Samsung Vibrant (T-Mobile): ☑, Android 2.2 (Froyo): ☐ MIA

Last year, Samsung decided to show off some highly anticipated phones in March 2010. Samsung formally named them the "Galaxy S" series. The Galaxy S is known as the OEM model, while the carriers in various countries would launch them under several other names.

In the United States, Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile, and Sprint all agreed to carry a variant of the Galaxy S device. This would mean, their version would have mainly the same internal hardware such as the same amount of RAM, ROM, screen resolution but may have different looking external hardware. Verizon carries two Galaxy-S variants. The Fascinate, and the Continuum. Sprint calls their variant the "Epic 4G", since it can connect to their WiMax network.

Samsung launched the series of phones with Android 2.1 (Eclair), while promising to make the newly announced Android 2.2 (Froyo) software available for the popular lineup in the coming months.

Well, most Galaxy S carrier-variants launched in mid July, many of the phones as of Q4 2010, have yet to receive the promised Froyo update, prompting many customers begin to wonder, and even get angry and vow to never buy a Samsung device again. Samsung has officially rolled out Froyo to their Galaxy S lineup overseas.

Samsung, being their usual Samsung self, loves to show off new devices every few months. During the CES 2011, Samsung announced new devices, with some better hardware. Well, there have been rumors of T-Mobile and Samsung partnering up once again, to launch a sequel to their popular Vibrant device., got wind of an upcoming Samsung device meant for T-Mobile, which stated that on February 23, T-Mobile is rumored to launch the T-Mobile Vibrant 4G.

To keep it short, the T-Mobile Vibrant 4G, is supposed to be the same Vibrant but with an upgraded hardware radio, boosting the theoretical speeds from HSPA 7.2, to HSPA+ 21. Also, it will have a Front-Facing Camera, and drum roll please...Brrrm bumm...Android 2.3 (Gingerbread)!!!! Yes, gets a Samsung Vibrant 4G sneak peak and it seems like the most shocking addition, if true, is that Android 2.3 is to be in attendance.

So, you might be saying, "Well what's the big deal here". Well, the big deal is that, it seems like instead of T-Mobile and Samsung working more and more closely in a timely manner to give Vibrant owners what they have been waiting for, which is Froyo on their current Vibrant devices. T-Mobile is trying to launch a successor with the upgraded software, rather than take care of the current Vibrant missing features.

If I owned a Vibrant, I would think if it's worth it to trust Samsung, and buy the new Vibrant 4G, just to upgrade from HSPA 7.2, to HSPA+ 21; Android 2.1 (Eclair) to Android 2.2 (Froyo), and from no FFC to a Front-facing camera.

To some it's a no-brainer to upgrade, especially if you are in love with the Vibrant for what if offers. I admit, the Super AMOLED screen that Samsung brings to the table, is very clear, and crisp. Makes my Nexus One's AMOLED screen cry in the sunlight.

But, back on topic. Our Canadian neighbors up north, have had a chance to get used to Froyo on their Galaxy S series based phones for a few months. So, that makes me wonder who is to blame for the Vibrant not receiving Froyo in a timely promised manner. T-Mobile or Samsung.

Of course, people have been flashing, modding, and rooting their phone in order to get what was promised to them last year, much faster. Plus with some added features.

To some, its a blame game, and because of that, a Class Action lawsuit has been filed.

More info can be found here:


another possible reason

Just saw this link:
There is a claim that the reason that Froyo has stopped rolling out to most carrier branded units is due to the fact that Samsung is charging.
If this is true, then the fault lies with Samsung(assuming this was not made clear in an agreement prior).

Carriers are to blame.

It seems obvious to me that Samsung is not at fault here. If they have made Froyo available for other variants of the phone, then it it would seem that the carriers of the individual models are the only hold up here.
Judging by what you have posted, it would seem that T-Mobile may have intentionally held off on their upgrade so that the 4G version would seem more appealing to consumers. This is part of why I prefer to stick with unlocked devices. They may cost more upfront, but the benefits of them versus their carrier branded brethren far out weigh the savings of signing on the dotted line for a subsidized device.