there you go proving their point. Even when you hit the end of the contract, you don't want to upgrade phones since they've provided you with all of the updates.

    • David Ruddock

      You want them to provide for free what you would otherwise pay for, is your point here. I can't say Samsung is probably going to change their business model to make that happen for you - they sort of live and die on the fact that technology evolves and rapidly and that newer *is* better.

      Sorry, there's a price to the bleeding of edge of technology, and I know I keep repeating that phrase, but it's utterly true in the realm of smartphones.

    • http://twitter.com/#!/brandonjnunn bjn714

      I would expect the carriers and manufacturers to support the devices with bug fixes and security patches, etc. for the contract term, but not NEW releases. You paid for a device with a specific feature-set. The manufacturer should not have to provide you with more features for free.

      In the case of the SGS, Samsung has already upgraded the device through TWO major platform updates. Why should they have to do a third when they could be focusing on future development?

    • Jim

      Your two or three year contract is an agreement between you and your carrier - the handset manufacturer is not a party to the agreement. It therefore seems unreasonable to bind the manufacturer to the terms (timeline) of an agreement which they did not enter into.

  • George Sabourin

    So, Galaxy S - March 2012 - End of the line.
    iPhone 3G[S] - 2009 - Still receiving updates and even still sold by Apple themselves and likely to stay supported until mid 2012 with iOS 6.

    Good work Sammy. This is why Android is fragmented.

    • Doug

      This is what happened to Nokia. They would never update the phones software. I had to always go buy a new phone.

    • http://www.twitter.com/ScottColbert Scott

      Try running the latest version of iOS on a 3GS; it's crippled-better no update than one that's half assed and lead to even more complaints.

      • Ravi Shah

        Ive heard the exact opposite Scott. Everyone I have talked to that has a 3gs loves ios5 on it.

        • Shark

          From what I heard, it sucked at first but an update seemed to smooth it out?

        • http://www.twitter.com/ScottColbert Scott

          Still can't run Siri on it-their big selling point.

    • http://www.AndroidPolice.com Artem Russakovskii

      Yeah, and Apple has what, 3-4 devices to upkeep, most of them the same as far as software goes? With absolutely 0 carrier customizations.

      Samsung has what, 20-30 devices with countless variations. It's easy to judge, but think about how hard it is to actually handle all these.

  • Blabla

    Electronics could and should have been made to last. Galaxy S is still a great phone, and there's no reason to ditch it yet.
    I have to argue about that consume just for the sake of consuming attitude. And by the way, it is not sustainable on the long run.
    However, I agree with you about newer Samsung phones not getting update.

    • David Ruddock

      That's simply not the way the market works anymore. I'm sorry you don't agree with the current philosophy of electronics manufacturers, but as long as it's profitable, out with the old, in with the new. Not much you can do to change that.

      • https://plus.google.com/118003942431890187900 NINOSLAV BUĐAK

        Well, actually as I see it, this thing is between *us* and Samsung. And not *us* and YOU. Or us and you holding the candle for Sammy. And it's pretty much as simple as this (as many people stated in the petition and comments all over the Net): IF we don't get support from Samsung (as we usually DO NOT, for years now), we'll switch to different manufacturer, be it Motorolla/HTC/other_AndroidOS_one or over the fence to the e.g. Apple or Nokia/WinPhone. The device is NOT built to last only 2 years or even *less* than 2 years as you seem to presume and it's even self-evident from the Samsung's 2-year guarantee, if not from the parts and craftmanship of the device (to you :)). Now, as I see it, Samsung has to decide if they wanna SUPPORT that install-base of *millions* of users and KEEP it under it's roof - or not, hoping they'll stay under it's roof with SGS II, Nexus etc. Mind you, Samsung has it's own "Samsung Apps" store etc. so it DOES have other benefits from those SGS+ICS users besides just loyalty so I don't see that install-base to be just a "cost" to Samsung if they port ICS to it. Not to mention that it's the EXACT same userbase that brought Samsung to #1 position, inline with Apple, and made it a huge success as a smartphone manufacturer in a really short time. Now Sammy has to decide does it still NEED that huge loyal userbase, or can it do without oh let's say half of those millions of SGS users and their wallets (and suggestions to "uninformed" new/future smartphone buyers).

  • DDp

    This is why I say manufacturers need to move closer to the Apple model. Fewer devices so it's not a million and one different versions of an update they have to code and test each and every time.

    Just go Nexus, or don't go Android at all. Save yourself the trouble. These stupid OEMs need to learn a fukkin lesson or two w/ this fragmenting BS.

    • David Ruddock

      Agreed. Apple's model simply allows way more resources to be invested into legacy development. Samsung just can't afford to do that unless they hugely cut back their smartphone portfolio to just 1 major release a year, with maybe 1 cheaper budget phone.

      • Shark

        Very true. I think there's room for a couple mid range phones though along with a couple of budget phones.

    • http://www.AndroidPolice.com Artem Russakovskii

      Absolutely agreed. They can't even differentiate one phone from another many times, so what's the point?

  • Larry Vandemeer

    Ask the iPhone owners or iPhone3G owners or even iPhone3GS owners if they care that they did not get iOS5 or even iOS4. Those 3 phones sold more than any other single smartphone in the history of man kind. Yet their owners did not have a fit when Apple release iOS5 and said it will not run on iPhone/iPhone3G/iPhone3GS. I'm including the 3GS that iOS5 on it sucks, plain and simple. And what about the 4-6 month old iPhone4 users who can't use iOS5's biggest feature Siri? The Galaxy S will still a superb phone irrelevant if it run 2.2, 2.3 or 4.0. If Apple can't upgrade FULLY their few model phones (4 out of 5 models) that they control everything on them and make 3x the money on each one than Samsung, why should Samsung who make 50 models?

  • Robert Whittaker

    So the analogy is that you bought a pc running xp you'd expect a free upgrade to windows 7 18 months down the line, and that the hardware would be able to support it? Or dell (or whoever) would have to do some magic to make it work for you? It's just not the real world.

    I think the issue is that in the US you seem to pay for the phone even on an 18 Month + contract. It doesn't happen in the uk. So like me I'm a bit frustrated with 6 months of my contract left. But I have 2 options. Wait for it to elapse and then sign up to another 18 month contract and get a new free phone. Or I pay for an upgrade (and renew the contract). Note this is not a full phone cost.

    • Ravi Shah

      Your analogy would make sense if samsung were making money off the Android OS itself. The reason that you have to pay for a windows upgrade is because the company behind it (Microsoft) exclusively develops it as a closed source OS for manufacturers to use. Android OS is open source and therefore can be and should be upgraded. Besides, ICS is built to run on any device running Gingerbread so heck yes the Galaxy S can run it just fine. If my nexus s can, so can the galaxy s.

    • Ravi Shah

      Your analogy would make sense if Samsung were making money off the Android OS itself. The reason that you have to pay for a windows upgrade is because the company behind it (Microsoft) exclusively develops it as a closed source OS for manufacturers to use. Android is open source and therefore can be and should be upgraded. Besides, ICS is built to run on any device running Gingerbread so heck yes the Galaxy S can run it just fine. If my nexus s can, so can the galaxy s.

      • http://twitter.com/#!/brandonjnunn bjn714

        Except for one big point -- the Galaxy S runs TouchWiz and the Nexus S does not. And Samsung is not going to strip away TW just to get it to run smoothly. That would be removing features for the majority of its user-base. The developer and enthusiast community is a very small percentage of the market.

        • Ravi Shah

          Well I'm sure samsung has some brilliant engineers who can manage to slim down the touchwiz launcher. Personally I think it looks hideous compared to the new ics so maybe they could remake touchwiz to look closer to stock while including their usual crapware. This could also be used on newer samsung devices! If they don't want to go through all that effort... just release the kernel source and other necessary source for the dev community to easily make ics roms. I know that there are already ics roms for galaxy s devices but devices such as the vibrant won't get much support from devs due to 911 issues. Worst case they could develop a stock ics rom as an optional upgrade for those who really would like it. Make it available on Samsung's website for people to manually update.

  • http://emuneee.com Evan

    In reference to your last paragraph: its not Samsung is creating an entire portfolio of diverse devices with different form factors...its the fact that they flood the market with Galaxy S/S1.5/S2 derivatives that makes it a support nightmare.

    They don't need (for example) the Galaxy S, Vibrant, the Continuum, Galaxy S 4G, Droid Charge, Infuse 4G, etc....those are all the same as the flagship they are based on with a few negligible (arguably useless, spec modifications).

    I wish Android manufacturers would become more like Apple and not release 10 derivations of the same device/formfactor every 6 months . They are the ones digging this hole where hey can't afford to support the devices they push out. They need to focus on a couple devices every year and make those really good while providing excellent customer support. Then the complaints will subside.

  • B.G

    Samsung sold 30 million of them. Maybe you don't care, but 30 million people do. You sound like a spoiled brat. And it's definitely not eco and not responsible to change a perfectly nice and good working device every year. Ah, and outside of the US you can buy any phone unlocked at normal prices and use it on any carrier.

    • https://www.facebook.com/stock.plus $omator

      it was 20 milions in 18 months of galaxy s series (probably all variations included)

    • David Ruddock

      A spoiled brat? I'm sorry, which group of people are the ones throwing a fit because their smartphone isn't receiving the latest version of software like it's some kind of crime against humanity? Like, literally, a tantrum.

      As far as "eco" goes, I'm sure smartphones generate their share of waste. Though I have zero idea how that's at all relevant to this discussion. You don't like the way Samsung does things, don't buy their phones.

      • Robert

        So we should all spend 500 euros on new phones?

        • Shark

          No need to. Galaxy S owners still have a device that does what it was advertised to do so when they bought it. By no means is it obsolete.

    • Shark

      That 30 million you say includes Galaxy S II devices.


  • http://twitter.com/#!/brandonjnunn bjn714

    I agree with this for the most part. I do find it reasonable to not provide a device line with a third major upgrade. I don't buy a phone expecting to receive the newest version and features for eternity. I just find fault with the idea that owners are crying foul for a company not upgrading a device that was introduced prior to the last 4 major releases of the OS. If Samsung had said at launch "we will update this device to every new version until 2014" or something like that, then sure. That is not what happened. They promised to upgrade to froyo (which on a side note, took an eternity to complete).

    I think much of it comes down to the entitlement or "I deserve it" mentality that has overtaken our society as of late.

    • Shark

      Exactly. Most devices get one major update, two if they're lucky.

      This sums up the entitlement mentality: http://i.imgur.com/5krlg.jpg


      • http://twitter.com/#!/brandonjnunn bjn714

        I like the graphic. Makes me want to smack some parents, as in most cases those kids are like that because of the parents. And yeah that illustrates it perfectly.

  • http://www.1337mods.com Kenny

    You might think of this from a manufacturer's point of view.... and that's not right. You have to look at it from the consumer's point of view.

    In an economy like the one we live in today, a lot of people cannot justify spending $300 or more on a new phone; instead they will just keep their old phone. Samsung is trying to give their customers what they (the customers) want. If Samsung decides they don't want to follow through with the update, fine. That's their decision and we shouldn't fault them for that since they never promised updates. I don't understand why you are ranting about the fact that Samsung is considering it though.

    I still have my Captivate for another 1 year, 3 months on contract. I MIGHT upgrade to a different phone when my contract is up... Most likely I'll continue to use it for another year and upgrade later. Many other people will do the same.

    Meanwhile, I'm using an ICS ROM on my Captivate and it works perfectly. There is no reason for Samsung not to do this. The hardware is more than capable.

    Stop being a bigot.

    • David Ruddock

      I fail to see how the inability to afford a newer phone puts a moral responsibility on the manufacturer to support the old one.

      Apple has made it their goal to do this, and if you want those years of support, you fork out $200 (at least), and they'll give it to you. That's their business philosophy.

      Obviously, it's not Samsung's. Samsung didn't promise anything, and I don't understand how a promise they didn't make is now being taken as a huge slight against consumers. The expectation of continued software support is totally arbitrary, and stems entirely from a sense of entitlement among Android users who HAVE to constantly be on the bleeding edge. You want the bleeding edge, pull out your wallet, or plug in your microUSB cable and open up XDA.

      • http://www.torikomix.pl Tori

        David, I don't get it - I though this site should stand behind the people, not defend the manufactures, that don't do software upgrades just for the reason to make us buy a phone sooner.

        • https://plus.google.com/118003942431890187900 NINOSLAV BUĐAK

          And you're not the only one. It seems we thought wrong. :( And I was just starting to like AndroidPolice as I discovered it fairly recently. :) Or is it just that some journalists "try" to shift public opinion by writing *their* view REALLY LOUD with a lots of noise. View from their own shoes, ofc. and with their own interests in minds. 3;)

        • David Ruddock

          Well, that is the definition of an "editorial" Ninoslav. Guilty as charged.

        • Shark

          They never promised you an update, you're not entitled to it.

          In no way are they 'making' you buy a phone any sooner. Your device still does what it was advertised to do when you purchased it, if not more due to the updates it's received thus far.

  • http://www.torikomix.pl Tori

    "I Try To Care", well sorry, but a whole lot of people in Europe do care.
    We should fight for this to be normal in the Android land - we should be getting updates just like the iDevices!
    I don't really get the point of this editorial.

    • http://www.torikomix.pl Tori

      And another thing "probably going to get rid of in six months" - well guess what, when my contract ended one year ago, the Galaxy S was half a year old, and I'll be getting "rid of it" a year from now.
      Now tell me - would you rather use you phone for an entire year (half my contract) with 2.3 or 4.0 ?

      • http://twitter.com/#!/brandonjnunn bjn714

        What version was on your phone when you bought it? What version did Samsung tell you they would upgrade you to? Of course I would rather be on the newer version, but why should Samsung have to give you the newest version's features and selling points for free when they have already upgraded you beyond what you originally purchased?

        • http://www.torikomix.pl Tori

          Because when my contract is up, you can bet, that I'll stick to a manufacturer that remembered about the consumers that bought their (then) flagship phone.

        • http://twitter.com/#!/brandonjnunn bjn714

          They have given you each OS update that occurred while it was the flagship phone. Now that the SII is the flagship, it gets the main releases and the older devices get the maintenance releases.

          2 years ago, we would have been lucky for phones to even see ONE software update in its lifetime (save a few exceptions, of course).

  • jason

    I see what the manufacturers have to deal with. But for those like ne that bought a vibrant just over a year ago because as for all the reviews I could find it was still the best phone they offered even with the vibrant 4g coming... which turned out to be a gimped phone in my opinion, we still have a phone that rocks. Still on froyo... with no gingerbread on the horizon... an ics update would be great.

    Developer community in general has all but given up on this phone and I understand why... 911/cm7 issue is serious. All I know is that this would allow for a great phone to still be developed for. I do know now that although I swore I would only buy samsung, the nexus line is the way to go for now on. And as broke as I am it will be near end of life for that before I can afford it... makes me sad.

  • Aleebaan

    These statements are totally uncorrect. The Galaxy S in Sweden now is the best mid-range phone and it won't stop selling for a couple of months yet. It is more sold than most other Samsung phones today.

    • David Ruddock

      Key word: mid range. As in cheap. What makes you think Samsung has any interest (financial or otherwise) in keeping what now constitutes a budget phone up to date?

      You get what you pay for, in terms of both hardware and software support. You want the best update support? The Galaxy Nexus is available online.

      • http://www.torikomix.pl Tori

        Oh, they have interest - brand loyalty. I'm sure I'm not gonna get a phone from a company that doesn't support it phones if they're capable of an upgrade.

        • https://plus.google.com/118003942431890187900 NINOSLAV BUĐAK

          I have a Samsung TV, Samsung DVD/DivX player and Samsung smartphone and a whole lot of friends having the same. I know how "fast" Samsung is with it's firmwares support and finally here's their chance to change things and public opinion for better. Let's see if they'll take that chance. :) BTW, it's ALWAYS the users, enthusiasts and hackers who bring the support for us instead of the original electronics manufacturer (Samsung). :/

        • http://www.AndroidPolice.com Artem Russakovskii

          What other brand that makes Android devices will upgrade all their mid-range devices that were released such a long time ago though? Motorola? HTC? LG? Name one.

  • Simon Belmont

    To be fair, some of the Galaxy S phones HAVE received TWO major Android updates. For example, Android 2.1 to Android 2.2 and to Android 2.3. That is pretty respectable. And also to be fair, some people DID complain when older versions of the iPhone/iPod Touch lost support.

    The Sprint HTC EVO 4G had the same amount of major updates and I thought that was pretty good and I don't expect HTC to roll out an Android 4.0 update to that handset. I agree that it's not financially feasible for Samsung, HTC, or what have you to keep updating old hardware. That is why rooting and custom ROMs are such a draw with Android. David might have put it quite bluntly, but he is technically right here. That Samsung is even looking (again) into the possibility of Android 4.0 for the original Galaxy S is going above and beyond in my opinion. Just my two cents.

  • James

    i have said it before and i will say it again 99.9% of android users dont know the differences between Android 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.3 2.3.5 only the .1% techies care and if they have a sense or touchwiz phone 4.0 want be that big of a deal because the 99.9% won't see the differences my sister has the first droid x still with 2.1 if you ask a 100 random android user at least 98% would not know what verison of android they are using

  • http://androidpandora.blogspot.com/ Myself

    I paid over 600€ for a 16Gb Galaxy S 1 year ago, no contract, I'm not from the US and it's not very common to buy phones by contract where I'm from, that being said I already bought a Galaxy Nexus 2 weeks ago or so, is it wrong to expect an update for my Galaxy S? I don't think so, 600€ isn't cheap for a phone, still nowadays the Galaxy S is still a champion of sales where I'm from, people buy it for 300€ w/o contract, not updating the phone is sending the wrong message, and the reason people chose Apple over Samsung, and honestly I don't see reason to defend Samsung on this one.

  • Eric

    Am the only one that says just wait till a dev releases an ics rom? I have an evo... I'm not expecting it to get anymore updates. I bought a tmobile gs2 im waiting on the Android community more than Samsung. It would be nice if all phones during the contract lifespan would get an upgrade. But not everyone buys them at the same time and after a year, with the way things are progressing, bigger faster and better are going to be released. My thoughts though for carriers and companies is, if the new software won't run because of the phones specs then fine, but if so just release the vanilla version of it and let users have the choice. Don't give it a new ui. Touchwiz or sense etc.. If companies don't want to spendtime or money updating their modified version of android for an older device, then so be it. So offer the vanilla and backaway.

  • sriracha

    i'd like to see new phones supported for, say, 30 months after release. after which the phone defaults to security patches only for an additional 12 months. this is what i bought in for, and i expect no more. i have a DInc2 and i am happy with 2.3.4, and what GB can't do, XDA does. ICS? i really don't care if an official release makes it out or not. it does everything i want, and does it well.

    nor do i expect XDA to continue to develop fror this phone. eventually things are not worth the time to develop any more. if this phone lasts me three years (being supported), i'm a happy guy.

    ask M$ where my free upgrade to Win7 is. or ask BMW where my new car is, because my current ride has fallen out of favor and is almost ten years old. everything has a life span. if not, there would be no innovation. and an even more dismal economy.

    • David Ruddock

      30 months? That's a stretch. I'd say 18, at most. More would be nice, but it's not possible unless Samsung drastically reduces their rate of iteration.

      • sriracha

        i only say 30 months because that would cover the average "new every two" consumer, and the late comers. and i agree that is wildly optimistic. but it would keep the average consumer covered.

        i'd also like to add to your point about a OEM's smaller portfolio. yes, i think manufactures should keep a smaller device SKU listing for the sake of longevity. i wouldn't want my "new" device to be out on the street ten months into a 24-month contract.

        traditionally i hang onto something until it is no longer useful or just up and dies. my t.v., house phone and mobile phone, car, shoes, et al, are not new by any means. my droid is the newest of my new, and if my (then) three year old HTC Ozone hadn't given up the ghost earlier this year, i'd still be using that. it was never "top shelf" but i covered my needs (email, sms, calendar, tether) fairly well, and i was sad to see it replaced.

      • Steve

        So what about the Stratosphere? It's been out for only 2 months. According to you, it should at least get another 16 months of support... we'll probably be on Lollipop 6.0 by then.

  • kuztumrawmur

    wow David, you're a fucking dick. Notice how so many of your articles generate negative responses while everyone generally agrees with Artem. You post nothing of value on this site. Artem is a much better writer, a much more intelligent journalist, and I for one cannot wait until you stop writing for Android Police.
    Anyone else agree?

    • David Ruddock

      Just send along your email address and I'll be sure to let you know when I give my two weeks.

    • http://twitter.com/#!/brandonjnunn bjn714

      It is an editorial. Don't get so upset. It is his opinion about Samsung's position. David is not deciding whether or not Samsung updates your Galaxy S. Samsung is doing that. If you don't like his articles, then just don't read them. That is a choice you are empowered to make.

    • sriracha

      and I for one cannot wait until you stop writing to Android Police.
      Anyone else agree?

      • Zaeem

        David, look- we're all coming here to get news about Android and to support Android. The reason why you're receiving so much hate is because you seem to despise what we come here to love. You can't do that, mate. It just doesn't make any sense.

        For future references-
        Android is good.
        Apple is bad.
        Microsoft... We don't really care about right now.

    • Shark

      No need for such profanity. It's an editorial, it's not meant to gain consensus, it's opinion.

      Judging by your last comment, you just detract from this site.

    • http://www.AndroidPolice.com Artem Russakovskii

      David is one of the most senior people at AP, and while he rubs even me the wrong way with his opinions sometimes, he is oftentimes the voice of reason you don't want to hear or accept, he speaks what he thinks, and is realistic. He does way more than you may think behind the scenes.

      I see how he may seem harsh sometimes, and we argued about this very article (he's also very open to criticism, as long as you come prepared with good arguments), but it's his editorial, and if you don't agree, you're welcome to post your concerns in a civil manner.

      • kuztumrawmur

        I'm sorry David (and Artem), that post was definitely way too harsh. I guess I just got carried away and let the anonymity of the internet get to me. I love your site and will be sure to not post anything like that again.

  • EmrysTal

    For me as a Samsung Vibrant user, I would be happy if Samsung would release the source code needed for the 911 issue (and whatever is needed to improve the GPS software-wise xD) and let CM/other developers handle the legacy support.

    • http://twitter.com/#!/brandonjnunn bjn714

      That one I am hoping Samsung will address, as they usually play somewhat nice with the developer world and even they can't deny the impact of CyanogenMod.

    • Shark

      Maybe Steve Kondik could persuade them! This would be a good solution, those who really do want ICS are probably a similar breed to those who root and install custom ROM's and would reap the benefits of the source code.

  • Tim Thomas

    How much trouble would it be for Samsung to just put out the necessary source codes and let the developers do all the work? Having phones that are easily rooted and ROM'd would definitely be a selling point for techies looking to upgrade their phones.

    • David Ruddock

      That might be a fair compromise. Of course, releasing source on some things might constitute compromising source on newer phones, meaning more exploits, etc. It'd be awfully hard to convince them to do that.

    • http://twitter.com/#!/brandonjnunn bjn714

      They would still have to create all the necessary drivers and libraries for each of the devices, which is the majority of the work needed. Then those are just applied to their base ROM and built (in simple terms). So developing the underlying drivers and libs is not likely to happen unless there is support for the device.

  • http://www.youtube.com/xdadevelopers azrienoch

    The problem I had with Samsung announcing the Galaxy S and Tab wouldn't be updated is the reason they gave. TouchWiz is too big and bloated. That's it. The fact that they're not willing to support an older device because it won't sport their version of it is not a good enough excuse. Galaxy devices are supposed to be cutting edge. They're Samsung's favorite son. The fact that they're at least pretending to look into it is proof enough that they agree it's a weak excuse. These devices may be old, but supporting them is essential to the reputation of the Galaxy brand.

    • http://twitter.com/#!/brandonjnunn bjn714

      There are two sides to that. Sure TouchWiz is way to bloated and needs a bit of a diet. On the other side, Samsung can't exactly remove TW features or just introduce stock ICS entirely, as that will likely upset more customers that are using TW.

      Sounds an awful lot like the HTC Desire Gingerbread "update." They would either have to strip features or drop TW completely...

      • http://www.youtube.com/xdadevelopers azrienoch

        Worst-case scenario for TouchWiz, it's not included. As a new operating system, people are used to redesigned UIs. But there's more than enough room to simply include the TouchWiz launcher and a few apps. I'm running ICS on my Tab right now. What's holding them back is the inner-workings of the TW system. Nobody will miss it except Samsung.

    • David Ruddock

      I honestly think it's a bullshit reason, too, and I definitely don't think it's the real one at play.

      It's probably true that with TW4.0, the Galaxy S wouldn't be able to accommodate the space the ICS ROM would require.

      The actual reason? Samsung doesn't want to support the phone anymore, because they have better things to commit time and money to than providing legacy support for a device that is no longer profitable and production of which has all but stopped. It makes financial sense.

      As far as what's good for the Galaxy brand, new devices are *far* more important to garnering a reputation than supporting old ones. It's the drawback to using a relatively young piece of consumer technology - obsolescence happens at a hugely accelerated pace.

      • http://www.youtube.com/xdadevelopers azrienoch

        Well, as pointed out elsewhere, while it may be more than a year old, people are still buying them, and still glorifying them. I agree there're financial reasons at play, but the Galaxy-branding argument explains their reconsideration, and their negligence of the devices you listed. The Galaxy S and Tab are cheaper to make than their successors, and if they can keep selling them, they will, even if that means a minor setback to develop ICS and TW4 for those devices. THAT makes financial sense.

        • David Ruddock

          No, it doesn't.

          The cost of a Galaxy S in manufacturing terms probably hasn't fluctuated that much since its release. Maybe somewhat lower costs for the memory, maybe the display (since Samsung upped AMOLED capacity). Otherwise, all they're doing is selling them at a much thinner profit margin. The materials cost of a high-end phone is anywhere from $100-250, things don't magically get cheaper over time unless either A.) the resources required to make them decrease in cost or B.) there is hugely increased volume available of component parts. There is zero reason to think either of those is true for any part of the original GS other than the display and *maybe* the internal SD memory. At the materials level, technology doesn't get cheaper just because it's "old" - new, cheaper technology replaces it, and makes the old technology unnecessary. That, or the cost of the old technology in terms of raw materials decreases substantially.

          They're just selling that $150-to-make (or whatever) for $300 now instead of $550 - and maybe it costs $130 to make now. They're still losing a ton of margin, because demand has massively decreased because the product is no longer competitive in the price range it was originally meant to occupy.

          On the other hand, phones like the Exhibit II 4G (or Galaxy W, as it's known abroad I think), may cost like $40-50 to produce (or less, hell if I know exactly), and can then be sold for $250 - $50 less than the GS, but with a much, much better profit margin.

        • Zaeem

          Ah, Azrienoch! The voice of reason!!!! :D

        • http://www.youtube.com/xdadevelopers azrienoch

          Well now, think about it. There's no way the Galaxy W is selling as well as the Galaxy S. The Galaxy S has the prestige of a high-end phone. And I'm not talking about magically making them cheaper, I'm talking about processors, cameras, batteries, radios, etc. All less-expensive components than their successors, the Galaxy S IIs, the Galaxy Tabs, the Galaxy Notes, and the Galaxy Nexuses. On top of all that, the reduced prices we see are largely offered by carriers and retailers. Samsung is still selling at near the original price.

          And again, they have the Galaxy brand to protect. As long as their high-end Galaxy phones--including the legacy ones--are perceived as cutting-edge, they can get away with selling mid-and-low-end devices under the Galaxy brand too. Once the high-end devices aren't cutting edge, they really are obsolete, and any money still invested in them is lost.

        • David Ruddock

          Carriers pay near MSRP for every device they sell *until it gets old.* If these European carriers were still selling Galaxy S's 2 months ago, they weren't paying Samsung the full MSRP. Just no way - maybe a year ago, but not months ago. And the Galaxy W is selling in Europe far better than the Galaxy S right now, because the S is largely discontinued. In Europe, Asia, and the Middle East, budget phones are vastly more popular than here in the States, because smartphone plan rates are based on the MSRP of your phone - meaning a cheaper phone gives you a cheaper plan. I bet the Galaxy W is selling in droves.

          As far as the "reputation" of the Galaxy brand is concerned, that may hold water in Europe, but not in the US. Nobody in the US knows what the fuck a "Galaxy" phone is. They know "droid" and "Google-phone".

          And there's zero reason to believe a Galaxy S II costs substantially more to make than a Galaxy S. The whole goal of new technology in high-competition consumer electronics markets is to replace the old technology at a similar price, because the new technology has been developed with a manufacturing cost in mind.

          Guess which technologies have become cheaper recently?
          -Multi core mobile processors, thanks to new ARM architectures, and Samsung's in-house manufacturing saves money.
          -Memory is getting cheaper every day
          -Digital apertures (more megapixels, better photos) are constantly getting less expensive
          -Samsung upped its AMOLED capacity, meaning the cost of making displays has gone down because they can sell a bigger volume, and I doubt SAMOLED+ is much more expensive than AMOLED was
          -Batteries in the GSII vs. GS are so similar that the difference in cost would be nigh-negligible
          -3G/CDMA radios are dirt cheap. I'll give you the LTE radio costing a *bit* more, but I feel like that's something they just want us to think is costing tons of money.

          You're putting a lot information out here that, frankly, sounds like it's coming out of your ass. Samsung wouldn't make a cutting-edge phone that was a lot MORE costly for them to produce, because someone still has to eat that at the end of the day, and carriers won't play ball if the cost is too high. No way in hell is Samsung trying to cut into their profit margin on their currently #1 selling device (GSII), and no way carriers are willing to pay *that* much more to stock it.

        • http://www.youtube.com/xdadevelopers azrienoch

          All right, let's put it this way. My contacts disagree, both from Samsung and from other companies I asked to play the hypothetical game. Getting the TouchWiz brand on the phone is extremely important to them, because "it's part of the Samsung experience." But the Galaxy S is Samsung's most popular phone to date, and the only reason they're reconsidering is they don't want the reputation of a company that leaves customers behind. You're simply not going to find answers in maintenance costs.

  • Peter F

    Samsung should take a page out of Apple's book. Make ONE or TWO high end phones per year. Next year, make one or two new phones, and keep the old models as the cheaper, lower end phone. This way there is way less phones to keep updated and everyone is happier.

  • Steve Unemployed

    So, how much money did you get from Samsung for 'Christmas' for this hit piece Dave???

    It must be really easy to tell people to upgrade when you work for a website that gets tons of free phones and swag.

    • David Ruddock

      They just give me a blank check every time I write something that justifies any action they take which might upset users in any possible way.

      If you keep quiet, I'll get you a piece of the action.

  • flip360

    Well Dave you can order up some GN`s for us the uneducated and poor users with your blank check, right?

  • me

    If you were going into a cell phone store and bought a Captivate or Evo 4G 4 months ago then you don't need ICS. You obviously didn't care you were buying a 1.5 year old phone and don't need ICS because you aren't paying attention to technology. If you were paying attention to technology then you would have bought a phone that was newer. And yes not everyone has $200 to buy a Galaxy S2 when it launched but places take trades on old phones, and you could have waited a short time. You could have shopped around for a better deal or waited for the deal you wanted.
    I had a captivate when it came out and lworked my way to a galaxy s2. I work at minimum wage and can afford my new toy because I saved for it. I didn't expect to get an upgrade for my PlayStation 1 to be able to play PlayStation 2 games. I didn't expect and upgrade from windows XP to 7. And my girlfriend doesn't have IOS5 on her iPhone 3gs because it is older and would run slow. If they waste time and money to get your galaxy s phones running ICS then it will probably need a full wipe and run slow.
    So stop whining because you paid for a 1 year old phone and now it won't be getting a new version of android. All you are doing is dragging out the fact that you are cheap and want something for nothing. If you want the new version of android then just wait for an upgrade and get a new phone after the bugs are worked out. Hell, the new nexus was released a few weeks ago and already has a few updates. I personally will wait on ICS so I don't have bugs to deal with.

    • me

      In conclusion, stop complaining and get a new phone when you can. I don't see anyone bitching about still having a tune TV instead of a 70 in 3D led TV hanging on their wall. And if its that important to ha e ICS then stop buying other expensive stuff and save for that new phone.

  • khsharpe

    aaah Mr Ruddock, having just moved from a Galaxy S I to a Galaxy S II i have to say i can sort of agree with what you're saying. Sortof.

    but my word - i gotta ask - is there something personal in this for you? Cos you are one seriously grumpy shit

    but i do sort of agree with you. Sort of

    • David Ruddock

      I freely admit to this being a grumpy shit post. It really irks me that there is this massive sense of entitlement among those who are *fervently* arguing that Samsung has a duty to provide the Galaxy S (or Tab, whatever) the ICS update.

      They make it sound like Samsung broke into their home, smashed their Galaxy S with a hammer, took a dump on it, and left a note saying "Fuck You. Love, Samsung".

      My mind is just boggled by the attitudes this promotes.

      • VibrantOwner

        If you're ever able to get decent statistics I'd like to know how flamebait articles affect readership.

        This isn't meant as a troll, I actually am curious how articles like this affect your numbers.

        • David Ruddock

          Any original content generally has a positive effect on traffic, but editorial content rarely has any ramifications beyond the first 24-48 hours after it is published because of the context-sensitive nature of the content (it applies to a pretty specific moment in time, in this case).

          If you're asking if we've ever seen it hurt traffic, the answer is no. It's not a huge boost in traffic, and we don't publish it for that reason - we publish it because it's part of what separates Android Police from many other Android blogs.

      • IOWA

        Actually, according to the Android Alliance agreement signed by Samsung, people ARE IN FACT entitled to the latest update. (After Google I/O 2011, that is).
        So no, the Galaxy S does not fit in here, but in general, people should get updates all the way up to 1.5 years after the phones release date to the latest version of Android.
        Secondly, User overlays are NOT the reason (not even remotely close, btw) that Android took off. The reason Android took off is because Google made it Open Source (and therefore FREE) to use, versus paying to use Windows Mobile 6.5 (Which was way behind the curve), or using the crap known as symbian. With Apple on the rise, and Android the only viable competitor in sight, the price was pretty much right and that's how Android took off.
        David, please, do so research before saying these things. I've always loved AP but this post and your replies are ridiculous.
        -IOWA Androidforums.com / Androidhelpers.com

  • Jeremy

    Epic 4g owner here. I don't care.

    Galaxy S owners fall into 2 groups. 1) Going to replace it before ICS ever gets here 2) Bought it late into the game, and should have had no reasonable expectations that it ever did anything more than what it did out of its 1.5 year old box. (Officially)

    You buy the bleeding edge, and can reasonably expect at least one upgrade, if there is one that year, or you save $50-$200 to buy last years phone, and get what you have. You can't have it both ways.

    The Galaxy Nexus will be yesterday's news by the time this ever comes to fruition, let alone the Galaxy S.

    Hope for? Maybe. Be outraged over not getting it? Totally unreasonable.

  • Swoosh

    All I want from Samsung is to release the source for the kernel and some other tid bits that's holding back the development of 3rd party developers. I DO NOT want Samsung to create an 4.0 Galaxy S that would take like a year. Just simply release the source and let us take care of the rest. Its a Win/Win we get to update our phones and Samsung doesn't have to do all the work.

    • me

      I'm waiting on a rom based on ICS. Of would be nice to have sooner rather than later but I can wait.

  • ssj4Gogeta

    Well it cost me around the equivalent of US $600 in July 2010, and I'm a college student. In the US with carrier-subsidized prices and 2-year contracts, you might expect everyone to buy a new phone every couple years, but there may be many people elsewhere who are willing to keep their phone for a bit longer.

    But, kudos to Samsung for at least "reviewing the possibility," as the phone was on 2.1 when I got it.

    • http://twitter.com/#!/brandonjnunn bjn714

      One point to note is that while the US pays less for phones because of contracts we also pay more for service. So if you saved the difference in the price of service between the US and most countries, you would be able to buy new phones every two years, if not every 6-8 months.

  • Walt

    I have a Samsung Captivate which is AT&T's galaxy s version. As of a few weeks ago AT&T hadn't released Gingerbread so I flashed Cyanogenmod 7.1 to it and now it's like I have a new phone. The heck with Samsung and AT&T. Go DEV's!

  • Neiler

    Really not sure what the point of this article is. Many people purchase hardware in expectation that it will stay current with latest updates. That is completely fair. David - with this article you have just sided with Samsung, almost as if you diregarded the viewpoint of all consumer - which btw helps your employer pay for your food.

    Good thing is you are a nobody and don't get to decide what Samsung does. So, why do I care? I don't - i dont even have the galaxy S. I just wanted to remind you who pays for your food LOL

    • Shark

      Why is it fair that people expect an outdated phone to still receive updates that weren't promised?

      Oh noes David sided with Samsung!!1

  • Manownafar


    Get a custom mod. I have been running ICS for weeks now on my captivate and it rocks.

    If you don't have the cojones to flash a room, and get an ipod.

    • Ravi Shah

      The world is proud of you. I've been running it for months. The point of people's arguments is that they shouldn't have to flash custom roms to get the newest os. Especially on a phone that is still being sold all over the world. Also, Samsung shouldn't lie about the galaxy s not being capable of running ics.

      Also, as an ios and android user, I'm not sure what your point is. Ipods can be hacked quite a bit as well.

  • cece

    I chose the Galaxy S because it was the most capable... and so the most likely to be upgradable long after I buy it !
    So yes, it is bad for such devices not to be supported even 2 years after their birth.
    Maybe I will buy a newer one next year... but in this case I would be happy to be able to give my Galaxy S to a relative, and would much prefer it to be up to date software wise.

  • http://droidsamurai.blogspot.com PixelSlave

    If you count the number of active users, I guess no other phones could beat the OG Droid. It still makes the top 10 of many survey.

  • Statik

    I have to take the opinion that if we as consumers say that fast hardware turnaround is ok then we end up with Samsung continuing to release what is in my opinion too many devices every year. Which leads to even less software support because hey, just buy a new phone right?

    Just spend a couple bucks on overtime for the one guy it would take to port the Nexus S build to a proper in-house Galaxy S build WITHOUT touchwiz.

    And to David: as you yourself stated, this is an editorial. You know you are writing on a site that allows comments right? And from your own admission in the original article you say there are lot of angry Galaxy S fans out there. Did you really expect anything different from the comments on an article such as the one you wrote? Save your time and don't respond to them. I personally don't agree with you one bit but arguing with people who you already know you don't agree with is pointless.

    • David Ruddock

      If arguing with people you don't agree with is pointless, why are you commenting at all? Kind of a nihilist attitude. There's plenty to be learned from constructive debate and disagreement.

      • Statik

        I offered my comment on the article before making the comment about arguing. Also, I love arguing in a constructive way, I see none of that here. I see people on two sides offering the same 2 views over and over. One is customers who want their device supported and the other is people who understand Samsung has to make difficult decisions like this. Neither side is being swayed. Thus the rational debater will say debate over.

        Good luck in your future endeavors, I've enjoyed reading the site up until now, but if Artem states you are the most senior person here and the voice of reason most of the time that speaks volumes about the behind the scenes activity at AP.

  • http://www.facebook.com/abetsi Albert Rabuyo

    It kind of sucks that the Galaxy S 4G isn't getting ICS. I just got that phone for my girlfriend.

  • Aatif Sumar

    Yikes AP. Really flying loose with the quality control. Would expect an article like this from Gizmodo.

  • http://androidpandora.blogspot.com/ Myself

    you realize the phone has less then 2 years right?

  • Andrew

    David, i'm half in agreement with you.
    I say this as an owner of the original SGS, which i've had for the past year, and now only 1/3 years into my contract.. sigh. Recently i purchased a SGS2 with cash 'out-of-pocket' simply because i didn't see an upgrade path for the SGS.
    Samsung did never agree to a specific length of updates for the original SGS. They did promise an upgrade to 2.2, which they delivered, and even followed up with 2.3.. after some time. So in this sense, i don't feel they necessarily owe updates to owners as further updates were never promised.
    However, looking at the SGS, it has exactly the same hardware as the Nexus S, which has received an update from Google. It clearly 'can' be upgraded yet Samsung initially said it lacked the necessary hardware requirements.
    My point is this. Looking forward 12 months, the next iteration of android will be released, Android '5.0' or whatever it may be. At this point, the Samsung Galaxy S 2 will be 1.5 years old, as the original Galaxy S is now. It will very likely meet the hardware requirements for an update.
    Would you find it acceptable for Samsung to refuse an update to the SGS2 for 'X reason' simply because it is 1.5 years old, and yet the hardware is completely capable of an upgrade?
    Can i expect to see a similarly written article from you 12 months from now if Samsung decides not to update the Galaxy S 2?

    • David Ruddock

      I think there's some confusion about my support for their 'reasoning.' I don't support it - their stated reason (not enough room for TouchWiz) is pretty weak, borderline bullshit. They *could* make an optional, vanilla-ICS update for those who want it, and toss on a TouchWiz-like launcher and theme. Making room is possible, I'm sure.

      The reason I support is the one hiding behind that one, the "real" reason - cost. Samsung doesn't want to spend the money on labor hours, testing, and carrier certification/deployment to get an update out there, plain and simple, and I completely empathize with them on this. If they had taken a more firm stance and just said "The Galaxy S will no longer receive major Android OS updates, because we have decided to focus on newer products," they would have made fewer enemies on this.

      I don't argue with the statement that it's capable of running Android 4.0.

      But, the Nexus S runs totally stock Android, is by its very nature *designed* to be easily updated, and Google themselves are responsible for a lot of that as well. It's Google's end of the "Nexus" bargain with manufacturers. Converting a scaled-down TouchWiz 4.0 to ICS for 5+ variants of a 1.5 year old phone is just not a justifiable cost for Samsung, and I can see why they don't want to do it.

      • Andrew

        Yes, i agree with you. They could still support the phone, as its capable. Even i would have been happy with vanilla ICS.

        Though, i'm not entirely sure the reason for withholding an update is related to cost. I would imagine that if Samsung were to focus a small group of dedicated developers to build and test a new update, they could release an update in a few months time. Perhaps a few months more would be spent to work out the eventual bugs. Considering the profit Samsung has made selling tens of millions of SGS', i think the added cost of producing one more update to their former flagship phone is negligible.

        Rather than trying to understand and appreciate the financial burden it would place on Samsung to release a new update, i would have much rather seen another article blasting Samsung for failing to provide long-term support for their previous flagship phone and its many millions of owners.

        We should not be trying to understand Samsung and their profit margins, instead, we should be demanding the best possible support from this company for its customers. If this means Samsung will be burdened by some added cost and hire more developers, so be it. If it means Samsung will consider releasing fewer high-end phones and variants per year and in-turn choose a simpler support model, even better.

  • Andrew

    David, i'm half in agreement with you.

    I say this as an owner of the original SGS, which i've had for the past year, and now only 1/3 years into my contract..

    sigh. Recently i purchased a SGS2 with cash 'out-of-pocket' simply because i didn't see an upgrade path for the SGS.

    Samsung did never agree to a specific length of updates for the original SGS. They did promise an upgrade to 2.2, which

    they delivered, and even followed up with 2.3.. after some time. So in this sense, i don't feel they necessarily owe updates

    to owners as further updates were never promised.

    However, looking at the SGS, it has exactly the same hardware as the Nexus S, which has received an update from Google. It

    clearly 'can' be upgraded yet Samsung initially said it lacked the necessary hardware requirements.

    My point is this. Looking forward 12 months, the next iteration of android will be released, Android '5.0' or whatever it

    may be. At this point, the Samsung Galaxy S 2 will be 1.5 years old, as the original Galaxy S is now. It will very likely

    meet the hardware requirements for an update.

    Would you find it acceptable for Samsung to refuse an update to the SGS2 for X reason simply because it is 1.5 years old,

    and yet the hardware is completely capable of an upgrade?

    Can i expect to see a similarly written article from you 12 months from now if Samsung decides not to update the Galaxy S 2?

  • Andrew

    David, i'm half in agreement with you.

    I say this as an owner of the original SGS, which i've had for the past year, and now only 1/3 years into my contract.. sigh. Recently i purchased a SGS2 with cash 'out-of-pocket' simply because i didn't see an upgrade path for the SGS.

    Samsung did never agree to a specific length of updates for the original SGS. They did promise and upgrade to 2.2, which they delivered, and even followed up with 2.3.. after some time. So in this sense, i don't feel they necessarily owe updates to owners as further updates were never promised.

    However, looking at the SGS, it has exactly the same hardware as the Nexus S, which has received an update from Google. It clearly 'can' be upgraded yet Samsung initially said it lacked the necessary hardware requirements.

    My point is this. Looking forward 12 months, the next iteration of android will be released, Android '5.0' or whatever it may be. At this point, the Samsung Galaxy S 2 will be 1.5 years old, as the original Galaxy S is now. It will very likely meet the hardware requirements for an update.

    Would you find it acceptable for Samsung to refuse an update to the SGS2 for 'X reason' simply because it is 1.5 years old, and yet the hardware is completely capable of an upgrade?

    Can i expect to see a similarly written article from you 12 months from now if Samsung decides not to update the Galaxy S 2?

  • http://shoe-nuff.blogspot.com Camboss

    I call bs, alot of you mobile tech blogs i heard are what drives the mobile stock. How can you empathize with a mega company, like seriously break that rationale down to me. I bet if you bought a galaxy nexus and on jan 1, samsung announced the sg3 for tmobile only you would be hard pressed. not only are you stuck in a two year contract with verizon but i doubt any rsponsible adult would simply quit their line of service for a new device. I read tech blogs everyday and you guys are more childish than anyone i encountered in high school when keeping up with the jones goes wrong.

    I have never once seen any blog just say to some1 hey you got a phone, it makes calls, it surfs the web you're good. That highlight is why i think you all are part of samsung or some other manufacturer.

    Your post pic is a man beating a dead horse, but samsung doing right by the consumer is wrong. Regardless of touchwiz or ics, samsung, you're telling me a bunch of garage nerds at xda can put ics on the most basic of phones from 2007 but a mega corp cant do it because of money. Your post wreaks of selfishness not only would you encourage fragmentation but you're worried about samsung spending resources for their own devices...wow dude.

    Just chill and lets see what happens, you could have just wished all owners to experience ics but rather you spew elitism, no way no how am I ever upgrading, why? because i live in the real world with bills

    • Shark

      What's wrong with 'empathizing' with a mega company? It's an editorial, it's opinion. It's allowed. It doesn't have to be rational. Besides, this article seems to be more a rant against the entitlement felt by Galaxy S owners.

      I find the claim that AndroidPolice being part of Samsung quite laughable to be frank.

      Why would a mega corp put ICS on a phone from 2007? There's no incentive whatsoever. Of course it comes down to money, they're a 'mega corp'. They have shareholders to please.

      There's a cut off point for every device and cut off time for the Galaxy S. The iPhone 3G had one, the HTC Hero had one hence the inevitability of fragmentation.

      Well, look at it this way, if Samsung spend more capital on updates for year and a half old phone there's less capital for R&D of newer, more awesome products. That could mean less competition which would mean we don't get great things like the Exynos processor, Super AMOLED screens etc.

      The author can wish or not wish for what they want. I didn't really understand your last couple of sentences from 'No Way no How' but I'm guessing you're saying you want a free update from Samsung who don't owe you anything because you can't afford to go and purchase a phone with ICS?

  • Souvik Kar

    "You can only have so many "pure Google experience" devices before it starts becoming a race to the thinnest profit margin, like the PC business, and guess what - that results in boring hardware, low build quality, and mediocre end-products. If you want all Android phones to perform alike, good on you, but I'd rather have competition that promotes adding value, not on creating a uniform experience across all brands. That's just a terrible idea. - David Ruddock"

    If someone wants to buy a 200 dollar(w/o contract) android phone they can do that today. There are already a lot of android phones which qualify as boring hardware, low build quality, and mediocre end-products. So that argument is moot. If someday that 200$ phone satisfies my requirements I will buy that.

    I will try to answer your basic question about why is Samsung doing this. Because the market(i.e. the customers) asked for it. The most probable reason for Samsung to reconsider this is because the market gave some feedback that they will switch manufacturers/platforms in the future if they don't get this upgrade. Just like the market made Godaddy change their mind on SOPA. Just as Samsung is not obliged to provide updates, customers are not obliged to buy Samsung/Android phones. If a company wants me to be loyal to a brand/platform then I want to see that loyalty reciprocated.

    The irony is that your whole opinion is a complaint that other people are complaining.

    • Shark

      Honestly, I think most people won't care whether their Galaxy S gets ICS or not because as long as their phone does what it wants i.e. play Angry Birds, let's them edit things in QuickOffice, sends texts etc. they'll be satisfied. Subsequently, the amount of repeat purchases won't really be impacted.

      It's probably only a minority of the user base who's next purchase will be significantly influenced by the ICS update.

  • Chris

    My wife and I bought the GSG 4G for me and the SGS 2 for her. What I thought was odd was that my Galaxy S 4G has a newer version of Android than my wife's SGS2.. I could of gotten the SGS2 but I actually liked the smaller size of the SGS 4G. I've customized it enough to where I'm happy so I don't care much about ICS.


  • Fady Mahfouz

    Updating is very crucial, Im one of the first adopters of the international Galaxy. It was on Eclair 2.1 that day, and I hated it, then Froyo came and eveything was brighter, then Gingerbread came but I didn't care cause I was already on MIUI after using Darky ROM for a long time.

    Long story short, don't give us ICS, but give the developers all their needs to develop ROMS.

    Support the troops, support the Devs.

  • Laurence

    This is one of the worst posts I have ever seen on AP.

    Here are the relevant facts, as far as I'm concerned:

    1) We know that the Galaxy S is capable of running ICS just fine, because ICS runs on the Nexus S which has nearly identical underlying components.
    2) The Galaxy S is not an "obsolete" phone; it is still being sold in large numbers today all around the world.
    3) There are still millions of Galaxy S phones in use right now, and certainly not all of them are going to be thrown away in six months time.

    Timely updates, especially for formerly top-of-the-range "halo" phones such as the Galaxy S, are a good thing for Android as a platform. Updates are good for developers, because they reduce version fragmentation. Updates are good for security, which means less "Android malware" scare stories floating around the press. Updates are good for brand loyalty, because it makes consumers feel like they're being taken care of and not just being forced to buy a new phone.

    For exactly the same reasons, when a phone like the Galaxy S doesn't get updated, that's a bad thing for Android. David Ruddock seems to shrug and say, well, if you care about getting timely updates then you should just get an iPhone or a Windows Phone. Well, if myopic companies like Samsung continue to prioritise their short-term interest in selling a new phone over their long-term interest in building brand loyalty, consumers might start taking David's advice.

  • Andreas

    I think you missed the point that such an upgrade would bring new life to an "old device", as you call it.

  • JohnR

    Being a reasonable "adult", it goes without saying I agree with David 100% on this one.

  • gatch

    I think its safe to assume that anyone who even reads this article has a pretty good idea of what having the latest android version on their device means. It means your device retains its awesomeness for that much longer. And we all want that, because you get more mileage out of your expensive gadget. I own the original galaxy tab and it has been worth every cent, so I don't reallly mind not getting ICS. But there are already new 7" tablets coming out with ICS that have same or even lower specs than my galaxy tab. So how hard can it really be for samsung to get it on my device? If they don't do the update, fine. They didn't promise me an update anyway. But if they do, then they promote customer loyalty so the next time you buy a samsung smartphone/tablet, you know it will be a good buy with at least 2 years of mileage and updates to the latest android during that period. Customer loyalty and peace of mind go a long way.

  • dezz

    Why in the world does it take them half a year to rollout an update???

    The whole rant is based on the notion that update, that could be available within few months, will take them over half a year. And since it takes them that long to do something that developers manage to do 10x faster, for free, Samsung should just should not bother at all???

    I understand that you got yourself a nice "xmas gift" from Samsung but common at least make an effort and earn your 'pay'

    • Shark

      Because they need to train their support staff, gain carrier certification and go through extensive testing.


      A developer on XDA can do it 10x quicker because they don't have to carry out all these steps in between.

      • dezz

        I am verry well aware of the process and time it takes..

        And keeping all that into account there is still no reason for Samsung (specifically) to take it over half a year when other manufactures can do it within 3-4month time.

        a. Samsung had ISC earlier than source code release - nexus.. so much much earlier.

        b. NEXUS S. - hardware wise its close and there is no extensive driver development necessary

  • dezz

    Actually Samsung wouldn't have to update if they would release the source for drivers so developers can actually make the hardware they produce usable.
    If they want to keep their system closed as Apple does thn they HAVE TO provide updates as long as the hardware can handle them. Just like Apple.
    What Samsung is doing is killing the platform that made it possible for them to sell all those phones to begin with.

  • me

    And if Samsung has to spend all this money on getting ICS on a 1.5 year old phone then they will have to continue to support the device beyond the expected life of the phone. This adds costs beyond the projections and would you rather them barely break even because of development costs on that phone or make more money and have more encouragement to continue to make new devices. If a company isn't able to have a large petition then they will leave the market. Look at HP with their WebOS devices. Great devices but the costs didn't encourage them to continue with it.

  • aiden9

    Yes from a purely short term profit making standpoint it is stupid to update. Long term though it could pay off and this is why they're looking at it.

    In return for another update they get:
    1. Goodwill, people are going to have positive things to say about Samsung.
    2. Lock-in, the more time people are on touchwiz the more likely they are to stay with touchwiz.
    3. Another talking point, "Hey we have the best screen, some of the best specs, and oh we won't ditch you like those other guys".

    The long term effect is lower churn, higher word of mouth advertisement(the tech gurus are going to recommend Samsung devices so they don't have to maintain a fleet of phones to flash).

    That is what they're considering, they're weighing the potential slowing of sales(some would stop buying 1 every 2 years) vs the potential to gain/retain sales.

  • Shark
  • Alex

    It's true that Samsung doesn't have any obligation of upgrading you device (not even once) but I expect them to do it as long as the device itself can handle it properly. Why should I buy any product from a company if they are not willing to keep me in the loop even if the device can?

    There are some moral issues here about how companies make profit but those questions are beyond the scope of this article.

    • Phillip

      There's no moral issues. Samsung is in the business of selling phones and increasing profit for its shareholders, that's it. If they keep upgrading your old phone so its on par with their current flagship you wont be incline to buy a new one.

      Unlike apple, samsung, htc etc only have a few months to sell a phones at full (subsidized) pricing before the inevitable price cut to make way for the next flagship. At the rate their releasing phones you cant expect them to keep

      Most of you voicing hate for this editorial are going to buy another android phone regardless of what Samsung does because your fandboys, me included. The other 99.5% of android uses dont have a clue what ICS is and as long as their phones work their cool.

      If the next phone you buy isn't a Nexus one you need to shut up cause your just setting yourself up to bitch again about upgrade. That sounds harsh but its the truth.

  • Evan

    Alright, too many comments for me to read all the way down, so I apologize if this got resolved, but I wanted to get my 2 cents in.

    I bought the Samsung Galaxy S Fascinate 6 months ago. I have 18 months left on my contract. I didn't expect it to be a top of the line phone. In fact, it was free with the contract. I don't expect updates to be a top priority for it - but I do expect updates as long as the hardware is capable of utilizing it.

    You might say this makes no sense financially, and so Samsung isn't going to care a lot. Well, as consumers, I can tell you that we don't really care if companies are doing well financially. We don't care if they make money. It's not our problem. And if Samsung, or any other company, decides to ignore the part of the consumer base that feels that way, then they should expect to lose that segment. It's not going to be 20+ million or anything, but it will hurt for sure. Certainly more than it would cost to continue upgrading the Galaxy S - at least to ICS. Beyond that, maybe not.

    • Phillip

      If your "buying" a phone that's a year old and free on contract then your not going to get much if any future support. By now your phone has been updated to a stable build of android and its about to be end of lifed.

      I don't think companies are losing sleep over customers who buy $0-50 phones. How much brand loyalty can they have if their not spending any money?

      Face it, technology is constantly moving forward and to except companies to keep your old phone (yes, the galaxy s its old by current standards) at parity with new ones is retarded.

  • http://securethink.blogspot.com Allen Baranov

    I think that the question is not whether they should do this or not. It is: why not.

    Geeks, power users and trendies will upgrade to the latest hardware as soon as they possibly can - ICS or not. The normal man in the street will not and if Samsung throw an update to him then it will increase brand value.

    ICS is not like Gingerbread. You will notice the difference. The whole user experience is different and it really brings a whole new feeling of freshness to the phone. It is designed to run on Gingerbread compatible devices which the SGS is certainly one of. I have noticed that ICS actually runs faster and smoother than Gingerbread although touchwiz and its friends may undo this.

    It has taken teamhacksung and onecosmic working 'blind' with the ICS source about 1 month to get a somewhat working SGS ICS Rom out.

    It should not be that much work for Samsung to continue this quest and get something official out quickly without too much hassle.

    Samsung being able to say "This new funky Android OS is now available for your phone because we care about you even after you have bought your phone" is good for the brand and can be done at very low cost to the company.

    • Phillip

      Samsung's probably going to say around the February 27th (the opening day of MWC 2012), "Get the all new funky Android 4.0 on your all new Galaxy S3".

      Whats good for the brand is selling phones, that's business 101.

  • ryan G

    Why should I even care about the ICS and will it, wont it, drama?? There is plenty out there you can do with your Galaxy S without using the official channels. What makes it better is the warranty is up after a year in the UK anyway and the updates have been consistent enough until that point, so now with MIUI and alike MOD's easily managed, all is well.

    Drama over nothing for those not willing to open their minds.

  • azumihk

    U guys making it a warzone drama ,
    first u check your sgs 1 and most of u are on androind 2.3.5 so most of u have had all the major updates from sammy rite? first people said ahh samsung is not giving us updates but in reality we are getting the updates almost same the same time as the google phones. the sgs is 1.5 years old and has 512 ram, uses like 368 or something so now ics is comming and google makes ics for the new phones rite? most phones have like 1gig of ram these days and not 512 so the upgrade to ics is not totally samsungs fault. we cant expect in 2014 to make upgrades for phones sold in 2012 coz its still 2 years old but in the mean time the phone maybe 4 years old. phones get faster more ram, the os gets better and better. we maybe soon see 3D icons or icons that rotate and it will take all more more and more ram to put the new os on the phone. people here says yea but apple this and apple that. well ios 5 doesnt run as smooth as apple want on a 3gs, they want u to upgrade also, ofcourse they make it availble but they want u to upgrade . now for iphone 4 no siri and only 1 year old still can upgrade to ios5 but dont compare it to ics. u check apple's ios , its basicly the same as it was in 2007, u get your 3gs and hold it next to your iphone 4s, its basicly the same, they put in notification bar and some multi tasking but not many changes. ics is maybe not going to be a major change to gingerbread but u cant blame samsung for the ics update coz it just uses more ram. anyway i think they can do the upgrade to ics like htc did to gingerbead, they will leave some standard programs out maybe and then it maybe fits. im sure they want to support but it has to work good and fast and they want their own touchwiz on it. some say skip the touchwiz but ah thats what sgs makes the differnce with google and if u dont like it take google and if u like it take sgs. the phone is still great and i had good times with my sgs 1

    Happy owner of sgs2 and a note :)

  • http://vaughnsphotoart.com Vaughn Teegarden

    I would rather have fewer choices of smartphone and know that whichever I pick it will be updated and compatible with newly released apps for several years.

    The way I see it, failing to update the OS creates an artificial obsolescence that is wasteful of my money. I don't appreciate that, and a lot of consumers feel the same way.

    An offering of products that have better longer-term support could be a winning proposition, marketing wise, even if that meant fewer choices at purchase time.

  • Malik Ashar Azeem

    is a nice brand it results are much better as compared to Nokia and other
    products of the same model.i like it very much. Samsung Galaxy