Official 4.4 is that true?!

lee480 · Jan 26, 2014

tel033 said:
Ok then my mistake, but how would you then explain the galaxy s2 getting updates with a snapdragon s2?

Sent from my XPERIA S using XDA app

If I were you, I would have buried my head in the sand in shame. Firstly, you have totally lost your credibility. This simply shows you post without researching, twice. Shameful. Secondly, Galaxy S2 uses Samsung Exynos CPU. Don't try to make an assertion by fabrication facts. Makes you look ugly.

nisu4717 · Jan 26, 2014

tel033 said:
Ok then my mistake, but how would you then explain the galaxy s2 getting updates with a snapdragon s2?

Thats I m thinking lte has s3.and have updates

Sent from my LT26ii using xda premium

---------- Post added at 02:09 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:01 PM ----------

lee480 said:
If I were you, I would have buried my head in the sand in shame. Firstly, you have totally lost your credibility. This simply shows you post without researching, twice. Shameful. Secondly, Galaxy S2 uses Samsung Exynos CPU. Don't try to make an assertion by fabrication facts. Makes you look ugly.

Hey s2 variant has s3 chipset.and and running official custome roms 4.4.2
If sony wants they can use that sourse.
And I have also read that msm8660 has kernal 3.1 rc4.and kitkat is using 3.1 kernal.correct me if I m wrong.so sony could use this kernal source if they are ready to give an update.ok

Sent from my LT26ii using xda premium

Redstarr1 · Jan 26, 2014

nisu4717 said:
Thats I m thinking lte has s3.and have updates

Sent from my LT26ii using xda premium

---------- Post added at 02:09 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:01 PM ----------

Hey s2 variant has s3 chipset.and and running official custome roms 4.4.2
If sony wants they can use that sourse.
And I have also read that msm8660 has kernal 3.1 rc4.and kitkat is using 3.1 kernal.correct me if I m wrong.so sony could use this kernal source if they are ready to give an update.ok

Sent from my LT26ii using xda premium

Again your facts are completely wrong. There are a few Samsung Galaxy S2 models with a Snapdragon S3 (please use the proper names because if you keep using S3 and S2 all the time this is going to be very confusing), but those models never got an update to Android 4.2. The only Galaxy S2's that got updated beyond Android 4.1 are the Exynos models. And what is an "official custom ROM" anyway?? That makes no sense, if it were official, it wouldn't be custom. I think this is a case where a developer added the word "official" to the name of the ROM to make it sound fancy. Looking through the I9100G forum (a Galaxy S2 with TI OMAP SoC), there's an "official" entry for MokeeOS with a Linux 3.0 kernel. As I will point out next, we are actually better off.

About the kernel, we have a Linux 3.4 kernel so that makes your last bit a bit redundant. I think you don't realize just how good we have it, our Linux 3.4 kernel is really good, and Sony didn't have to update it for us but they did and thanks to that we now have great KitKat custom ROMs. The Galaxy S2 with Exynos is the one gem out there, all other phones from the last year never got that kind of treatment. It's unfair to point to that one model from the biggest player in this business and saying that all other smaller companies should behave exactly the same on all their models. Samsung doesn't do this either (oh and the Galaxy S2 got updated to Android 4.2, not 4.3). So just stop pointing to other devices because ours got treated pretty good, we have a good kernel and stable custom ROMs. If you have issues with the custom ROMs like random reboots, you're doing something wrong.

The Xperia S might have been Sony's "flagship" device at the time it appeared, but it was hardly high-end. It ran Gingerbread, the SoC was a year old. Only the screen could be considered above average but it's actually a burden for the lower end GPU. This was all reflected in the price, I don't know about you guys but I didn't pay a lot for this device. If this was a €500+ phone I might agree that more updates were in order, but the price dropped very quickly. I also want to point out that that "flagship" argument makes no sense at all. Imagine a Chinese manufacturer making a line of smartphones, do you expect the "flagship" of that line to be updated as well? How do you even quantify what a flagship is? Sony released the Xperia T in the same year as the Xperia S, doesn't it make that one the actual flagship?

You pay for updates along with the price of your device. If you get the cheapest iPhone, you know that it isn't going to get the next version of iOS (and I paid less for my XS than I'd have to pay for an iPhone 4S at the moment). The only reason Nexus phones get updates faster and the devices are cheaper is because Google has a completely different business model. As long as you buy your phone from a company that completely focuses on hardware, you need to continue buying hardware.

Also, that update to ICS completely counts as an update, it was sold with GB and the ICS update took months to appear. If we were to get an official Android 4.2 update, it would probably not be ready even now at Sony's pace. It's just naive to believe that Sony would change their habits just for us.

This is an issue that will always remain in the current system of smartphones. What we need for this to change is modular devices. Until then, you'd better stop moaning about these updates because you're just making yourself sick and nothing is going to happen. Learn from your own mistakes, there's no need to argue with me. I've drawn my own conclusions on what I'll be getting in the future (probably not a Sony) and all I'm trying to say here is that we actually got treated quite well. There's no use in playing the outraged victim here if you don't do your research properly, it's just kind of sad.

Felimenta97 · Jan 26, 2014

Redstarr1 said:
Again your facts are completely wrong. There are a few Samsung Galaxy S2 models with a Snapdragon S3 (please use the proper names because if you keep using S3 and S2 all the time this is going to be very confusing), but those models never got an update to Android 4.2. The only Galaxy S2's that got updated beyond Android 4.1 are the Exynos models. And what is an "official custom ROM" anyway?? That makes no sense, if it were official, it wouldn't be custom. I think this is a case where a developer added the word "official" to the name of the ROM to make it sound fancy. Looking through the I9100G forum (a Galaxy S2 with TI OMAP SoC), there's an "official" entry for MokeeOS with a Linux 3.0 kernel. As I will point out next, we are actually better off.

About the kernel, we have a Linux 3.4 kernel so that makes your last bit a bit redundant. I think you don't realize just how good we have it, our Linux 3.4 kernel is really good, and Sony didn't have to update it for us but they did and thanks to that we now have great KitKat custom ROMs. The Galaxy S2 with Exynos is the one gem out there, all other phones from the last year never got that kind of treatment. It's unfair to point to that one model from the biggest player in this business and saying that all other smaller companies should behave exactly the same on all their models. Samsung doesn't do this either (oh and the Galaxy S2 got updated to Android 4.2, not 4.3). So just stop pointing to other devices because ours got treated pretty good, we have a good kernel and stable custom ROMs. If you have issues with the custom ROMs like random reboots, you're doing something wrong.

The Xperia S might have been Sony's "flagship" device at the time it appeared, but it was hardly high-end. It ran Gingerbread, the SoC was a year old. Only the screen could be considered above average but it's actually a burden for the lower end GPU. This was all reflected in the price, I don't know about you guys but I didn't pay a lot for this device. If this was a €500+ phone I might agree that more updates were in order, but the price dropped very quickly. I also want to point out that that "flagship" argument makes no sense at all. Imagine a Chinese manufacturer making a line of smartphones, do you expect the "flagship" of that line to be updated as well? How do you even quantify what a flagship is? Sony released the Xperia T in the same year as the Xperia S, doesn't it make that one the actual flagship?

You pay for updates along with the price of your device. If you get the cheapest iPhone, you know that it isn't going to get the next version of iOS (and I paid less for my XS than I'd have to pay for an iPhone 4S at the moment). The only reason Nexus phones get updates faster and the devices are cheaper is because Google has a completely different business model. As long as you buy your phone from a company that completely focuses on hardware, you need to continue buying hardware.

Also, that update to ICS completely counts as an update, it was sold with GB and the ICS update took months to appear. If we were to get an official Android 4.2 update, it would probably not be ready even now at Sony's pace. It's just naive to believe that Sony would change their habits just for us.

This is an issue that will always remain in the current system of smartphones. What we need for this to change is modular devices. Until then, you'd better stop moaning about these updates because you're just making yourself sick and nothing is going to happen. Learn from your own mistakes, there's no need to argue with me. I've drawn my own conclusions on what I'll be getting in the future (probably not a Sony) and all I'm trying to say here is that we actually got treated quite well. There's no use in playing the outraged victim here if you don't do your research properly, it's just kind of sad.

Though I agree with you in 95% of what you said, there are two things that I don't.

First, The Xperia S, even though having a year old CPU/GPU, it was high end during its launch. May not be the highest of the highs, it was a high end.

Second, the Xperia T was, for its time, Sony's flagship. Sony has been using, for now, a different way of marketing than other companies, using a 6 month flagship. That means, every 6 months, instead of 1 year, they have a new flagship.

A flagship is the device that represents the company. The main one. The best the company has to offer during its time (though Sony seems to not know that until Z1)...

Sent from my SGP311 using Tapatalk

nisu4717 · Jan 27, 2014

Redstarr1 said:
Again your facts are completely wrong. There are a few Samsung Galaxy S2 models with a Snapdragon S3 (please use the proper names because if you keep using S3 and S2 all the time this is going to be very confusing), but those models never got an update to Android 4.2. The only Galaxy S2's that got updated beyond Android 4.1 are the Exynos models. And what is an "official custom ROM" anyway?? That makes no sense, if it were official, it wouldn't be custom. I think this is a case where a developer added the word "official" to the name of the ROM to make it sound fancy. Looking through the I9100G forum (a Galaxy S2 with TI OMAP SoC), there's an "official" entry for MokeeOS with a Linux 3.0 kernel. As I will point out next, we are actually better off.

About the kernel, we have a Linux 3.4 kernel so that makes your last bit a bit redundant. I think you don't realize just how good we have it, our Linux 3.4 kernel is really good, and Sony didn't have to update it for us but they did and thanks to that we now have great KitKat custom ROMs. The Galaxy S2 with Exynos is the one gem out there, all other phones from the last year never got that kind of treatment. It's unfair to point to that one model from the biggest player in this business and saying that all other smaller companies should behave exactly the same on all their models. Samsung doesn't do this either (oh and the Galaxy S2 got updated to Android 4.2, not 4.3). So just stop pointing to other devices because ours got treated pretty good, we have a good kernel and stable custom ROMs. If you have issues with the custom ROMs like random reboots, you're doing something wrong.

The Xperia S might have been Sony's "flagship" device at the time it appeared, but it was hardly high-end. It ran Gingerbread, the SoC was a year old. Only the screen could be considered above average but it's actually a burden for the lower end GPU. This was all reflected in the price, I don't know about you guys but I didn't pay a lot for this device. If this was a €500+ phone I might agree that more updates were in order, but the price dropped very quickly. I also want to point out that that "flagship" argument makes no sense at all. Imagine a Chinese manufacturer making a line of smartphones, do you expect the "flagship" of that line to be updated as well? How do you even quantify what a flagship is? Sony released the Xperia T in the same year as the Xperia S, doesn't it make that one the actual flagship?

You pay for updates along with the price of your device. If you get the cheapest iPhone, you know that it isn't going to get the next version of iOS (and I paid less for my XS than I'd have to pay for an iPhone 4S at the moment). The only reason Nexus phones get updates faster and the devices are cheaper is because Google has a completely different business model. As long as you buy your phone from a company that completely focuses on hardware, you need to continue buying hardware.

Also, that update to ICS completely counts as an update, it was sold with GB and the ICS update took months to appear. If we were to get an official Android 4.2 update, it would probably not be ready even now at Sony's pace. It's just naive to believe that Sony would change their habits just for us.

This is an issue that will always remain in the current system of smartphones. What we need for this to change is modular devices. Until then, you'd better stop moaning about these updates because you're just making yourself sick and nothing is going to happen. Learn from your own mistakes, there's no need to argue with me. I've drawn my own conclusions on what I'll be getting in the future (probably not a Sony) and all I'm trying to say here is that we actually got treated quite well. There's no use in playing the outraged victim here if you don't do your research properly, it's just kind of sad.

Probably in yr way u r right.but I paid 24000 rs for sl in India.and its very high for Indians.

Sent from my LT26ii using xda premium

-PiLoT- · Jan 27, 2014

i dont even know what the *****ing is in this thread. But to sum up

Unles qualcomm release the source for the chipset then Sony CAN'T update the phone to kitkat

montenell · Jan 29, 2014

would be nice to see on my ion

tel033 · Jan 31, 2014

Hell I just want 4.2 or 4.3

Sent from my XPERIA S using XDA app

xperiauser1221 · Jan 31, 2014

tel033 said:
Hell I just want 4.2 or 4.3

Sent from my XPERIA S using XDA app

No difference whatsoever in 4.1.2 and 4.3
Just flash themes from 4.3 and ur good as new...
And even try nature xperia 3.1 it's a great rom... If trying kitkat paranoid beta 4is best now

Sent from my LT26ii using xda premium

warlok9000 · Feb 1, 2014

guys, qualcomm abandoned developing drivers for S3 chipset. it's ci=urrently on 4.1.2 and will FOREVER stay at this version. so would we already close this thread?

YuriBasescu · Feb 4, 2014

There must be some other way to get 4.4 without paying morr moneys

Sent from my LT26i using yuri's app

c0ntagi0 · Feb 4, 2014

I'm replying to this using pureslim kitkat r1, its running stable , fast, and better than average battery life. If anyone wants kitkat badly, aosp / custom rom is the way to go. Get it or stay happy with Sony's stock. Sony's UI is still the best looking UI out there. Don't listen to what technology websites and blogs are saying, as they are out to push products that you don't really need.

Sent from my Xperia S using Tapatalk

skyend · Feb 6, 2014

Why are you guys arguing about the updates anymore?! That aint gonna make sony miraculously drop off any major upgrade. As far as your woes with flagship devices go, yes Xperia S was a flagship device. Yes, I paid INR 32,000 for it and purchased on the day of the launch. Yes, it makes me sad that Jelly bean was delayed so much. Yes, it makes me sad that ICS was buggy as hell. But then the final JB upgrade is pretty solid imo for a device thats two years old now and I am happy with it. The custom roms aosp jb kk are always a bonus.
If you are gonna cry about updates then maybe you should have avoided buying a device with outdated cpu, because by the time you got your xperia s in hand, qualcomm already moved on with s4 series. Qualcomm aint gonna support their cpu forever just like every other company out there.

Sent from my LT26i using xda app-developers app

xperiauser1221 · Feb 6, 2014

skyend said:
Why are you guys arguing about the updates anymore?! That aint gonna make sony miraculously drop off any major upgrade. As far as your woes with flagship devices go, yes Xperia S was a flagship device. Yes, I paid INR 32,000 for it and purchased on the day of the launch. Yes, it makes me sad that Jelly bean was delayed so much. Yes, it makes me sad that ICS was buggy as hell. But then the final JB upgrade is pretty solid imo for a device thats two years old now and I am happy with it. The custom roms aosp jb kk are always a bonus.
If you are gonna cry about updates then maybe you should have avoided buying a device with outdated cpu, because by the time you got your xperia s in hand, qualcomm already moved on with s4 series. Qualcomm aint gonna support their cpu forever just like every other company out there.

Sent from my LT26i using xda app-developers app

I'm using xperia SL I paid 27500 inr for it...bought last year (Jan 2013)
Just close this thread now...
No one's gonna get an official kitkat update..
Sony is lazy and I realised it when they provided jelly bean after 1 yr of its release..
Hell it's not even available to xperia Z1
They are still using 4.3...
If anyone wants frequent updates buy a nexus device..
Snapdragon s3 chipset in our phones have no drivers for 4.4..
It's stuck... Here forever and now rayman has also left...

Sent from my LT26ii using xda premium

De@n · Feb 7, 2014

xperiauser1221 said:
I'm using xperia SL I paid 27500 inr for it...bought last year (Jan 2013)
Just close this thread now...
No one's gonna get an official kitkat update..
Sony is lazy and I realised it when they provided jelly bean after 1 yr of its release..
Hell it's not even available to xperia Z1
They are still using 4.3...
If anyone wants frequent updates buy a nexus device..
Snapdragon s3 chipset in our phones have no drivers for 4.4..
It's stuck... Here forever and now rayman has also left...

Sent from my LT26ii using xda premium

Rayman hasn't left

Sony XDA · Feb 12, 2014

c0ntagi0 said:
I'm replying to this using pureslim kitkat r1, its running stable , fast, and better than average battery life. If anyone wants kitkat badly, aosp / custom rom is the way to go. Get it or stay happy with Sony's stock. Sony's UI is still the best looking UI out there. Don't listen to what technology websites and blogs are saying, as they are out to push products that you don't really need.

Sent from my Xperia S using Tapatalk

I use this ROM too and I must to agree with you. For me it is first ROM without problem with restarting launcher. Of course there are some bugs, but releasing new version could change it. So, if you want to have Andoid 4.4.2 try this ROM.

leonardoqm · Feb 14, 2014

qualcomm not give drivers

guilt is the qualcomm that stopped making drivers for S3 processors for android 4.2 or higher.

emadtaha · Feb 15, 2014

noooo

Ofcourse not true

Official 4.4 is that true?!

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Retired Senior Moderator

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Member

Senior Member

Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Member

New member

Senior Member

Similar threads

Top Liked Posts