1 4 5 6 7 8 Previous Next 106 Replies Latest reply: Jun 11, 2012 5:28 AM by cynthia20 Go to original post RSS
  • 90. Re: Android 4.0 for Samsung Galaxy S2?

    animaleyezz wrote:

     

    Congrats on going with Sprint.  The Exynos is only marginally faster than the Snapdragon that's in our little darling.

     

    No, it's substantially faster given the price/performance ratio with the appliations I'm using (Game Developer) - I'd agree that it's hard to prove out but gains of 10-20% in worst case scenario testing were the range - that I paid the same price (less if you disclude the "I'll get it some day rebate program" that Tmobile had it's users endure for the GS2 + availability - it was kinda a no brainer for me.

     

     

    animaleyezz wrote:

     

    That margin was not enough for me to justify switching networks for. 

     

    Oh, I get that - one of the key reasons my wife remains on Tmo is that the $400 in early termination fee's wasn't something I wanted to take on at once (and, admittidly, it makes sense for me to move her later when I can use her upgrade for a GS3 or equivalent - doesn't even make sense to have her jump ship for the Galaxy Nexus honestly)

     

     

    animaleyezz wrote:

     

    The Exynos couldn't handle the HSPA+ spectrum, which surprisingly you feel is better.  So you switched networks for the processor not the throuhput of network speed.  Hmmm. Interesting trade off.

     

    It's not that the Exynos can't hanlde it - rather that the processor and modems don't play nicely together - same basic mechanic you see on other "LTE" variants of devices - I'd expect to see Exynos2 (or whatever horrible naming convention is assigned) - should play better with modern modems.

     

    I didn't really hand off network speed, I'm a rare case - but wimaxx offered by Sprint eclipses the speeds of even 42mbsec/HSPA in Atlanta - I have a buddy at work who has the Tmo variant and we've speed tested ours side/side inside and outside, and wimaxx is consistently the same outdoors - but nearly twice as fast indoors where I work.  It'll be interesting to see how the LTE rollout over the next year turns out.

  • 91. Re: Android 4.0 for Samsung Galaxy S2?

    philyew wrote:

     

    What is your comparison base for the 30% improvement on a Vibrant? ICS to stock Froyo?

     

    What is the comparison between ICS and a custom Gingerbread ROM? I frankly find that CM7 is faster than ICS (Passion v12 or 13) on the Vibrant. No benchmarks, just day-to-day practical use.

     

    From stock Froyo (whatever that build is) - to Passion (1.3 iirc) - again, I'm an app developer (games mostly) - so i used gaming benchmarks to get my 30% estimate...their theoretical benchmarks though so that always leaves a margin for error.

     

     

    philyew wrote:

     

    ICS isn't even an issue for Vibrant users, considering that they are just about the only Galaxy S community in the world that never got Gingerbread.

     

    Why not? I'm pretty sure it's not primarily because TM want to sell you new phones, but it is much more likely because only a fraction of Vibrant users took the manual Froyo update route last year, thus exposing the huge disparity between the noise generated by a minority clamoring for OS updates and the actual number of people who have a real interest in taking the step. Up until that point, there were no real metrics because everyone got their update OTA whether they wanted it or not.

     

     

     

    No I'd agree - but it's still an interesting testbed for comparison and an illustration of what both Tmobile and Samsung (HTS from one of the comments above) - just don't want you to see   All of the above would rather it be a case for an upgrade rather than a software update.  The issue of Froyo not rolling out through OTA was a decision by Tmobile and they got exactly what they were looking for and built a case to save the money of an OTA roll out vs. Keis - silly companies and their greedy logic.

     

     

    philyew wrote:

     

     

     

    You ascribe several TM decisions to greed and, in other circumstances, you would probably be right, but the whole TM USA adventure for Deutsche Telekom has been a badly conceived disaster from the outset when they sank $55 billion into acquiring what was then a small wireless company, Voicestream, which was just breaking out into a nationwide profile with less than 7 million subscribers.

     

    Imagine that. $55 billion. Having grown to 5 times that size, they could only command an offer of $39 billion from AT&T last year and considerably less from Sprint. Everything Deutsche Telekom do here is now about minimizing their losses.

     

    Before hotspot tethering was offered by the Google OS, TM had built a line of business in broadband wireless services, selling devices and data plans which enabled computers to get mobile data access. The Google OS development was a direct competitor to TM's line of business, enabling data access for multiple devices from every new Android smartphone sold.

     

    They had three choices: (1) block the feature, (2) charge for it in order to minimize their revenue losses in thebroadband business stream, or (3) take the loss. If you were running a business, what option would you take?

     

    I'd agree - it was a self defense mechanism, but one that cost the consumer dearly

     

     

    philyew wrote:

     

    W

    You question their LTE strategy, but again their are certain business imperative not answered by HSPA+ evolution that are much more than strategic checkmarks.

     

    Aside from the long term efficiencies of LTE, which will improve tower range and allow voice services to be handled by the same hardware as data, LTE is the only approved technology that has a real potential for true 4G evolution. Plans for HSPA+ currently top out at 84mbps and become increasingly inefficient in comparison with LTE from that point onwards.

     

    But the main reason, if for no other, that TM must make the move to LTE is that once the competition starts to deploy LTE-Advanced, TM will have to start calling "the largest 4G network" just "3G" again, because they will no longer be able to catch a break on the loosey-goosey definition of 4G that the ITU allowed at the end of 2010. How the heck are they supposed to compete when that happens? They have to position themselves now so that doesn't happen.

     

    Sometimes you have to avoid differentiating yourself negatively, and that is just a important as trying to differentiate yourself positively. Even if you had picked some of the other ways that they have started nickel-and-diming customers (e.g. reconnection fees, migration fees, "secret" contract extensions etc), I would have to conclude that, at this point in time, they are not driven so much by greed as by desperation, but the negative differentiation that results will, over time, considerably outweigh the financial benefits.

    Agreed, but Tmobile has to start doing business differently if it's going to survive without becoming a nationwide MetroPCS -  Tmobile gods, hear me now - you are never going to be one of the "big three" - Sprint is even loosing it's chances, but they're far ahead of you on the curve.  I think Tmobile needs to look at a more expensive base Customer models (for end users) - with "perks" to absorb the different costs.  I'd agree that LTE get's them closer to the other carriers - but the fact is, they don't have to plan on a user base bigger than they have now - in fact, they can pretty much count themselves with a 20% decrease in userbase over say the next 5 years if they don't add an iPhone - as much as it pains me to write it - the iPhone is what the mass idiot consumer wants:

    1.  It makes people with little or no education feel smarter than they are by offering services touch-button versus having to get into more complexity

    2.  Market from Apple is ingenious (if not a little fascist)

    3.  It's the largest growing segment of new devices sold (per device, I'd love to back google in it's activations number, but it's not exacltly capturing all of that at the high end)

     

    Without an iPhone - Tmobile is going to have to do something completely differnt - that can be good for the Android ecosystem and the end consumer if they can play and sell it right....or a disaster if they don't.

     

    Slacker

  • 92. Re: Android 4.0 for Samsung Galaxy S2?
    nearmsp

    Slacker - the customer is always right. Calling people who want an iPhone as idiots is putting one's head in the sand. Also do not assume that people with little or no education want to feel smarter so they buy iPhones. Most University students have iPhones or other iOs devices, and they are surely not uninformed. BTW, I have 2 Master's and a PhD and authored books, but I still would like to have an iPhone on T-mobile. I do not think an education or computing skills has anything to with wanting or not wanting an iPhone.  I think T-mobile has recognized that they do need an iPhone which is very popular in the US. As a value family plan customer, I am more than happy to buy iPhones for ourselves at full price provided  the Data speeds are faster than edge speed.I personally think  along with Android, T-mobile should also pay attention to the million or iPhone customers and many more who are keen to have one. BTW, I use a Galaxy S2 and am happy with it, but even though I purchased it for full price this year, I will be happy to toss it this fall should the new iPhone work at high speed on the T-mobile network. I use the MacBook Air and the new iPad and would not mind having the new iPhone when it comes out.

  • 93. Re: Android 4.0 for Samsung Galaxy S2?
    smplyunprdctble

    I agree with you.

     

    Calling iPeople stupid is wrong.

     

    iDevices are not for me.  I accept that.  iDevices are perfect for a population [educated agnostic].  Android devices are perfect for a population.  Windows Phone devices are perfect for a population.  Blackberry devices are perfect for a population.

     

    There's a reason there's different devices.  Not every device is for every person.

     

    Of course, iDevices have also become a "status symbol" and that's what people want.  And, since it's a "status symbol", carriers need it in order to keep customers.

     

    If T-Mobile gets this "status symbol", then the network is going to suffer.  People will move to T-Mobile because it's the cheapest plan of the iPhone carriers.

  • 94. Re: Android 4.0 for Samsung Galaxy S2?

    You both are taking two different ideas out of context:

     

    1.  People (in masse) are stupid

    2.  People want iPhones

     

    Infer from those two statements what you want, but I don't think people are dumb for wanting iPhones - but I can extrapolate that most people out there have an IQ to rival your average carrot - and there are lots of iPhones out there.  I'm harsh, but it's a phone, if someone goes killing themselves because my opinion of their phone directly affects them in some way, then we're probably just elliminating wasted genes, so forgive me if I sound harsh

     

    To quote Smply above "

    smplyunprdctble wrote:

     

     

    Of course, iDevices have also become a "status symbol" and that's what people want.

     

    And why do people want status symbols?  To fill a void in their lives where experience and achievement should be - hence, my phillosophy.

     

    Good on you Near for getting your PhD - I got mine in Mathematics, what's your specialty?

     

    Slacker

  • 95. Re: Android 4.0 for Samsung Galaxy S2?
    nearmsp

    @Slacker -Engineering.

    I personally think if T-mobile should bring iPhones, then it should charge extra - like an additional charge for those buy it on a discount to account for the additional subsidy required for an iPhone to bring the cost down to the S/HTC level.

    Finally, I agree there are those who would buy an iPhone because it is cool or for the status symbol paritculary in emerging economy countries. I recognize there are some serious shorcomings in the iOs system and that is related to the file structure and the way data is stored inside the Aps. For those who use the windows environment for their laptops/computers, it is hard to reconcile with iPad/iPhone system. But I have made workarounds such as using Drop box on my iPad.

     

    I personally think with the move to LTE, T-mobile is preparing for the iPhone. Apple too is losing ground to Android big time in China and India, and other emerging markets. Under such conditions to deny T-mobile which has more customes than adults in Canada does not make business sense for Apple. With an iPhone, T-mobile will benefit big time by drawing customers who hate AT&T but remain there because they want a GSM phone.

  • 96. Re: Android 4.0 for Samsung Galaxy S2?
    philyew

    Once TM achieves substantial progress with their re-farming program, they may be positioned to make a move with the iPhone, but I very much doubt they would do anything before they could offer 3G/HSPA+ coverage in all their major markets. Anything less would be a major letdown and destroy what would be a very expensive launch.

     

    However, that is only half the story. The other half involves Apple and their willingness to break the charging mold they have used so far to allow new carriers into the iPhone market. We know Sprint committed to upwards of $15.5 billion over the first four years.

     

    That would put TM at around a $10 billion commitment over a similar period. First year sales, by my reckoning, would need to exceed 40% of their current smartphone volume (11 million according to their last quarterly report) to keep pace with that commitment. That's a tall order in any situation and might be taller still, if recent claims that 20% of those devices are ALREADY iPhones prove to be correct.

     

    The final piece is whether Deutsche Telekom are willing to make a financial commitment of that order before fully exploring their current strategy of "if you build it, they will come" in which they create the necessary network accommodating unlocked iPhone owners (AT&T defectors or direct buyers) without committing a dime to Apple.

  • 97. Re: Android 4.0 for Samsung Galaxy S2?

    As far as I've seached n heard, Its supposed to be out no later than the end of April 2012 *this month*.. I like to be kept updated on android stuff so I use this great app that lets u select from where u wanna get news and update articles n videos- its called PULSE.. I strongly recmend it if u wanna be kept informed with the adriod world n other news too...

  • 98. Re: Android 4.0 for Samsung Galaxy S2?
    kungfubass1961

    with t-mobile that is never ever wont happen dont look for it its more rumors then truth you will find $10.000 in your back pocket right now compair to ever getting 4.0 on the t-mobile samsung S2.

  • 99. Re: Android 4.0 for Samsung Galaxy S2?

    I'm getting tired of waiting on this update. Many other carriers and manufacturers already have released ICS. Samsung wasn't the fastest OEM, but it does seem like TMO is one of the slowest carriers to get us ICS. Hopefully TMO can better staff their software team in the future. Does anyone know where their software development is located?

  • 100. Re: Android 4.0 for Samsung Galaxy S2?
    smplyunprdctble

    splaktar wrote:

     

    I'm getting tired of waiting on this update. Many other carriers and manufacturers already have released ICS. Samsung wasn't the fastest OEM, but it does seem like TMO is one of the slowest carriers to get us ICS. Hopefully TMO can better staff their software team in the future. Does anyone know where their software development is located?

    Really?

     

    Name five in the US.  Note, the Galaxy Nexus does not count because it came with ICS and it's the current Google phone.

  • 101. Re: Android 4.0 for Samsung Galaxy S2?

    june 11th at least thats what it says on their facebook page.

  • 102. Re: Android 4.0 for Samsung Galaxy S2?

    I am online with T-Mobile Support chat.

    from my chat:

     

    !Gingeraudrey D:  Thank you for waiting as per the information that I was able to get currently we are only supporting the software update 2.3.6 for Galaxy S II.

    !Gingeraudrey D:  Beginning May 21, the Samsung Galaxy S II will receive a necessary software update to Android version 2.3.6 / Software T989UVLDE to improve performance, stability and a Google Security fix. The software update will be available OTA and Kies after May 23. The update will continue until June 22.

    Patrick Fitzgerald:  So there is no official plan to upgrade this device, currently?

    !Gingeraudrey D:  We do not have any update yet as to when it will update to Android 4.0

     

    So the Android blogs and "experts" don't seem to know anything, really; and T-Mobile can't seem to understand how much this lack of communuication hurts their customer relationships.  They are letting outsiders control this important piece?!  Apple make every upgrade a marketing event.  Hey T-Mobile/Google, maybe take a lesson?!

    PO'd in Chicago

     

     


  • 103. Re: Android 4.0 for Samsung Galaxy S2?

    Look at the dilimena that this could cause.  Every company has individual departments that have individula roles and I'm sure T-Mobile Support has a job to fulfill and answering grapes about if an OS is coming out probably isn't one of them.  I'm pretty sure they can answer most questions about anything that is currently out pertaining to the devices and documentation they have available to them.  But to sit on the phone and babysit you until you get a warm and fuzzy just doesn't make sense.

    Then there is a the department in charge of "Official Press Releases".  Did you bother looking at where they do release such information?

    Ok I'll do it for you.

    https://twitter.com/TMobile/status/208634341948014592

  • 104. Re: Android 4.0 for Samsung Galaxy S2?

    http://www.facebook.com/TMobile

    Check the timeline.  I'm sure you're awere of how Facebook works right.

1 4 5 6 7 8 Previous Next