Upgrade rant

[Macguy59]

I feel like a yo-yo these days being FORCED to keep changing the version of Activesync I use. Updating my Toshiba E405 to WM2003SE required me to have the most recent 2.7.1 to install properly only to have My WM2003 upgrade for my i600 require I downgrade AS to 2.7. GGGRRRRRRR :evil:

Ok I feel slightly better now

[Mike Temporale]

I think it's really getting to you. As using 2.7 & 2.7.1 would most certianly cause other problems. I think you mean 3.xxx ;)

[Macguy59]

I think it's really getting to you. As using 2.7 & 2.7.1 would most certianly cause other problems. I think you mean 3.xxx ;)

Ahem :oops: You might be right.

[Kris Kumar]

Hmm..you have to use 3.7 instead of 3.7.1 8O I was under the impression that 3.7 was the minimum version of ActiveSync to be used.

Wasn't 3.7.1 released ages ago. Wonder why 3.7 is being recommended.

Anyway from the rants in the other threads it doesn't look like Verizon put in its heart into making this update available to the public. I mean they sat on it for 3-4 months, meanwhile they were telling customers that they want to have a polished, thoroughly tested release :-)

It is a case of management bungling things and blaming the technology for the end results.

[wirelessbeachbum]

Hmm..you have to use 3.7 instead of 3.7.1 8O I was under the impression that 3.7 was the minimum version of ActiveSync to be used.

Wasn't 3.7.1 released ages ago. Wonder why 3.7 is being recommended.

Anyway from the rants in the other threads it doesn't look like Verizon put in its heart into making this update available to the public. I mean they sat on it for 3-4 months, meanwhile they were telling customers that they want to have a polished, thoroughly tested release :-)

It is a case of management bungling things and blaming the technology for the end results.

Verizon sent the upgrade back to Samsung for "polishing" several times before the final release...samsung was pointing at Microsoft for some of the issues in the end..such as the distinct caller id problems.

Remember Verizon is a wireless service provider, they don't make the phones they just sell them...any problems need to be pointed back at Samsung or Microsoft...

[Jerry Raia]

Yeah but the Worry Free Guarantee??
Our problem becomes thier problem right???

:rotfl:

[Kris Kumar]

Remember Verizon is a wireless service provider, they don't make the phones they just sell them...any problems need to be pointed back at Samsung or Microsoft...

My point is that Verizon claims/claimed that the reason for the delay in release of WM2003 was because it needed time to test/verify and train support staff.

I know they are not Tech company and they are not geared to handle the situation. BUT I know that they had the upgrade with them for more than 3 months.

They cannot blame Samsung or Microsoft for the bug. It just seems they sat on the upgrade for 2 months and then noticed that Sprint is coming out with a 2003 version. And Samsung (+ Microsoft) started bugging them to release the upgrade, so that support cost on their end can come down (they have to support only one OS). And then VZ rushed out to release the software.

Microsoft should of course try and police (for ActiveSync version goof up) Samsung + VZ but I guess right now they don't have enough muscle in the cell phone industry.