- CrackBerry Abuser
- 352 Posts
- 0 Post(s)
- 0 Thread(s)
Why OS Updates carrier controlled and not BlackBerry?
I'm sorry if already mentioned but I'm baffled. On EE UK n still no OS update made me query why blackberry didn't adopt apples approach to updating their devices? Is it more expensive rather than just providing a "file" so to speak to carriers for them to release at their convenience?
Any insight would be great.
Posted via CB10
- 03-06-13, 12:26 PM #3
Apple has the clout and the $$$ to enforce that. Other manufacturers like the extra revenue they get from the carriers paying them to load on undeletable bloatware. And the carriers wouldn't like it if a new OS broke their bloatware so they need to do "testing" as well...
For Androids, carrier-controlled updates = device obsolescence = make people buy new devices. Of course, with more and more people taking the custom ROM approach, that's not working out as well as the carriers would like...
BB isn't in a great financial position right now so they have no choice but to listen to the carriers if they want the carriers to push their product.
- 03-06-13, 01:29 PM #4
(1) Apple doesn't have full OS update capability --- AT&T blocking Facetime is an example.
(2) BB10 is so immature that any update is going to touch on bugs/improvements on cell phone calls, SMS, MMS, blackberry bridge, BBM video --- which all requires carrier approvals.
- 03-06-13, 05:49 PM #5
For AT&T the answer is simple.
AT&T is like a communist dictator and they want to restrict your use of the OS as AT&T sees fit and then add their own bloatware.
BBMaps - hidden for years by AT&T with their reps telling you that your only choice for navigation is their AT&T Nav app and service for $10/month
BB Bridge - restricting the use of the bridge app in an attempt to make you pay $10/month for Hotspot service
Bloatware - AT&T Family App, myAT&T, AT&T Code Scanner, CityID, YPmobile, AT&T AppCenter, Wikitude, TheWeather Channel (all of these sit in my JUNK folder)
Blackberry builds the technology and AT&T tares it down at your expense for their own gain.
- CrackBerry User
03-07-13, 01:58 PM #6
- 17 Posts
- 0 Post(s)
- 0 Thread(s)
I hope this does change for the better, and give more control to us users. However carriers have different requirements in terms of low-level modem code which I believe is different in their release builds.. IF they could separate this, and issue core OS release updates to all, it would speed the update process. Nothing worse than some carriers release updates days/weeks/months after
- 03-07-13, 08:39 PM #7
In theory, you can separate the radio code from the general code and release updates to the general code that don't touch the radio code.
In practice, carriers have a vested interest in ensuring a minimally reliable/functional environment on the devices they put their name on, to ensure their customers have a decent quality experience. Same reason why no carrier in their right mind is going to sell a garbage device that is going to make the carrier look bad and sour people on their service.
Neither is AT&T by any stretch of the imagination the only one that puts restrictions on functionality. Verizon has been infamous for that as well, and I guarantee you carriers around the world are probably not that different. (Be glad you're not using etisalat in the Middle East, who in 2009 made headlines for being caught installing spyware on its users Blackberry devices in the UAE in order to snoop on their activity.)
But I think there can be a better balance of interests than what is typically the case today. Apple is the only phone vendor that pushed back significantly on the carriers, and they were able to do that because they were coming from a position of strength in that relationship. They did the same thing with device subsidies. But most vendors (including Blackberry, for the moment) are not in the kind of position to successfully pull that off.
Then again, there are some hopeful signs. The recent reversion back to the bad old days in the USA where it was prohibited to unlock a phone, caught the attention of the Obama administration and it looks like the White House is going to make a case on the side of the users right to unlock their devices if they desire to.
We could use some more movement in that direction.
- 03-07-13, 08:43 PM #8
And BTW - much to RIM's credit - they took a dim view of what Etisalat did and actually offered a tool that users could use to remove the spyware.
Etisalat BlackBerry update was indeed spyware, RIM provides a solution
BlackBerry update bursting with spyware ? The Register
- 03-07-13, 11:21 PM #9
I'm kind of disappointed by the choice Blackberry has done with the updates.
I live in a country where Blackberry userbase is pretty much non-existent. There is only one little operator that sells BB phones, and the three biggest operators don't and will not sell these in foreseeable future.
So I guess I'm out of luck with getting updates to my FACTORY UNLOCKED Z10 which I bought from UK (I live in Finland myself). Havent received any updates yet, and it seems that now if the carriers really do control these, there is no way i'm getting the updates because my carrier doesn't even sell these phones.
I guess it's time to part ways with the Z10...
- CrackBerry Genius
03-07-13, 11:26 PM #10
- 1,695 Posts
- 0 Post(s)
- 0 Thread(s)
- Available upon request.
samab is right. BB10 is too young for updates not to touch radio stacks and aspects of the phone that interact with the network.
As the OS matures, BlackBerry will have more control over updates.
iOS has this freedom since it's primarily been the same OS for the last 6 years.
Last edited by AVPTI; 03-07-13 at 11:31 PM. Reason: clarity
- 03-08-13, 01:00 AM #11
If you had looked around you can find various threads here discussing ways to make it work without your carrier being involved, in fact I believe CB posted an article about this a couple days ago.
What a lot of people are doing is temporarily installing a SIM card from one of the carriers that already pushed the update. Even if it's an unprovisioned card, it will trigger the update since the updates are associated with a particular carrier, you can use that to get the update via WiFi.
But remember that since you bought the device "unsupported" by your carrier, YOU have to be the one that figures out if something is going to be safe to install or not, the carrier will wash their hands of it if you have a problem.
In particular, there is an SMTP bug with recent Z10 firmware releases, and if you are currently using an email configuration that specifies a particular server for outgoing SMTP (especially if it's authenticated SMTP over port 587, I am told), your outgoing email will BREAK.
So if you're in Europe and you know which variation of Z10 you have, and you know which countries are shipping that same version, then you can take the risk of installing that update using the method I described, using a SIM from a carrier that serves ie UK, France, Germany, etc.
- 03-08-13, 01:16 AM #13
- 03-08-13, 01:27 AM #14
As I said, the three biggest carriers here don't even sell / support blackberry, it's just one little tiny carrier (which in fact is a virtual carrier who uses network from one of the "Big Three"), so I would guess that If one of the big three got a notification of the update, and when they don't sell the BB phones they wouldn't care about it and propably would deny the update).
But I don't know how this works The main thing is that the phone is now (slowly) updating
- By bb.pl in forum BlackBerry PlayBookReplies: 30Last Post: 01-07-12, 06:55 AM
- By cal2okl in forum BlackBerry Bold 9000Replies: 7Last Post: 10-23-09, 09:58 PM
- By brianteel in forum Storm OS DiscussionReplies: 2Last Post: 03-24-09, 09:58 AM
- By WJF84 in forum Storm OS DiscussionReplies: 13Last Post: 02-05-09, 11:48 AM
- By rollingstone in forum Mac UsersReplies: 3Last Post: 01-29-08, 10:18 PM