Solved

Oreo update for the LG V30?



Show first post

409 replies

My name is Jesse not Jessica. I'm a dude, not a gal. There is no one in this topic by the name of Jessica. I've been following this topic since it opened (for news purposes only) and said nothing until recently. So no, I don't always go around and "Spread" the cheer as you call it.

I was not making fun of your name. I thought is was like Jess. My apologies.

T-Mobile needs to get their crap together. Not even kidding, I'm not happy about this. This is the exact reason that I will likely never buy another phone from you asshats, and likely will end up leaving you for Project Fi and a Pixel when the new one is released (I know Magenta will be too incompetant to figure out how to carry the device, yet again). LG has had the Oreo software update ready for carriers for MONTHS. All the other carriers have beat T-Mobile and the best we get is "it's on our list". Well guess what, you're beginning to get on my list... list of companies I'm looking for an alternative to. How about an ETA? How about get it done already? When we pay $800 for a device that should have come with the new version of Android to begin with, you need to bump that up on your priority list. Most recent security update was Jan 1 2018. These are pushed our to AOSP EVERY MONTH and we're now THREE MONTHS BEHIND (AGAIN). Quit half assing it and do what you're supposed to be doing. This does not reflect well upon T-Mobile, regardless of what you keep telling yourselves.

That's the price we pay for cheaper bills and goodies, some caveats have to happen.  One being slower updates.  Look at the lg v20, 18 months and they're just now "starting"  to work on oreo.  At least it's not taking you almost 2 years to receive one. This is of the areas I'm not happy with t-mobile about.  I rather not have the T-Mobile Tuesday if it meant for expedited updates.

It doesn't matter whether you trust XDA or not. If you read the original post, found at the bottom of the post you referred to, the creator of the thread has written that it is very unlikely that the LG V30 US998 has 600 MHz, as it's FCC filing shows no such thing. And I'm not a developer, just a V30+ owner, but completely new spectrum is important to test, especially when it is unique to one carrier. That being said, too much blame is being placed on LG, who has already completed development of Oreo, and the entire hassle is coming because of T-Mobile. I know that for Note 8, people were complaining so much, despite the fact that it came out today, two days after Verizon and AT&T. It's important to remember the carrier variation present. Now I do hate how some people are excusing incompetence on T-Mobile's part so lamely. For example, the update status page couldn't possibly be right, as we know that LG is done developing Oreo with it's UI. It's not LG's fault that this hasn't been pushed out, nor does it give preference to larger carriers. The carriers hold the Android phonemakers hostage, not the other way around. Most likely that T-Mobile is testing the smoothest experience for all the bloatwa0re that will still be there when Oreo comes around. This is really sad as DT, has, as another contributor noted, now allowing pure Android from the manufacturer, with direct OEM OTAs. All in all, what I'm saying is, you have to be considerate of both the OEM and carrier, but remember that the OEM has the software from day one, it's the carrier that causes most problems. Also, I think your response to jesseinsfmagenta was I'll warranted. I'm pretty sure the only people with interests related to T-Mobile or their phones are T-Mobile empleyees, and their usernames begin with a Tmo_. Keep this in mind next time when deciding whether or not someone has T-Mobiles interests at hand.

Userlevel 7
Badge +12

ryokecra125 wrote:

It doesn't matter whether you trust XDA or not. If you read the original post, found at the bottom of the post you referred to, the creator of the thread has written that it is very unlikely that the LG V30 US998 has 600 MHz, as it's FCC filing shows no such thing. And I'm not a developer, just a V30+ owner, but completely new spectrum is important to test, especially when it is unique to one carrier. That being said, too much blame is being placed on LG, who has already completed development of Oreo, and the entire hassle is coming because of T-Mobile. I know that for Note 8, people were complaining so much, despite the fact that it came out today, two days after Verizon and AT&T. It's important to remember the carrier variation present. Now I do hate how some people are excusing incompetence on T-Mobile's part so lamely. For example, the update status page couldn't possibly be right, as we know that LG is done developing Oreo with it's UI. It's not LG's fault that this hasn't been pushed out, nor does it give preference to larger carriers. The carriers hold the Android phonemakers hostage, not the other way around. Most likely that T-Mobile is testing the smoothest experience for all the bloatwa0re that will still be there when Oreo comes around. This is really sad as DT, has, as another contributor noted, now allowing pure Android from the manufacturer, with direct OEM OTAs. All in all, what I'm saying is, you have to be considerate of both the OEM and carrier, but remember that the OEM has the software from day one, it's the carrier that causes most problems. Also, I think your response to jesseinsfmagenta was I'll warranted. I'm pretty sure the only people with interests related to T-Mobile or their phones are T-Mobile empleyees, and their usernames begin with a Tmo_. Keep this in mind next time when deciding whether or not someone has T-Mobiles interests at hand.

Carriers would rather not sell devices, and testified to that fact.  OEM's want carriers to pay for options, but in Europe it's actually illegal to do so.  One reason why they have all the options, and also more expensive BEFORE VAT tax. 

OEM's can decide just like Apple and say we'll do it this way and like it, but they don't because they love the money upfront they get.  The reason why Apple, and Google update their OS is simply because they have residual income.  They get money from their respective app, movie, books, music stores.  OEM's don't get residual income so they don't put a lot of resources on older devices, or even updating.  T-Mobile puts the least amount of bloatware onto the phones. 

FYI - There's a lot of court cases where OEM's , and even Google/Sony AOSP project that contradicts most of everything you just said.

Carriers would not rather sell devices! Are you mad? Do you know how much

they make on agreements with companies for preinstalling apps and data

collection systems? Could you refer to specific instances of OEMs. I don't

think you understand how these carrier contracts work, so here we go. OEMs

build phones. In the US, the average consumer doesn't buy unlocked, only

through their carrier. So OEMs will move Heaven and Earth in order to get

these carriers on board. That means giving them control of minimal software

characteristics, stock apps, and total control on software deployment.

Again, total control of software deployment. Like I said before, the

Android update goes like this: Google, AOSP, OEM, Carrier. LG has obviously

finished Oreo, that's why it's on the other carriers.

Also, I don't know ow if you're spinning things out of thin air, but Apple

and Google don't support updates fast because that have "residual cash" it

is because they build their softwares for themselves. Each of them have 1

year to develop the next OS. They only have to test a few devices running

the pure Android or iOS experience. The OEMs are building off of a

pre-existing OS and given less time. I do agree that it is preferable for

any company to sell a new phone than to update the old one. But they are

accountable. No one will buy an unsupported device. T-Mobile has nothing to

lose, as even if someone will switch OEMs, they won't switch carriers

unless for a service issue. Nevertheless, residual cash?! Seriously?,

that's a new one for me.

Please also refer to the specific cases of Carriers testifying as first

mentioned, and the cases of OEMs forcing carriers to pay for "options", the

European law that forbids it, the EU VAT legislation you were referring to

and the Google/Sony court cases that apparently negate everything I said.

Thanks

Userlevel 7
Badge +12

ryokecra125 wrote:

Carriers would not rather sell devices! Are you mad? Do you know how much

they make on agreements with companies for preinstalling apps and data

collection systems? Could you refer to specific instances of OEMs. I don't

think you understand how these carrier contracts work, so here we go. OEMs

build phones. In the US, the average consumer doesn't buy unlocked, only

through their carrier. So OEMs will move Heaven and Earth in order to get

these carriers on board. That means giving them control of minimal software

characteristics, stock apps, and total control on software deployment.

Again, total control of software deployment. Like I said before, the

Android update goes like this: Google, AOSP, OEM, Carrier. LG has obviously

finished Oreo, that's why it's on the other carriers.

Also, I don't know ow if you're spinning things out of thin air, but Apple

and Google don't support updates fast because that have "residual cash" it

is because they build their softwares for themselves. Each of them have 1

year to develop the next OS. They only have to test a few devices running

the pure Android or iOS experience. The OEMs are building off of a

pre-existing OS and given less time. I do agree that it is preferable for

any company to sell a new phone than to update the old one. But they are

accountable. No one will buy an unsupported device. T-Mobile has nothing to

lose, as even if someone will switch OEMs, they won't switch carriers

unless for a service issue. Nevertheless, residual cash?! Seriously?,

that's a new one for me.

Please also refer to the specific cases of Carriers testifying as first

mentioned, and the cases of OEMs forcing carriers to pay for "options", the

European law that forbids it, the EU VAT legislation you were referring to

and the Google/Sony court cases that apparently negate everything I said.

Thanks

I am not going to search through court documents for you.  One of the things we learned and why contracts ended up having diminishing returns instead of the flat fee was some of those lawsuits.  The way we are currently thinking are during the days of BREW and not Android.  There's a lot of there if you looked for yourself and stop with the hyperbole regurgitating what "Online media" tells you the past 6 years.  Europe has exactly the same thing we do except for 2 pieces of law, and have different expectations after the first 3 years of Androids life and look who has better support?  They do, and we keep thinking the same thing.

What company would continue to put money into something that isn't generating profits?  Apple, and Google make money off their respective OSes through their stores.  That gives them incentive to keep coding.  Do you really think they'd put the amount of resources they do if it wasn't profitable?  OEMs don't get a cut of that residual and make money specifically off the sale of the device.  Samsung knows this, and one of the reasons why...  They bought Tizen, and also have competing products with Apple and Google.  Samsung has the one of the worst update grades along with LG, and those are the top 3 manufacturers for market share.  So updating devices isn't all that you make it out to be.  I mean Samsung was bad updating the S, S2, S3, S4, S5, Note, Note2, Note3, Note4, and Note5 yet here they are...  Top 2 manufacturers for Smart Phones Since the Galaxy S.  Samsung sometime during the S or S2 Samsung said something in an interview that they charged for features and upgrades, but wouldn't go more into detail.  More than likely it was a NDA thing as to why and probably let out more than he should have.

Yes carriers would rather not sell devices, but the american public expects them to as to why they carry them. It isn't rocket science as it's lost revenue the longer they hold onto devices, and the upfront cash they have to put in.  If the US public was more open about buying their devices outright and unlocked carriers wouldn't carry devices. 

When we do get our update, will we be getting the camera AI software which LG has already stated will eventually roll out to existing V30's? The Korean models have it already.

No

T-Mobile is the only carrier which has changed the V30 Nougat OS and is likely changing the Oreo OS to make the device operate they way T-Mobile wants.  For instance - ONLY on T-Mobile can a V30 NOT add WIFI hotspot to the dropdown menu.  T-Mobile wants you to utilize their ugly pink Widget.  All other versions of the V30 have this option.  This is only one of a number of changes T-Mobile has made to this device. 

These changes take a while to make as they need to test whether or not they break other parts of the OS.  That is, the more the carrier sticks to the basics of the device, the sooner updates come to the device.

The T-Mo version is also the only one that doesn't support bluetooth tethering at all...

Is there anyway to add it manually ? I'm assuming all tmobile did was erase a section of code so how do we readd it

When are we going to get a update to allow dual audio for bluetooth...

why would one want to tether using Bluetooth? It's not much faster than T-Mobile's Hotspot which is 512Kbps.

No.  For regular wifi hotspot you need to either use the widget or go into settings.  As you correctly assumed TMobile removed the coding.  I've tried using ADB to add WIFIHotspot  to the "notification_panel_active_app_list" without luck.  It seems like certain options are not just missing but purposefully BLOCKED in the OS. 

One would need to root, I imagine to add the same level of functioning V30's enjoy on other carriers.  

Yep, I tried the same thing. Lol. I thinking I'm joining Jump On Demand today and getting an S9 and getting rid of this phone. It has become a complete after thought for LG and T-Mo.

I wanted it to tether to my Chromebook. No reason, really. Just wanted to do it that way and was pretty irritated when I realized it'd been removed.

You can install a program from the Play Store called Tiles. This allows you to create a settings shortcut directly to HotSpot, no root required. But then you click enable, so 2 button choices to enable, but you can bypass the ugly pink widget

There are several work arounds which sort of work - - IF I wanted to waste space installing a new program.

I'm not going to derail this thread with a discussion of how utterly preposterous, intensely arrogant and completely BlackBerry like such actions by Tmobile are.  Late with OS updates, late with security updates and purposefully hamstringing an OS for the benefit of marketing and income production is very "Carrier Like" for a company pricing itself as "uncarrier".

The last security update I received on my V30 is from January 1, 2018. We are now well past the 90 day security patch window that is required for Android devices which is totally unacceptable. There is really no excuse for not releasing security updates in a timely manner let alone giving an actual time frame for OS updates. LG and TMobile need to do better by their customers!

My baf, I meant to say no bloatware and updated directly from the OEM. This wait is now truly getting frustrating.I am officially frustrated with both LG and T-Mobile. If it was LG's fault T-Mobile could have done something by now. I think both parties don't care, I think T-Mobile wants us to jump to a S-9. Did I already mention that I hate TouchWiz and I had Samsung? Not happening T-Mobile. I do need to find a new manufacturer though. I wonder if anyone has reported to Google that we are only on our January security patch? So that Google could possibly remove their Google Enterprise Certificate off of the LG V30?

Here is part of the email that LG sent me in response to not having the software update on the T-Mobile variant of the V30. LG is specifically putting the blame on T-Mobile, stating that they provided the update to the carriers and that all of the carriers add carrier specific software (aka bloatware), they test it then release the software to us. It would seem that perhaps T-Mobile has their developers on other projects, since other models have gotten the oreo update since. Does that seem right to you? That perhaps..say Samsung gets priority because they sell better? Anyway this is what LG said in my last correspondence:

To go over the software update release on your LG V30, we have discussed in our email exchange yesterday that it is confirmed that the Android Oreo is already being provided. In fact, we have already released the update to carriers which is why other carrier models (as you have also mentioned) already received it apart from the T-Mobile version. Without LG releasing such update, no carrier will be able to provide Oreo to any LG V30 unit.

However, please do note that with LG integrating the Android Oreo to the LG firmware and providing it to carriers, this does not immediately roll out which is why there is a variation as to when end-users (such as yourself) receive it. The carrier’s development team will receive the update from LG that is provided by Google who coded the update. The carrier, in turn, will make necessary adjustments to carrier-specific apps, functions, etc. in order to make sure that it is working flawlessly with their system and services used in the device (done with any mobile brand and model). After such adjustments, the update will be rolled out via over-the-air (OTA) where users will receive a notification on their units automatically to download and install the update. Now, the actual receiving of the notification may also vary depending on the network. Some carriers may send out the updates in batches. This is typically done to avoid network congestion as the update is downloaded through the OTA server using the network service.

If this is true, shouldn't T-Mobile be up front in the future about which models get priority in software updates? Especially since handsets cost so much these days? Oh yeah which brings me to another point. I couldn't find where carriers testified in court that they didn't want to carry hardware. I found a few articles stating that they have raised prices because they can't make as much money as they did back in the flip phone days. That they make a profit off of handsets, but not as much, also that they don't make a bigger profit because they don't charge interest on their subsidy. Articles said that carriers want to carry the latest hardware because it helps bring customers to them. Oh well I will continue searching for those testimonials.

Perhaps all of us need to email, call, tweet, post on Facebook as to why and when our LG V30s are getting the Oreo software update?

Userlevel 7
Badge +12

So LG does it differently from all other Android OEMs... Sorry don't buy it simply because no OEM is going to give proprietary code to carriers. For the last 10 years you'd expect source code to be leaked by now with the number of carriers put there that support their devices.

The bad thing about that email it's from a support rep which has no involvement with development and often trained to pass the buck or at times say what the customer wants to hear.

As for wanting people to buy new devices I don't buy it. If that's the case why update the Motorola Z2 Force(which sold so poorly), S8,  and Note 8?

But why do all the other carriers have their versions updated, and

T-Mobile's is still in manufacturer development? How come I am still using

the January security patches? Why didn't the V30 show up on the Oreo update

list until the beginning of March? Even then it didn't show up until too

many people asked. So you are telling me that LG hasn't given T-Mobile the

software to add their bloatware to yet?

Reply