Sign up now for Disney+
  1. LostOnThePianoRoll's Avatar
    Apparently it's still all in the carrier's hands

    BlackBerry OS 10.2.1 Update is Subject to Carrier Approval - N4BB

    Such a pity really... while I'm on a relatively fast carrier "Vodafone" but still.. it means any dev planning to update their app in BlackBerry World to 10.21 will have to wait.. and if he does the jump users who didn't get the update are gonna flame him for ditching them...

    The troubles are never ending...

    Posted via CB10 on my Z10STL100-1/10.2.1.1055
    01-24-14 12:35 AM
  2. jj482's Avatar
    God they should just circumvent them and publish a download. Make it a little harder for the average Joe, but don't make it to hard for your fans.

    PS I use Sachesi myself

    Posted via CB10
    01-24-14 12:42 AM
  3. BigBadWulf's Avatar
    I can understand the hope, but not why anyone would expect it actually happen.
    01-24-14 12:42 AM
  4. FlashFlare11's Avatar
    Was going to post this on the other thread, but it can be discussed here. Just a little theory.

    It seems that this rumor has, for the most part, been debunked. Michael Clewley even stated (on Twitter, I think) that 10.2.1 has been submitted to carriers for testing and was done so quite a while ago. It is a shame as I'm sure many of us (especially us in the States) have been hoping for BlackBerry to simply bypass the carriers and release software updates on its own timetable.

    Anyway, even though it doesn't mean much anymore, I had a small theory that could've added some credence to this rumor. I'll share it simply to see if it could be possible in the future and to simply spur discussion:

    I thought it was quite interesting BlackBerry was holding a press event for a release in very much the vein as 10.1 MR (a maintenance release for minor fixes/additions, if you will), albeit with some more significant additions (like the new Android Runtime supporting direct .apk installation, Picture Password, etc.). Still, despite those additions, from the numbering of the release, it's clear that this isn't intended to be a major release like 10.1 and 10.2 were. BlackBerry had developer events for 10.1 and 10.2, but not really an event strictly dedicated to showcasing the new features of the software. I've heard complaints that BlackBerry should be more vocal about each and every OS release, and I don't disagree. However, I think they were putting quite a bit behind this particular release.

    More intriguing than that, however, is that we have a press event with the software releasing a week afterward. This appears very strange to me. I mean, clearly, 10.2.1 is ready to be released. It's a software update. There's no need to hold it back any longer than necessary if it is ready to be released (if BlackBerry were pushing this update itself). Even if BlackBerry wanted to hold a press event showcasing the new features, it could've done so on the day of the release, after release, or even a day before the release. I didn't see the need for a week, not for a software update (and one as minor as this one). However, I realized that we are approaching a major milestone for BlackBerry; the BlackBerry 10 launch. I had considered the possibility that whatever contractual agreement BlackBerry had with carriers regarding BlackBerry 10 software was drawn for one year and was due to expire sometime between the press event and January 28 (the rumored drop date) and, once freed from the contract, BlackBerry could push update itself.

    Now, I don't know if such a contract exists, the duration of the terms, and whether BlackBerry would be (theoretically) free to push the update once freed from the contract. Anyway, the point is moot now that we know 10.2.1 will come from the carriers.

    However, Bla1ze (or anyone with knowledge on the matter), is this a valid reasoning? Could it happen in the future? I'd love to hear what you think about it!
    LostOnThePianoRoll likes this.
    01-24-14 12:44 AM
  5. John Vieira's Avatar
    Maybe it was the theory that this was possible after 10.2.1

    Somehow some switch got turned on to push the next update from BlackBerry itself, and 10.2.1 would still have to be approved.

    US carriers could use this as a way to lean against blackberry, never even pushing this out.

    However, that's pretty stupid, I'm pretty sure that BlackBerry had the power to push updates the whole time.

    via Z30 10.3.0.1337
    FlashFlare11 likes this.
    01-24-14 12:47 AM
  6. BigBadWulf's Avatar
    BlackBerry needs the carrier's support, if they have any chance of succeeding. They constantly request modifications when testing BlackBerry OS. Getting them to concede control at this point, is relatively impossible imo.

    Interesting theory, none the same.
    FlashFlare11 likes this.
    01-24-14 12:52 AM
  7. FlashFlare11's Avatar
    Thank you!

    From a technical standpoint, with the way BlackBerry 10 segments the radio files from core system files, BlackBerry really shouldn't have to submit software updates to the carriers for approval since the components that deal with the device's relation to the carrier aren't being affected. The carriers (thankfully) aren't totally loading up our devices with their bloatware either. It makes me wonder whether this process of carrier testing is archaic. I realized it was a necessity with the legacy OS, but with modern operating systems it appears this should be a thing of the past.

    It simply seems that BlackBerry is ceding too much for too little in return.
    vaioman likes this.
    01-24-14 01:06 AM
  8. LostOnThePianoRoll's Avatar
    Interesting points... and about BlackBerry needing the carrier's support to live, that is not true everywhere.. here in Egypt there's no such thing as a phone with contract. If you want to upgrade, you go to a shop and buy your phone outright ( I payed the equivalent of 724$ for my Z10 in march).. it may seem like we in the developing countries would need that kind of support to get more reasonable prices for upgrades Lol

    That is not an option here so the carrier is simply a call/data provider...

    Even if you buy the phone locked through the carrier's shop you pay full price ( sometimes around 50-60$ more expensive).. so to heck the carriers for all I care

    Posted via CB10 on my Z10STL100-1/10.2.1.1055
    Last edited by BigBadWulf; 01-24-14 at 07:33 AM. Reason: language
    01-24-14 02:36 AM
  9. Fya_Fly's Avatar
    I say start writing emails to the CEO of each network, if they are bugged enough I reckon there will b a shift

    Posted via CB10
    01-24-14 03:12 AM
  10. Barljo's Avatar
    I think that this may be a clever move.

    BBRY: "Hey everyone, our new software update released today".
    Consumers "I'll check for that then... hang on, no update?"
    Consumers: "Hey carrier, where's this update that BBRY released? What gives?"

    Obviously the weight of that discussion is highly dependant on the number of consumers, but eventually the carriers may well see the demand and start paying attention.

    I know that this is a very simplistic view, but maybe that's what BBRY are hoping for.
    01-24-14 06:41 AM
  11. habs_fan's Avatar
    Geez that's what I have been saying in all the other threads lol

    Here http://forums.crackberry.com/showthread.php?t=896211 I said this

    I think it means what they did with 10.2 it was a global update on a day, there was a ton of different carriers globally that got 10.2 around the world, all of Canada but none of the state's. But other countries got it as well. I think it just means a rollout and carriers will update when ready as per normal

    Posted via CB10
    Or here http://forums.crackberry.com/showthread.php?t=895938


    I think people are taking too much out of the "global launch" I think they mean like they did with 10.2 where most carriers world wide released it on the same day but some didn't like US I still think it's in the hand of the carrier

    Posted via CB10
    See I'm not a dumb as I look







    Posted via CB10
    BigBadWulf likes this.
    01-24-14 06:49 AM
  12. David Murray1's Avatar
    Gimme gimme gimme - my Z10 is malfunctioning and behaving like a beta device and I am craving a good stable OS that works properly. Let's hope, a year on from the launch of the public beta, OS 10 is finally worth using.
    01-24-14 06:53 AM
  13. BigBadWulf's Avatar
    Thank you!

    From a technical standpoint, with the way BlackBerry 10 segments the radio files from core system files, BlackBerry really shouldn't have to submit software updates to the carriers for approval since the components that deal with the device's relation to the carrier aren't being affected. The carriers (thankfully) aren't totally loading up our devices with their bloatware either. It makes me wonder whether this process of carrier testing is archaic. I realized it was a necessity with the legacy OS, but with modern operating systems it appears this should be a thing of the past.

    It simply seems that BlackBerry is ceding too much for too little in return.
    To my knowledge they're still very interested in testing. I'd like a more detailed explanation as to why you think this pedantic.
    01-24-14 07:29 AM
  14. trsbbs's Avatar
    BlackBerry needs the carrier's support, if they have any chance of succeeding. They constantly request modifications when testing BlackBerry OS. Getting them to concede control at this point, is relatively impossible imo.

    Interesting theory, none the same.
    Why the bold font?

    CB10 via Verizon Z10. 10.2.1.1925
    01-24-14 08:29 AM
  15. BigBadWulf's Avatar
    Why the bold font?

    CB10 via Verizon Z10. 10.2.1.1925
    All these years, and you just noticed?

    Why the off topic question?
    kbz1960, Barljo and Pdinos3 like this.
    01-24-14 08:35 AM
  16. MobileMadness002's Avatar
    Some glad for leaks, let those scared timid wait while we enjoy the fruits of 10.2.1.1925.

    I have not used a carrier OS for more than 30 minutes on ANY of my BlackBerry devices.
    01-24-14 08:37 AM
  17. kbz1960's Avatar
    I knew it was too good to be true. Half empty here.
    01-24-14 08:44 AM
  18. Uzi's Avatar
    All these years, and you just noticed?

    Why the off topic question?
    I know the reason you have posted before

    Posted via CB10
    01-24-14 08:47 AM
  19. Richard Buckley's Avatar
    Thank you!

    From a technical standpoint, with the way BlackBerry 10 segments the radio files from core system files, BlackBerry really shouldn't have to submit software updates to the carriers for approval since the components that deal with the device's relation to the carrier aren't being affected. The carriers (thankfully) aren't totally loading up our devices with their bloatware either. It makes me wonder whether this process of carrier testing is archaic. I realized it was a necessity with the legacy OS, but with modern operating systems it appears this should be a thing of the past.

    It simply seems that BlackBerry is ceding too much for too little in return.
    Many have said this. Unfortunately this point of view ignores the fact that the carriers are the first line support for the whole OS.

    Posted via CB10
    01-24-14 12:36 PM
  20. guygardner73's Avatar
    Apparently it's still all in the carrier's hands

    BlackBerry OS 10.2.1 Update is Subject to Carrier Approval - N4BB

    Such a pity really... while I'm on a relatively fast carrier "Vodafone" but still.. it means any dev planning to update their app in BlackBerry World to 10.21 will have to wait.. and if he does the jump users who didn't get the update are gonna flame him for ditching them...

    The troubles are never ending...

    Posted via CB10 on my Z10STL100-1/10.2.1.1055
    Devs have had the update for a while and BlackBerry world is capable of having many different versions of the same app and will detect what OS version you have and offer the correct apo version for you.

    Z10STL100-2/10.2.1.1925 O2 UK
    01-25-14 02:53 AM
  21. FlashFlare11's Avatar
    To my knowledge they're still very interested in testing. I'd like a more detailed explanation as to why you think this pedantic.
    In my opinion, the power of the carriers (especially in the United States) needs to be scaled down. They provide the network service for the devices that are produced by the manufacturers. As a device owner, we are that manufacturer's customer. Why should the carrier have so much control over something they simply sell as a middle-man? The OS is the property of the manufacturer (or whoever owns the software on the device) and, as customers of that manufacturer, we shouldn't have someone in the middle trying to control that, especially when the effect on the carrier is incredibly small (if existent at all).
    Many have said this. Unfortunately this point of view ignores the fact that the carriers are the first line support for the whole OS.

    Posted via CB10
    And this right here illustrates the problem I was speaking of. The carriers are the first line for customers to go to for problems with the device/device's software. This is exactly why the carriers need to test the OS, because, ultimately, it's their bottom line that takes a hit should BlackBerry (or any manufacturer) mess up something that goes out under a carrier's name.

    I feel as though the only solution to this would be to completely separate the devices from the carrier. I think we're years away from it in the U.S., but I'd love to live in a world where we buy all of our equipment from the manufacturer and just go through the carrier for service. Carrier would only deal with service/network-related issues while the manufacturer would take care of all hardware/software matters. I know in some parts of the world, this is common. I'd love to see it here in the U.S., but it seems that removing power from the carriers won't be easy.
    01-25-14 11:45 PM
  22. BigBadWulf's Avatar
    In my opinion, the power of the carriers (especially in the United States) needs to be scaled down. They provide the network service for the devices that are produced by the manufacturers. As a device owner, we are that manufacturer's customer. Why should the carrier have so much control over something they simply sell as a middle-man? The OS is the property of the manufacturer (or whoever owns the software on the device) and, as customers of that manufacturer, we shouldn't have someone in the middle trying to control that, especially when the effect on the carrier is incredibly small (if existent at all).
    The carriers take on the warranty work, as part of the purchase agreement. It's their customer, and they should be responsible. Widespread device problems will turn them off a manufacturer, unless demand far exceeds the return aggravation. They test because they get the calls.

    And this right here illustrates the problem I was speaking of. The carriers are the first line for customers to go to for problems with the device/device's software. This is exactly why the carriers need to test the OS, because, ultimately, it's their bottom line that takes a hit should BlackBerry (or any manufacturer) mess up something that goes out under a carrier's name.

    I feel as though the only solution to this would be to completely separate the devices from the carrier. I think we're years away from it in the U.S., but I'd love to live in a world where we buy all of our equipment from the manufacturer and just go through the carrier for service. Carrier would only deal with service/network-related issues while the manufacturer would take care of all hardware/software matters. I know in some parts of the world, this is common. I'd love to see it here in the U.S., but it seems that removing power from the carriers won't be easy.
    The carriers operate on different bands, and for good reason. They also have specific interests, and request features or models built to their specifications. They place the big orders, and make manufacture possible. Manufacturers do direct sales for some global phones, but they aren't really global.

    I'll ask you this. Why would BlackBerry make a phone that only works on VZW in the US, and 3G or worse in the rest of the world, without a commitment from VZW ahead of production? That, along with the work involved ensuring customers get the right phone for them, to this point appears not worth the effort/risk for manufacturers. Certainly there's no shortage of cellphone stores, but they sell on behalf of the carrier anyway.
    01-26-14 01:20 AM
  23. chinchwadkar's Avatar
    Do not change the phone receiving gesture

    Posted via CB10
    01-26-14 01:33 AM
  24. FlashFlare11's Avatar
    The carriers take on the warranty work, as part of the purchase agreement. It's their customer, and they should be responsible. Widespread device problems will turn them off a manufacturer, unless demand far exceeds the return aggravation. They test because they get the calls.



    The carriers operate on different bands, and for good reason. They also have specific interests, and request features or models built to their specifications. They place the big orders, and make manufacture possible. Manufacturers do direct sales for some global phones, but they aren't really global.

    I'll ask you this. Why would BlackBerry make a phone that only works on VZW in the US, and 3G or worse in the rest of the world, without a commitment from VZW ahead of production? That, along with the work involved ensuring customers get the right phone for them, to this point appears not worth the effort/risk for manufacturers. Certainly there's no shortage of cellphone stores, but they sell on behalf of the carrier anyway.
    I completely understand the carriers' perspective. Realistically, selling a physical device with service is much more attractive to consumers as opposed to simply selling service plans. With that said, if Verizon is the largest U.S. carrier and operates on a specific band, it would be up to the manufacturer to make the device compatible if it wanted to penetrate the U.S. market. Much of the control we wish BlackBerry would take over its devices stems from the fact that BlackBerry cedes control of device warranties to the carriers. If BlackBerry (and every other manufacturer) handled warranty issues as well as customer support for their devices and the carrier simply handled service-related issues, I think the customer experience would be much better. Customers would recieve the latest software updates for their devices when the manufacturer allows and also, when an issue does arise, they speak to an expert representing the manufacturer, not simply a carrier rep that may or may not be properly trained to handle the issue.

    I guess my biggest issue, as a customer of AT&T and BlackBerry in the U.S., is that I think AT&T exerts far too much control over matters that I think it should stay out of.
    01-27-14 05:13 PM
  25. LostOnThePianoRoll's Avatar
    Only a few hours left for the moment of truth... if it's truly global then these forums will be on fire..

    Posted via CB10 on my Z10STL100-1/10.2.1.1055
    01-28-14 02:33 AM

Similar Threads

  1. Yahoo Calendar not syncing on 10.2.1.1925?
    By daradm in forum BlackBerry Q10
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-26-15, 08:34 AM
  2. Replies: 153
    Last Post: 02-03-14, 07:04 AM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-26-14, 08:54 AM
  4. Problem w/long texts on 10.2.1.1925
    By lcchick in forum BlackBerry Q10
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-24-14, 03:48 PM
  5. Headphones & Speakerphone not working after update to 10.2
    By maulikbhagat in forum BlackBerry Z10
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 01-24-14, 01:33 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD