PDA

View Full Version : Ah Motorola, you've done it again.



crenn
02-04-2011, 12:13 AM
http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/03/cliq-xt-wont-get-android-2-1-upgrade-motorolas-word-as-good-a/

While I don't have a Cliq XT, I'm very familiar with this situation. I get a new phone (wasn't really my choice, I was told I was getting a new phone and that was final) and only 2 at the time met my requirement. The Motorola Backflip, and the Motorola DEXT (Otherwise known as the Motorola Cliq), both at the time with promised updates to 2.1 (the most current at the time). I picked the DEXT and was mostly happy with it, there were quite a few bugs and I was hopeful as I got updates (which fixed some bugs, but introduced new ones). Now here is where things go bad.

Near the end of last year, when both the backflip and the DEXT were due to get an update to 2.1, motorola decides that they can't update to 2.1 since it wouldn't be a good hardware/software combination (They later put their upgrade page to just say "Will remain on 1.5"). They say this since the phones will struggle with some applications (although I'll cover this slightly later). However, they decide to continue updating the Cliq (Same hardware as the DEXT except for the radio) and the Backflip (Same hardware except for the radio in the worldwide version) to 2.1. They provide these updates before the end of the year to only the US.

It is quickly found that these phones are stable and faster, however still slow compared with a higher end model. Games like Angry Birds don't run very well because of the lack of CPU power. Because of the release of 2.1, DEXT and worldwide Backflips get an unofficial update from 3rd party developers. There were probably 2.1 updates before, but it's always nice to have official sources when making new ROMs. A quick root and an unofficial update makes the phone even better (2.2 is currently being worked on with the DEXT and Cliq, and hopefully the Backflip), and the lack of CPU power is half solved.... by overclocking the CPU a bit. It apparently still stutters but works a lot better than if it wasn't.

It's sad that a company that has plenty of opportunities to build their brand decide to turn around and give a nice lie to its customers. But here I am, one of those customers, I would have been happy if I got 2.1 (happier with 2.2) even if it couldn't really play games. But now I'm forced to give myself support to fix bugs that shouldn't exist (Nothing like trying to send SMSs... and have it repeatedly not send them) and add extra features (There is currently sure, there is a front facing camera for video calls, except you need Android 2.1 or higher to make video calls!).

I think the thing that has come from all of this is, I don't mind waiting for updates for my phone providing they do eventually come. But to promise an update and then lie saying it doesn't make the phone better while the phone has bug makes me unwilling to be a repeat customer.


My recommendation, don't buy a motorola phone. EVER.

Lothair
02-04-2011, 09:21 AM
HTC and Samsung are the only brands I've come to trust. I've never seriously liked any of the Moto's I've come to own over the years. They've always been "okay".

The Droid was a pretty cool phone though. I've never personally used it however, so.

AmEv
02-04-2011, 01:38 PM
Speaking of Samsung.....

The SGH-239.
Not a bad phone, for an entry-model.
Except there is NO way to data-connect to your computer.
At all. Bluetooth? Audio only. USB? INSTANTLY says "device not recognized", doesn't even attempt to look for drivers.
My solution for Samsung? Write the drivers and an update, FCOL!!!


But their LED TVs are nice :lick:

Snowman
02-04-2011, 03:24 PM
The only motorola I have ever considered buying was the ming, it was designed to run linux natively.. verizon butchered the h#ll out of it and dumbed it down to run some crap moto software that verizon branded all over the place.

Lothair
02-04-2011, 03:39 PM
I love Verizon like a fat kid loves cake, but I am dearly grateful that my Kin Two "advanced feature phone" doesn't have any of their crappy bloatware installed. They have a horrendous knack for ruining their phones with their poorly created software. I guess you can't be no. 1 without the funds, otherwise they'd be AT&T. Thank god they aren't. Can you hear me now? Why yes, I can actually! And I still can 5 minutes later. And 5 minutes after that. Etc. <3 Verizon.

Konrad
02-05-2011, 02:35 PM
HP is notorious for a long history of broken iPAQ promises, and Dell was guilty too (when they made Axims, years ago), and Garmin, and Fujitsu-Seimens. And Palm (although that was arguably because they constantly struggled on the verge of bankrupt extinction). And of course iApple, master of marketing and planned obsolescence (although they don't actually lie more than they just keep the consumer ignorant, chained, and complacent).

Notice that these are all small mobile devices, PDAs and smartphones and other handheld mobile stuff of that sort. Disposable technology these days ... they don't want to work on supporting or upgrading your old device, they want to work on the next model and get you to pay for the current one. The worst offenders even want you to purchase new chargers, cradles, and other accessories every time so they deliberately make newer devices use different proprietary parts (why does a 4-pin USB docking/charging cable require a special 22-pin connector, and how is it different from the old special 28-pin connector? why is the new 1150mAh 3.6V battery a slightly different width than the old 1150mAh 3.6V battery? why do you have to buy or install new software?) Forced device replacements/upgrades also work as speedbumps that slow down the pirates, cloners, and hackers to keep that revenue flow coming into the mothership.

Now that laptop and mini and tablet prices have dropped so much, I suspect that they will also become "disposable" tech. A completely new (and usually much better) device is often cheaper than replacing the battery or repairing some other part on an old device. This might not apply to the high-end machinery, but the majority of the market is comprised of low-cost low-end all-in-one integrated junk.

("I don't understand; my computer is new, why is it so slow?" — "Well, that's because you got a $300 system from Gateway instead of a real machine, duh!")