[EdwardC]

I have tried everthing that I can think of to find a fault with the update and cant find anything. I'm not really sure if anything improved but nothing is any worse.

[Chaddface]

What OS do new PB's ship with these days? Anyone get one recently?
It seems the majority of owners have no issues with the update.

[OniBerry]

Most people seem to have an issue with not upgrading when they had the chance, and now are moaning about it. Maybe those whose PBs got destroyed by the update have a reason to kvetch, but some people need to argue that the Sun is up at night, and we all get Moonburnt during the day.

Either you did, or you didn't. I don't see the issue.

Yesterday was a Civic Holiday(Simcoe Day in Ontario) in most provinces and is not considered a statutory holiday, so RIM shouldn't have just a skeleton crew. Secondly, I don't see how pulling an alleged buggy update equals to 'No Support'.

[rcm1301]

No matter how much in-house testing your do, there's nothing like releasing software to thousands of average consumers to reveal any problems.

We see the same thing we're I work too.

True, but maybe the guy who should have put in the code to first check you are running on 2.0 and not 1.0 was part of the 6k layoffs? It is a no-brainer that they should have put in a check and restriction that you cannot install .668 when still running on old 1.0. It is called basic logic common sense!

[highos]

Why they allow PlayBook's to be running around on 1.0.7 is beyond me. Have they not learned from the fragmentation of Android or their current phone OS's.

Huh?!? You're making it sound like RIM isn't offering software upgrades to everyone that has purchased an PlayBook so far. That is not the case, there are just situations where people are probably running 1.0.7, either because they couldn't upgrade or choice not to, or even in rare situations where untouched PlayBook's are being un-boxed that shipped with firmware even older then 1.0.7 that could run into this issue.

This is nothing like Android where (some) the Manufacturers aren't even OFFERING THE ABILITY to upgrade which is totally different. Most Android manufacturers are being a lot better about offering software upgrades, but the way you phrase it is completely out of line with the situation.

[Nirodac Yar]

Just my 2 cents.

In my many decades of computer experience I have discovered, whether your IBM or McData, you sometimes multi source components. Lithium batteries now a days have micro-controllers built into them for safety reasons. Perhaps older batteries from some vendors, had some "feature" or timing cycle that was different from other vendors. The code update MAY have been intended to improve battery life, but may have had the opposite effect of some brands of batteries (just a guess). The same thought may apply for other components in the system. Is all memory from the same vendor?

I saw this a lot in the IBM server world. Disk drives ,memory and batteries with the same FRU numbers had different part numbers, but with IBM, everything worked...guaranteed. IBM maintained a lab where everything, every edition, was tested, before being released. Then it was specified where the devices could only be used.
SUN microsystems did the same thing.
RIM would need to do the same thing to test every possible configuration of their PB. This is costly, and no doubt with RIMS problems, one of the first areas to be cut.

I upgraded my three week old PB (32G) from version 1 OS to 2.0.xxx when I brought it home, then upgraded it on Friday, all is well, the battery lost 3% charge overnight, but I hadn't put it into standby mode or anything, I just left it on my desk. Now if I can only get OTG to work (RIM, please turn it on).

Ray

[B3hindBlueEyes]

What OS do new PB's ship with these days? Anyone get one recently?
It seems the majority of owners have no issues with the update.

Bought mine 10 days ago. 32gb on sale at GBP149 brand new from PC World in the UK - what a bargain. I think it came with 1.0 because it spent a long time updating itself when I first turned it on.

I noticed it had the bulging back 'feature' so I did a secure wipe and thought I would try to exchange it for one that would sit flat on the desk, however they were out of stock (and rude! but that's another story...) so I decided to keep it (now have the awesome journal case so no longer a problem). When I set it up again it downloaded the 2.0.1.668 update - I had no choice in this.

Can't say I've noticed any issues. It does a few weird things now and then (e.g. Bridge icons vanish sometimes) but I imagine they were bugs in 2.0 also. I'm mostly annoyed that I lost the stock wallpapers in the process! (re-downloaded them from a thread on here but as they're 1024x600 screen grabs they don't display correctly). I'm in no hurry to wipe it again so will wait until the next update - might do that one from BB Desktop so that I get the full restore image.

All in all I'm loving my Playbook and find I'm using it a lot more than the Nexus 7 it replaced (RMA'd for hardware faults) because it does useful things.

[Chaddface]

Thanks for the response B3hindblueeyes. I was curious about the exact version number. With the statement from RIM about upgrade issues with a particular version number I was wondering if new PB's came loaded with the problem OS.

As for .668, everything is honky dory with my update as well.

[rcm1301]

Is everyone complaining about this issue using a piece of technology for the first time? Do you have any idea how complex this stuff is?

Complex? Seriously? What are they then doing in this business? "If you fail in your planning, you are planning for a failure". A simple code logic to not install unless you are on 2.0 would have solved it. Most software are distributed that way to enforce you only install latest upon latest.

[jomamasan]

The original posting in this thread concerned RIM's failure to inform their customers of what was obviously a problem with an os update.

Rumor and speculation ran rampant as a result. On the US support os update page they still have not offered any official explanation as to what happend and the current status of what was supposed to be a serious security update.

This topic is not about Holidays, staffing levels, successful/failed upgrades or any other issues related to the update.

Informing your users in a timely manner and an appropriate place in a situation like this is the least that Rim SHOULD do. Not doing so is BAD BUSINESS PRACTICE.

[Fonz0]

The part I don't understand is where it says that whoever already updated will not be affected, yet there IS something wrong with the update and therefore had to be pulled. And somewhere else on their site even state to recommend downgrading to previous bulid. WTF is that supposed mean??? Either it's fine or it isn't!!!
What a BULL!

I would bet the issue is that the update is not successful 100% of the time and that there is some small chance it will freeze or not fully take. Thus "those who already updated" are by definition NOT affected. Notice they don't say those who unsuccessfully tried to update....