[DoktorFace]

I'm a prisoner of Verizon, I have no choice but to depend on the carrier. I'm used to them screwing things up for me though so I just created a level of contentment to avoid heartburn.

Posted via the CrackBerry App for Android

[misterabrasive]

I'm a prisoner of Verizon, I have no choice but to depend on the carrier. I'm used to them screwing things up for me though so I just created a level of contentment to avoid heartburn.

Posted via the CrackBerry App for Android

I guess you could look at it that way, but I choose to be a 'prisoner'. I don't mind buying my phones from them and although I would prefer more timely updates, they have certainly been better lately. Great attitude about your contentment.

[raino]

iOS still goes thru certification process on carriers but its probably much quicker and more behind the scenes

I highly, highly doubt that Apple gets carriers to test and approve OSes in a timely fashion for global launches (full of bugs.)

[Jimberry Storm]

There's not much to do about American carriers without lighting people on fire.

Well said! If only there were good alternatives here, they do keep nipping at each others heels and things are improving very, very, very slightly. In their adds they all say terible thing about each other.....but its all correct

[Branta]

In my case, I bought the discounted AT&T carrier unlocked phone based on a chat message from support that said MM updates were forthcoming. That was false and so now I am stuck with the think. Had I been told the truth, I would have paid the $50 more for a factory unlocked unit.

You mean you purchased as a result of electronic messaging? Did you also buy remotely, to be shipped to you? Does anyone know the formal definitions for "mail fraud" or "wire fraud"?

[Wezard]

Correct me if i am wrong, but once blackberry releases MM to AT&T branded Unlocked phones shouldn't any at&t phone be able to use the same OS locked or unlocked? its the same hardware. will we be able to use an autoloader like we did in the past with OS10


Could this be a way blackberry will get around having to go through the carriers.

It's the same hardware, but the firmware is very specific to AT&T, (and other carriers). So it's not the same device.
BB had to cut some kind of deal with AT&T to get them to carry the Priv, that deal included the OS with all of AT&T's spy and bloatware. I'm sure the contract also included testing and update procedures.

In order to avoid breaking contract, (think breach of contract lawsuits) and leave AT&T willing to carry possible future devices, BB is going have to tiptoe very carefully. They are going to have to figure out some way to update the 'abandoned' AT&T devices, while not leaving the option for updating any device that has any sort of carrier contract or subsidies. And do this with AT&T's approval.

Obviously some of the above is conjecture, I don't have any inside information.

[BergerKing]

Huzzah!

[Wezard]

Possibly more accurate

[Elephant_Canyon]

I highly, highly doubt that Apple gets carriers to test and approve OSes in a timely fashion for global launches (full of bugs.)

I highly, highly doubt you know much about either the parameters of carrier testing or the actual extent of iOS issues.

[raino]

I highly, highly doubt you know much about either the parameters of carrier testing or the actual extent of iOS issues.

Why don't you enlighten me and others then. Please tell us how much carrier testing went into the 6.1 release that killed 3G and had at least two carriers pleading with their customers to not install the update?

Or the WiFi issues that were plaguing iPhones/iPads on 7.1.2? How many sets of carrier partner eyeballs missed that? Or just the general cluster****s that were iOS 7.0.x?

Or that 8.0.1 update where calls were getting dropped--how many carriers...you know, companies in the business of providing the ability to place phone calls on the go--missed that?

Or the lovely Error 53. How many of Apple's valued global partners signed off on the bricking of carrier-sold devices?

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

It's the same hardware, but the firmware is very specific to AT&T, (and other carriers). So it's not the same device.
BB had to cut some kind of deal with AT&T to get them to carry the Priv, that deal included the OS with all of AT&T's spy and bloatware. I'm sure the contract also included testing and update procedures.

In order to avoid breaking contract, (think breach of contract lawsuits) and leave AT&T willing to carry possible future devices, BB is going have to tiptoe very carefully. They are going to have to figure out some way to update the 'abandoned' AT&T devices, while not leaving the option for updating any device that has any sort of carrier contract or subsidies. And do this with AT&T's approval.

Obviously some of the above is conjecture, I don't have any inside information.

It's all about the current contracts....

Think BlackBerry could tiptoe all day long and AT&T wouldn't carry another BlackBerry device in their line up. But it sounds as if BlackBerry would "like" to bypass the retailers anyway....

The FTC and FCC are looking at Carrier and their update process... FTC, FCC want to know more about how carriers and manufacturers issue security updates | Android Central. I think eventually we will see things change for Android. Maybe Google pushes out updates for key Android components & security updates via Google Play. Then manufactures could also update their drivers and apps via Google Play. Leaving the Carriers to push out the radios settings and their own apps... Maybe one day.

[Elephant_Canyon]

Why don't you enlighten me and others then.

Please quote where I said that I knew. I don't. But it's clear you don't, either.

Please tell us how much carrier testing went into the 6.1 release that killed 3G and had at least two carriers pleading with their customers to not install the update?

Or the WiFi issues that were plaguing iPhones/iPads on 7.1.2? How many sets of carrier partner eyeballs missed that? Or just the general cluster****s that were iOS 7.0.x?

Or that 8.0.1 update where calls were getting dropped--how many carriers...you know, companies in the business of providing the ability to place phone calls on the go--missed that?

Or the lovely Error 53. How many of Apple's valued global partners signed off on the bricking of carrier-sold devices?

Breaking news! Software has bugs! Film at 11! How many Blackberry phones were plagued by double-typing issues for years (years!)?

Please link to any article or study which describes how much of the userbase was affected by these issues. It's easy to miss something if it only affects an isolated group of devices (or, in the case of Error 53, devices that were modified by third parties in a way that voids the warranty).

[JG_Agustin]

Guys, it seems AT&T is finally releasing the Beta: http://forums.crackberry.com/showthread.php?t=1076781

I don't have an AT&T active SIM, nor I'm a Beta tester, but these are at least some good news.

Hopefully BlackBerry will announce a solution for all the unlocked AT&T branded PRIVs to be updated. Or at least, it would seem that an autoloader will be made available soon after AT&T releases the official update...

Posted with my powerful and masterful  Passport!

[raino]

Please quote where I said that I knew. I don't.

So you had nothing substantive to add when you replied to me. Got it. Thanks for playing.

Breaking news! Software has bugs! Film at 11!

But the more eyeballs that look for bugs, the higher the likelihood of catching them before general release; given that Apple does everything on its own schedule including releasing updates when it wants to, it's very difficult to believe they involve carriers to any significant degree. That was my point.

Why would two European carriers have approved 6.1 during testing, only to then beg their 4s owners to not install it?

And no carrier caught the "bugs" in 8.0.1 that killed cellphone service? You guys like to brag how many iPhones are sold, including through carrier partners; none of them saw this happen?

It's easy to miss something if it only affects an isolated group of devices (or, in the case of Error 53, devices that we modified by third parties in a way that voids the warranty).

Isolated enough that Apple issued and pushed global fixes? They mobilize, diagnose and issue fixes that quickly for "isolated" cases?

And did you just justify Error 53, despite Apple fixing it and apologizing for it?

[Elephant_Canyon]

[a lot of smoke and blowing stuff out of proportion]

Seems to me you completely missed the point. Please explain in detail the technical parameters of "carrier testing." You probably can't, because you don't know what, exactly, the carriers are testing. You could probably do research and find out, but it's easier just to be lazy and complain about Apple.

Also, just because a bug only affects a small number of users doesn't mean it should be ignored by the manufacturer. It's still a software flaw, and should be fixed. And tangentially, a tiny handful of people complaining on the internet can seem like a much larger proportion of users, because people who are happy with their experience will mostly stay silent, and news organizations will report flaws and drama because people like drama. As a Blackberry fan, you should be acutely aware of this, considering all the bad press Blackberry has received in the past several years.

And did you just justify Error 53, despite Apple fixing it and apologizing for it?

No, I didn't "justify" it. It was a real problem, and it was promptly fixed (again, unlike double typing on Blackberries). But do you think carriers were going to specifically create test units with third-party home buttons installed (which, again, is unsupported and voids the device's warranty), just to test software updates? Because that's just a laughable scenario. So no, I'm not justifying the error. I am, however, justifying the lack of testing for it by wireless carriers, because they don't employ psychics to predict the future.

[jberb1984]

You did it! AT&T beta now available. Thanks.

Curve8300 - Curve9220 - Torch9850 - Z10 - Priv

[raino]

Seems to me you completely missed the point. Please explain in detail the technical parameters of "carrier testing." You probably can't, because you don't know what, exactly, the carriers are testing. You could probably do research and find out, but it's easier just to be lazy and complain about Apple.

And you know enough to absolve Apple of non-cooperation with carriers? When at least two in the past have gone on the record telling their customers to not install an update they supposedly tested?

No, I didn't "justify" it. It was a real problem, and it was promptly fixed (again, unlike double typing on Blackberries).

LOL. You unsurprisingly seem to have a very interesting definition of "prompt." Is prompt denying at first that it was a problem (a rehash of "you're holding it wrong" in the form of "it's only for your security?") Or is prompt doing a complete 180 in face of a class action lawsuit?

[jgrobertson]

They are under no obligation to release the MM update at all. FTC isnt going to do squat.

A legal test is "suitability for intended purpose." AT&T can't block BB from providing updates directly without getting into legal trouble eventually. It is a matter of time.

[KNEBB]

Reason being is that; in business as is in life, Predators go for the easiest prey, verses something known to defend itself and put up a fight.

What's that saying; "when threaten make yourself appear larger", less of an easy target. And with more consumers doing so (making their numbers appearing larger), may make businesses think harder about the business risks involved, and governments more aware that their constituencies are paying attention.
It keeps everyone more honest.

But, the risk associated with not acting is that other Predators (businesses) will begin to classify those like you as fair game. And then you've always will have to watch your back, from all sides.

Sometimes you have to be willing to stand your ground and fight the Bully once. Or be willing to give up your lunch money, evertime they see you.

Posted via CB10

[Wezard]

A legal test is "suitability for intended purpose." AT&T can't block BB from providing updates directly without getting into legal trouble eventually. It is a matter of time.

That might apply to security updates, but not to OS updates.

KNEEB also has a point, if the carriers and govt get enough complaints, both will take notice. A steady increase, or a sharp but small increase in the number of complaints will have the same effect.

I'm going to guess that the complaints would need to be over 5% of the base. Any steady and consistent increase in #'s, regardless of %, would establish a trend and that would also cause businesses and govt to become concerned.

Is your or my complaint going to make any difference? No. If everybody on CB with a carrier Priv did? Still no, but other sites and those with other phone brands might take notice. A few of them might start filing official complaints, and the lack of timely security updates is a serious issue. Since both FTC and FCC are currently investigating updates, even though it's an informal investigation, now is the time to do it.

I know for a fact that complaining amongst ourselves is going to accomplish nothing.
If you are going to complain, make it official. Maybe, just maybe it will have some effect.

[FishhPoohh]

Can I ask AT&T folk here whether a June 2016 security patch has been issued?

Because mine says May, and I'm not sure if there's just something wrong with OTA from my device's end, or if AT&T is now withholding security patch updates, the latter of which might be a better case to present to the FTC and the FTC.

It is a security concern after all.

Attachment 402016

Posted via the CrackBerry App for Android

You'll probably get the June update with the release of marshmallow

Posted via the CrackBerry App for Android

[anon(9940776)]

-.-

[ToniCipriani]

An easier solution for those with 600 is to buy one direct from blackberry. It'll either come with the update, or will update soon after you swap the SIM.

A lot more satisfying than telling nanny government that you messed up.

Not an option for those with terrible coverage on the GSM carriers and require Verizon or Sprint.

[dpeters11]

Even if the carriers released every fix and Google patched everything on their end, there would still be significant vulnerabilities as that doesn't touch the extremely primitive baseband software. The thing even accepts the Hayes command set.

[conite]

Even if the carriers released every fix and Google patched everything on their end, there would still be significant vulnerabilities as that doesn't touch the extremely primitive baseband software. The thing even accepts the Hayes command set.

That's why the BlackBerry OS integrity tests on boot and DTek are so valuable. Since android can't be made perfectly secure, you can at least recognise when it's been compromised. Then you can do a device restore, and BES will lock you out until you do.