[conite]

That's true it was the 50 that received it first in the last two patches. My Dtek 60 didn't receive the April update. However the update or two before were right on time. I guess what I'm asking is what is your opinion on the recent schedule deviations?

There was a technical issue in April that affected the DTEK60 and Priv - the latter only receiving the AOSP-only patch level.

Apart from that, all is well.

[tryanfixit]

Thanks

[Kits_11]

yeah still no June update on the 60. I get the sense that BlackBerry are struggling to support multiple devices and OS (including versions). it's a shame. security was the number one reason I bought the 60. Whilst I still like it, I am seriously considering whether it would be my last BlackBerry branded phone. my work Samsung has had the patch days ago, and that is through a carrier rather than direct from manufacturer like my BlackBerry.

at the very least they should communicate with its supporters... not doing so is criminal and makes me trust them less each time. they can't deliver on their promises!

[chi-town311]

What blows my mind is that they keep posting these blog posts (both CB and BlackBerry) saying that all phones purchased from SHopBlackBerry get the updates and then nothing comes. Why do that? If only the PRIV and DTEK50 are getting it, then say that. If DTEK60 needs to wait one week or something to that effect, then friggin' tell us that.

[conite]

What blows my mind is that they keep posting these blog posts (both CB and BlackBerry) saying that all phones purchased from SHopBlackBerry get the updates and then nothing comes. Why do that? If only the PRIV and DTEK50 are getting it, then say that. If DTEK60 needs to wait one week or something to that effect, then friggin' tell us that.

It's because the information provided to Crackberry is not that granular.

[chi-town311]

It's because the information provided to Crackberry is not that granular.

That granular? Why does everyone need to make excuses for these guys? They put out a press release and it isn't accurate. There are only 4 possible phones they could be talking about. Wouldn't be that hard to get more granular. My view is that they are being purposely vague to hide the fact that their update process isn't as smooth as they'd like to admit.

[conite]

That granular? Why does everyone need to make excuses for these guys? They put out a press release and it isn't accurate. There are only 4 possible phones they could be talking about. Wouldn't be that hard to get more granular. My view is that they are being purposely vague to hide the fact that their update process isn't as smooth as they'd like to admit.

"BlackBerry begins rollout of June Android security update".

The horror.

[chi-town311]

Congrats, you read the headline.

"Keeping updates on schedule, the BlackBerry Security Incident Response Team has now announced they have begun the rollout of the June Android security update for BlackBerry smartphones. As per normal, once downloaded and installed, you should see your security patch level change and this time around, it will appear as June 5, 2017.

As with every security update, BlackBerry notes that the updated software version is available immediately for BlackBerry powered by Android smartphones that have been purchased from Shop BlackBerry but devices purchased elsewhere such as retailers or carriers are dependent on their own deployment schedules."

[conite]

Congrats, you read the headline.

"Keeping updates on schedule, the BlackBerry Security Incident Response Team has now announced they have begun the rollout of the June Android security update for BlackBerry smartphones. As per normal, once downloaded and installed, you should see your security patch level change and this time around, it will appear as June 5, 2017.

As with every security update, BlackBerry notes that the updated software version is available immediately for BlackBerry powered by Android smartphones that have been purchased from Shop BlackBerry but devices purchased elsewhere such as retailers or carriers are dependent on their own deployment schedules."

I thought we were talking about Crackberry. My bad.

As far as BlackBerry is concerned, it's just a simple template announcement. Same as every month. It's just lazy, not nefarious.

[Centerman66]

I thought we were talking about Crackberry. My bad.

As far as BlackBerry is concerned, it's just a simple template announcement. Same as every month. It's just lazy, not nefarious.

BlackBerry is in no position to be lazy

[conite]

BlackBerry is in no position to be lazy

BlackBerry probably doesn't care a whole lot. They have nothing left to sell to consumers.

[chi-town311]

I thought we were talking about Crackberry. My bad.

As far as BlackBerry is concerned, it's just a simple template announcement. Same as every month. It's just lazy, not nefarious.

That is CrackBerry. Them quoting the Blackberry article. But once again you are making excuses. Them just being lazy? Really? It's theirs frickin job. It's a public statement. Get it right. It's not the first time either. These guys are still acting like amateurs and its pathetic. If the update isn't ready for the DTEK60 then make that clear. And everyone, please stop defending them.

[Centerman66]

BlackBerry probably doesn't care a whole lot. They have nothing left to sell to consumers.

Yes but by further damaging their already compromised market perception does not help them sell either licensed goods nor software. There is no business model where allowing your reputation to become tarnished is a good thing.

Maybe the CTO who is reviewing an At Hoc proposal was sick of waiting for an update on his DTEK60......

[conite]

That is CrackBerry. Them quoting the Blackberry article. But once again you are making excuses. Them just being lazy? Really? It's theirs frickin job. It's a public statement. Get it right. It's not the first time either. These guys are still acting like amateurs and its pathetic. If the update isn't ready for the DTEK60 then make that clear. And everyone, please stop defending them.

I'm not defending. I couldn't care less.

The fact remains that the DTEKs only missed one update for one device (April for DTEK60) since they both launched.

[conite]

Yes but by further damaging their already compromised market perception does not help them sell either licensed goods nor software. There is no business model where allowing your reputation to become tarnished is a good thing.

Measure the costs of catering to legacy customers versus the potential loss of future licencing revenues. The business model is the answer to the math problem.

[Centerman66]

Measure the costs of catering to legacy customers versus the potential loss of future licencing revenues. The business model is the answer to the math problem.

You speak in unsubstantiated generalities. It's the literal version of arm waving.

I respect you and your contribution to this community greatly. But what you are saying here is flat out wrong.

[conite]

But what you are saying here is flat out wrong.

How so?

You yourself said they don't want to risk future licencing revenue by further tarnishing the brand. Well, there is a cost to that. As there is a cost to caterring to legacy customers.

[chi-town311]

wait... who is a legacy customer here? The DTEK60 came out like 6 months ago. you cant seriously be calling DTEK60 customers legacy customers, are you?

[chi-town311]

I'm not defending. I couldn't care less.

They fact remains that the DTEKs only missed one update for one device (April for DTEK60) since they both launched.

And the May update was late... and the June update was late. I think DTEK50 missed one or was late once too. But who cares about the facts. Oh yeah, and let's not forget that we are one full version of Android behind. I'm sure there are no security issues with that scenario. These are there most "secure" Android devices, right?

[conite]

And the May update was late... and the June update was late. I think DTEK50 missed one or was late once too. But who cares about the facts. Oh yeah, and let's not forget that we are one full version of Android behind. I'm sure there are no security issues with that scenario. These are there most "secure" Android devices, right?

I thought we were taking about monthly patch notices. It's hard to keep up.

[conite]

wait... who is a legacy customer here? The DTEK60 came out like 6 months ago. you cant seriously be calling DTEK60 customers legacy customers, are you?

For lack of a better term, sure. "Customers of devices no longer being sold, from a device business that no longer exists" if you prefer.

[chi-town311]

I'm talking about their claim to be selling the most secure Android device. I have seen other commenters bring up the possibility that the most secure version of Android is Nougat. I don't know the details though, but it would seem to make sense.

[chi-town311]

This clearly isn't how you view it, but from my perspective, since the DTEK60 is made by the same company that makes the Keyone, it's hard for me to draw a line between a device business that no longer exits. Also - the PRIV got the update. Is that not a legacy device under your definition? That wasn't even built by TCL and is older. Logically it would be less likely to get any updates.

[conite]

Also - the PRIV got the update. Is that not a legacy device under your definition? That wasn't even built by TCL and is older. Logically it would be less likely to get any updates.

The DTEK50 was first in line the last couple of months. It can vary a bit, as they like to stagger releases. DTEKs will continue to receive patches for a long time going forward.

[bigjman]

You guys are crying over a patch that's literally barely a week late? Y'all should be ashamed of yourselves. Get it together, too many sky is falling threads around here for nothing.

Posted via CB10