[ps4rh]

I just figured out why I kept getting pushed the 10.0.10.85 update: apparently if you remove certain apps (in my case, the Telus app, Box.net and/or Facebook, not sure which) it causes the OS update to be flagged for re-download.

Hopefully this helps someone if they have the same issue.

[jaleelhamid]

Yup u delete any pre installed app the the phone will tell u that there's a update just to put those apps back

Posted via CB10

[DetlevCM]

The same idiocy happens with O2 on 10.0.10.90 - most annoying. Vodafone is fine though... (I originally used the Vodafone Sim trick)

O2 was fine with 10.0.9.348 however BlackBerry Link was constantly reinstalling the OS without adding in the removed unneeded applications.

Nd to be honest why would I want them if I don't use them?

Posted via CB10

[WatFrog]

Same with Rogers: they keep pushing their crappy applications after you delete them. I have created a "Crapware" folder where I dump these useless junk apps and forget them there.

[LazyEvul]

Same issue on Telus here. Really annoying, I hope this stops happening after the next update.

Posted via CB10

[vpblaze]

Ditto here with my wife's Z10 on Rogers. Not impressed. Hopefully this gets sorted out. I hate having use less apps. I hate having useless icons and apps on my home screen even more.

Is this the carriers doing it or BBRY?

Posted via CB10

[Omnitech]

Same issue on Telus here. Really annoying, I hope this stops happening after the next update.

It's not going to stop, this is standard practice with cellphone carriers around the world, particularly the ones that heavily subsidize the hardware price of devices.

If you lived in India for example, where it is not permitted to bundle cell service with hardware and lock customers into contract in order to subsidize the hardware price, I'd bet that practice would be much rarer. Then again, the Z10 in India costs $800.

On the other hand, I think cellular service in India is about $15/month.

[LazyEvul]

It's not going to stop, this is standard practice with cellphone carriers around the world, particularly the ones that heavily subsidize the hardware price of devices.

If you lived in India for example, where it is not permitted to bundle cell service with hardware and lock customers into contract in order to subsidize the hardware price, I'd bet that practice would be much rarer. Then again, the Z10 in India costs $800.

On the other hand, I think cellular service in India is about $15/month.

Never heard of this "standard practice" occurring on any of my friends' devices. Also doesn't seem to make much sense to me for this to be a carrier-mandated thing... why would Telus care if I have LinkedIn, Foursquare, and a YouTube shortcut on my phone? I even opted to keep their My Account app on my phone. It seems more likely to be an issue on BlackBerry's end.

[Omnitech]

Never heard of this "standard practice" occurring on any of my friends' devices.

Carriers have been doing that for years. Common knowledge. If you don't believe me, go search years-old CB forum threads on the subject.

why would Telus care if I have LinkedIn, Foursquare, and a YouTube shortcut on my phone?

There are several possibilities. One is that they often receive revenue from companies when they promise their apps will appear on all the devices they sell. Two is that they want to make sure that certain popular things are available so people enjoy those things. When customers like the experience and they like the stuff that comes with the device, it's good for your business.

The most common examples are programs they put on there written by the carrier itself in order to wring more fees from users. As others have mentioned here AT&T has been known to block things like mapping programs to try to force customers to pay a monthly fee to use an AT&T mapping program. Verizon has done that for years too. Like AT&T, they have often strong-armed device vendors into crippling or disabling features because they saw those features as a threat to revenue. Mobile hotspot is one example. VoIP apps are another example. When Verizon starting installing a Skype app on their smartphones, there was a big hullabulloo about it because most carriers had never allowed such a thing, they viewed it as a mortal threat to their monthly voice plans. Etc etc etc etc etc.

[LazyEvul]

Carriers have been doing that for years. Common knowledge. If you don't believe me, go search years-old CB forum threads on the subject.

I've heard of them adding their own apps before, and sometimes pre-installing third-party apps. But never forcing third-party apps onto devices by bugging you with an OS update every time you remove them.

There are several possibilities. One is that they often receive revenue from companies when they promise their apps will appear on all the devices they sell. Two is that they want to make sure that certain popular things are available so people enjoy those things. When customers like the experience and they like the stuff that comes with the device, it's good for your business.

The most common examples are programs they put on there written by the carrier itself in order to wring more fees from users. As others have mentioned here AT&T has been known to block things like mapping programs to try to force customers to pay a monthly fee to use an AT&T mapping program. Verizon has done that for years too. Like AT&T, they have often strong-armed device vendors into crippling or disabling features because they saw those features as a threat to revenue. Mobile hotspot is one example. VoIP apps are another example. When Verizon starting installing a Skype app on their smartphones, there was a big hullabulloo about it because most carriers had never allowed such a thing, they viewed it as a mortal threat to their monthly voice plans. Etc etc etc etc etc.

Doesn't seem like a very plausible explanation to me for one simple reason - the apps, by all accounts, are the same across all carriers on the new update. Don't think that LinkedIn and Foursquare (and the others) have been paying off every carrier to offer the Z10 in the world, and I also doubt that they all uniformly decided that these apps are crucial to include.


Posted via CB10

[Omnitech]

I've heard of them adding their own apps before, and sometimes pre-installing third-party apps. But never forcing third-party apps onto devices by bugging you with an OS update every time you remove them.

Doesn't seem like a very plausible explanation to me for one simple reason - the apps, by all accounts, are the same across all carriers on the new update. Don't think that LinkedIn and Foursquare (and the others) have been paying off every carrier to offer the Z10 in the world, and I also doubt that they all uniformly decided that these apps are crucial to include.

I don't have any idea what you actually mean by "not plausible", unless I should just translate that to: "I don't like it".

There are a plethora of reasons why the vendors of ANY product want to present a particular "Out of box experience" to their users. I covered a few of the reasons. There are various others. The fact that certain customers don't like it has little to do with whether the carrier has their own reasons why they do it anyway.

Believe me, the carriers know a heck of a lot better than you or I whether including those things enhances or detracts from their ability to make money. If the whole world hated them for doing it and switched carriers over it, they wouldn't do it.

But all of the above is academic. The carriers do it. You can either try to find a carrier that doesn't (none of the major carriers in the USA would be in that list, same thing in Canada), move them into a folder and forget about it, or whine about it endlessly.

Given that there is no actual impact to anything else you do on the device due to the simple fact that the icons or software are just sitting there unused, I recommend option #2. It's just not worth the time or energy to get worked-up about.

[Bold_until_Hybrid_Comes]

I'm getting really sick of the apps that they portray that you can delete them (garbage can shows and allows you to delete). But you cannot really delete them as once you do the forced bloatware package download is pushed right to you again, it is a false sense of control when you "delete" them. Even worse is that when an update/newer version is available for those pushed bloatware, even the app is in a junk folder, you are forced to download the update. If you dismiss the alert for the update it will just come back again later too.

[DetlevCM]

I am currently thinking this would be a reason for a formal complaint...

And no, there is NO excuse for showering people with a constant re installation of application that the customer does not want.

Imagine Microsoft pushed out an Office trial to everybody every time they ran Windows Update - nobody would accept that. Why should in accept that my carrier wants to constantly spam me with application that I don't use it want to use? What's the point of foursquare on the first place? And why do they think I need a bookmark to YouTube on my app screen?

Fianally... I suppose I not be surprised as O2 is the company that tracks you to send you advertisement SMS based on your general location (phone mast) or, if you are stupid enough to install their "priority Moments" application who will track you via gps..


Posted via CB10

[darkehawke]

You can either try to find a carrier that doesn't (none of the major carriers in the USA would be in that list, same thing in Canada), move them into a folder and forget about it, or whine about it endlessly.

Given that there is no actual impact to anything else you do on the device due to the simple fact that the icons or software are just sitting there unused, I recommend option #2. It's just not worth the time or energy to get worked-up about.

i concur with option 2
I dont use twitter or linked in so i just moved it to the back of my app tray.
Better that then being bugged to update all the time.

[Omnitech]

Imagine Microsoft pushed out an Office trial to everybody every time they ran Windows Update - nobody would accept that.

I'm sure there are lots of people in this world that "would not accept" the parts of Microsoft Windows (ie "Genuine Advantage") that are designed to prevent people from pirating the software and using it illegally.

But Microsoft is fully within their rights to require users of their product to keep those parts intact, because that is Microsoft's way of preventing piracy. It's all in the license agreement you implicitly agree with when you open the package or turn on the computer for the first time.

Whether or not someone "likes" it is immaterial. No one is forcing you to buy a Blackberry, no one is forcing you to use the cellular carrier you use, nor to have a smartphone at all.

Sure, you can complain. But I'm pretty sure that if it weren't the case that most of their customers simply do not care, they wouldn't keep doing it. Sometimes people complain and eventually the vendor makes changes to make them more happy. Feel free to complain. Just don't be surprised if it doesn't accomplish much.

And if it weren't for the fact that it ultimately doesn't have an impact on anything else you do with the device, I might not have such a laissez-faire attitude about it. But it doesn't. Make a folder, stick the icons in there, then do something more productive with that time/energy.

[DetlevCM]

I'm sure there are lots of people in this world that "would not accept" the parts of Microsoft Windows (ie "Genuine Advantage") that are designed to prevent people from pirating the software and using it illegally.

But Microsoft is fully within their rights to require users of their product to keep those parts intact, because that is Microsoft's way of preventing piracy. It's all in the license agreement you implicitly agree with when you open the package or turn on the computer for the first time.

Whether or not someone "likes" it is immaterial. No one is forcing you to buy a Blackberry, no one is forcing you to use the cellular carrier you use, nor to have a smartphone at all.

Sure, you can complain. But I'm pretty sure that if it weren't the case that most of their customers simply do not care, they wouldn't keep doing it. Sometimes people complain and eventually the vendor makes changes to make them more happy. Feel free to complain. Just don't be surprised if it doesn't accomplish much.

And if it weren't for the fact that it ultimately doesn't have an impact on anything else you do with the device, I might not have such a laissez-faire attitude about it. But it doesn't. Make a folder, stick the icons in there, then do something more productive with that time/energy.

What has that got to do with anything? Microsoft just says they will only support genuine software - and they use a software utility to verify your software is genuine.
That's it. You can not install it if you want, you can remove genuine advantage and then you will not get any updates
I cannot see a problem there. Similar to a bank only paying out money to people with a bank card and not just any customer coming in and saying " I am so and so".

What is happening here is that some carriers are taking the liberty to force applications onto uses who have chosen to remove them. THAT is something very different.
It also has absolutely nothing to do with BlackBerry as for example Vodafone aren't as arrogant as O2 in this respect. They accept a customer's decision and will let you uninstall an application you do not wish to have on your phone. I can no see how this is very hard to see.

Anyway... I have queried O2 via Twitter, let's see what comes from it.
An do, I don't want an additional folder with rubbish in it. If I consider something to be rubbish I bin it and dispose of it - by the way, that's why you can uninstall Internet explorer nowadays - something g the EU pushed through. If I chose not to run a third party application, then I should not have it forced onto me continously.

Posted via CB10

[DetlevCM]

Oh, and one more point: accepting what is bad generally only leads to a race to the bottom. Problems must be pointed out because only then is there a chance of the situation improving.

Posted via CB10

[Omnitech]

Have fun with that crusade of yours.

[DetlevCM]

Have fun with that crusade of yours.

Well, lets see what happens. But I object to being forced to accept junk.

[DetlevCM]

Ok, O2 replied via Twitter let's see where this goes.

And Vodafone behaves the same now..

Posted via CB10

[DetlevCM]

Got another reply from O2 - they said it is how it designed and hopefully an update will be out soon...

Posted via CB10

[mwells45]

It's not cool that's for sure. They shouldn't dictate what I have on my BlackBerry. Eff you Rogers and the like.

Posted via CB10

[LazyEvul]

I don't have any idea what you actually mean by "not plausible", unless I should just translate that to: "I don't like it".

There are a plethora of reasons why the vendors of ANY product want to present a particular "Out of box experience" to their users. I covered a few of the reasons. There are various others. The fact that certain customers don't like it has little to do with whether the carrier has their own reasons why they do it anyway.

Believe me, the carriers know a heck of a lot better than you or I whether including those things enhances or detracts from their ability to make money. If the whole world hated them for doing it and switched carriers over it, they wouldn't do it.

But all of the above is academic. The carriers do it. You can either try to find a carrier that doesn't (none of the major carriers in the USA would be in that list, same thing in Canada), move them into a folder and forget about it, or whine about it endlessly.

Given that there is no actual impact to anything else you do on the device due to the simple fact that the icons or software are just sitting there unused, I recommend option #2. It's just not worth the time or energy to get worked-up about.

I think the point of my post flew right over your head: it doesn't seem plausible because it seems extremely unlikely for every single carrier to have the Z10 to agree on the exact same bloatware. Customers in different regions are all different, it just makes no sense at all. Plus, this wasn't occurring on the first version of the OS - are you seriously suggesting they all, at the exact same time, decided on the exact same bloatware for just one of the phones they sell, after previously having none at all on the same phone? Extremely unlikely. That's why I think this is something BlackBerry messed up, it would explain why it's uniform across all carriers. I'm just hoping it was an accident and can be fixed.


Posted via CB10

[Omnitech]

I think the point of my post flew right over your head: it doesn't seem plausible because it seems extremely unlikely for every single carrier to have the Z10 to agree on the exact same bloatware.

You don't think it's plausible, I do.

Specifically: there are only a handful of "major" apps available on BB10 right now. Foursquare is one of them, LinkedIn is another. (and is built-in right at the core of the OS because it's an integral part of the Hub)

So the fact that more than one carrier might have those things on there (assuming they are not actually built into the core OS like LinkedIn, Twitter and Facebook are) is more likely to be simply because there just aren't that many "major headline" apps available for BB10, and because either Blackberry or your carrier rightly believe that most people in fact do want them on there. And they're probably right. So to keep a consistent user-interface and user-experience, they want them to stay there. You can't expect to remove one spark-plug from your car's motor and expect it to run properly either - the manufacturer put it there because it's part of the design that they built and you chose to buy from them.

[DetlevCM]

You don't think it's plausible, I do.

Specifically: there are only a handful of "major" apps available on BB10 right now. Foursquare is one of them, LinkedIn is another. (and is built-in right at the core of the OS because it's an integral part of the Hub)

So the fact that more than one carrier might have those things on there (assuming they are not actually built into the core OS like LinkedIn, Twitter and Facebook are) is more likely to be simply because there just aren't that many "major headline" apps available for BB10, and because either Blackberry or your carrier rightly believe that most people in fact do want them on there. And they're probably right. So to keep a consistent user-interface and user-experience, they want them to stay there. You can't expect to remove one spark-plug from your car's motor and expect it to run properly either - the manufacturer put it there because it's part of the design that they built and you chose to buy from them.

That analogy does not really work. And it misses the point.
The carriers have ZERO right to assume a user wants to do a certain "thing" with their phone.
Now if these applications are added in every major OS update then its maybe slightly annoying but fine - acceptable.
The fact that they are pushed out constantly is the issue.

Now coming back to integration: Assuming BlackBerry have done their job properly, there is some API for applications that access the Hub which makes is perfectly reasonable to remove an application.
In fact, if they did their job properly, then "on the surface", the Hub should treat Twitter, LinkedIn and an Imap or POP email account exactly in the same way - all the hub does is collect the messages and present them in a single interface. The actual service specific aspects should be in the application - and then even if support is baked into the OS, they are not vital to run it. In fact, I would be very surprised if they cannot be removed - at least facebook and twitter are a company's worst nightmare more often than not. -> I am sure you can remove them from the business side using BlackBerry Balance, so why not the consumer side?

And finally - a good OS should be as modular as possible as long as it does not affect performance significantly. Adding to the fact that QNX is focused around everything being modular, I would be surprised if BlackBerry have been so stupid as to make the Hub non-modular.