Poll - Would you pay a premium for Android updates


Would you pay for an Android update for your phone?

  1. Yes, I'd pay up to $10 per update

    28.1%
  2. Yes, I'd pay up to $20 per update

    34.4%
  3. Yes, I'd pay up to $40 per update

    3.1%
  4. I'd pay over $50 for a major update

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  5. No way will I ever pay for Android updates

    34.4%

Last Updated:

  1. GreatBigDog

    GreatBigDog Well-Known Member This Topic's Starter

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2009
    Messages:
    495
    Likes Received:
    46
    Unless we are running Linux on our home PC's we are stuck paying paying either Microsoft or Apple for the privilege of updating our computers to the latest and greatest version of their OS's.

    Would you be willing to pay a premium for OS upgrades if it meant that the Manufactures / Wireless providers would continue to provide them for as long as your particular hardware could support it?
     

    Advertisement
  2. mjschmidt

    mjschmidt Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2009
    Messages:
    1,272
    Likes Received:
    113
    I would pay up to $20 per update, but only under the conditions that:

    1. it not include a manufacturer UI (unless that UI was not a part of the OS, and could easily be removed)

    2. it not include any carrier pre-installed bloatware/crap unless it can easily be removed.

    3. the update is available to us within 3 months of release from Google (6 months AT THE MOST!)

    4. It does not block root.
     
  3. drifter136

    drifter136 Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2010
    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    1
    I assume we're talking official updates here, performed in a timely manner (within 2-3 months) to the Vanilla release of a new version...then yes I would. Being that Android is an open source platform and custom versions will always be available, the price has to be kept in the "no-brainer" territory for this type of business model to work, not to mention substantial scaling back of manufacturer and carrier customizations, which isn't necessarily a bad thing.
     
  4. nicracine

    nicracine Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2009
    Messages:
    201
    Likes Received:
    7
    There are two conditions for me to pay for updates :

    - that they are not available for free elsewhere. If Google decides to charge for updates, sure, I will pay. However, if Rogers decides to charge for them while the rest of the world does not, there is no way in hell I will pay for it. I would rather donate to Cyanogen than pay Rogers for an update.
    - that we are talking about major update, from android 2 to android 3 for example.

    In your example, GBD, yes we pay for Windows updates, but not for service packs. There's an important distinction here.

    Nicolas Racine
     
  5. GreatBigDog

    GreatBigDog Well-Known Member This Topic's Starter

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2009
    Messages:
    495
    Likes Received:
    46
    You are correct, I would equate the windows "Service Packs" with the E911 update that we received or even last years 1.5 security update. That is the manufacture fixing their crappy coding errors, not feature updates.

    gbd
     
  6. kaput

    kaput Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2010
    Messages:
    29
    Likes Received:
    3
    I'd pay up to 20$ for a major update 1.5 to 2.x etc but that is only because of the current state of the market. Being a Linux user i don't pay for OS upgrades and i don't pay for different flavors of OS like home edition or office edition where the code is in but you pay the UI to toggle some options. THAT and community support is the appeal of open source. (give it a try)

    Android is open source (based on Linux) which means the manufacturer doesn't pay for it and can modify as they wish. They do spend money to develop hardware specific code like drivers, but that should be accounted in the hardware cost and develop some cool UI, thats marketing costs. Rogers (and other providers) pay to add their logos, and brand to it and mostly to lock us (the phone) on their contract. So THEY should pay for the extra work involved in updating branded OS. Sadly us paying may be the way to get it faster.
     
  7. cezegg

    cezegg Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2010
    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    0
    isn't paying for open source completely against the premise of open source?
    i'd have no problem paying like.. 10 bucks, or maybe like a certainly yearly dues to participate in the downloading and installing of properly scheduled, REAL updates (not crippled rogers roms, not roms fixing the mistakes of their old roms that'll need to have other roms to fix those mistakes, and so on.), punctual updates, and... free cookies.

    and our membership would have to come with a card!
    and... maybe a secret knock.
     
  8. kaput

    kaput Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2010
    Messages:
    29
    Likes Received:
    3
     
  9. MagicAndroid

    MagicAndroid Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2009
    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    5
    I'd pay 20$ per update for the work time needed to push out the updates not the updates itself. But see if that was the case i'd expect a 99.9% bug free OS within a month of Googles release. Waiting 6 months is more along the lines of a free service.
     
  10. thewhitewizard

    thewhitewizard Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    3
    Considering the OS is open sourcei find it unpalatable to pay for updates. But if lines had to be drawn somewhere and we had to pay some kind of premium, then it naturally follows that it should implement similarly to desktop OS's.

    If you bought XP, you know that Microsoft would update XP throughout its lifecycle. This included all the service packs. Having bought XP didn't entitle you to a free copy of Vista.

    Android should start using their numbered versions as the termination point for 'UPGRADES' <this is the word id use to jump from version 2 to 3>. 'UPDATeS' would constitute all the incremental 2.x updates within the version number. All of those should be free.


    *edit - just noticed gbd and nicracine touched upong this earlier.
     

Share This Page

Loading...