Phone manufactures sell phones to carriers, not consumers. Success in the phone industry depends entirely how well you meet the demands of the carriers. RIM knows it (or knew it), Nokia knows it, Samsung knows it.
Android is merely a platform that allows Samsung to tailor their devices to the carrier's requirements, in a way they couldn't do when they were selling Windows Mobile devices.
So how does Android 4 help Samsung better meet the demands of the carriers?
It doesn't. Carriers want devices that show off their network, they want devices that compare well against the iPhone, and they want you to buy a new phone and sign a new contract in 2 years. They obviously have no trouble selling Samsung devices with outdated software to the unsuspecting public; it made Samsung the largest smartphone manufacturer in the world.
Neither the carriers nor the manufacturers will spend a dime to rush out Android 4.
I must point out that your comment does not apply to a large number of markets. Consumers in India, for example, decide on a handset independent of which carrier's service they use.
Samsung's devices compare very favorably to similarly priced devices. iPhones are very expensive compared to Samsung's devices in India and in my observation (warning: anecdotal evidence), most iPhone owners that I know have sourced their devices from the US (usually via the used device markets) to get around the price problem. There's no wonder that Samsung continues to thrive and Apple continues to languish in the Indian market.
"Phone manufactures sell phones to carriers, not consumers."
Where do you get that data from? I just tried to challenge your claim, but I did not find any worldwide statistic about how many people buy smartphones with or without contract.
My personal guess is that not only do a lot of people buy their phones from Samsung (e.g. through amazon.de/co.uk).
From the people who buy on contract, many people are in a position to choose between many providers with very similar services and prices. Meaning that they choose the contract by the price and quality of the phone, not the contract.
At least in Europe that's the case, and I believe it is similar in most Asian markets.
Companies like Samsung are not primary concerned about carrier satisfaction, because in most parts of the world, carriers are exchangeable pipe providers that need Samsung more than Samsung needs them.
Calling everyone one who buys a samsung device "unsuspecting public" is patronising. There are real reasons to buy a non apple device. I have listed some such reasons on an earlier thread - http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3642152 . I also managed to miss one important reason in that list - 4G.
He's not calling everyone who buys a samsung device "unsuspecting public". He's specifically referring to those who wouldn't mind buying a 2.2 phone when 2.3 and 4.0 are out.
You aren't wrong in how you describe the players' actions and motivations, but thinking like this in the legacy and and Android markets is what is turning everyone into Apple's customer.
I got fooled by the "Android is open" marketing. Then I learned that "open" was for carriers, not consumers, so there really wasn't much "freedom" difference between Android and iOS,
I bought my i9100 full retail. I am most certainly their customer. Just got a major Kies update yesterday. Even for those people who get their device carrier subsidized -- which is the vast majority, including for Apple devices (where Apple sells the device to the carrier and not to the end user) -- Samsung is very interested in making their customer, the end-user, happy. The end result of their efforts is unprecedented, almost Apple-like interest in every leak about the Galaxy S III.
Same thing with HTC -- they suffered a down year because they didn't do well, so they're back and ready to delight customers again. The One is on my short list.
Android is merely a platform that allows Samsung to tailor their devices to the carrier's requirements...So how does Android 4 help Samsung better meet the demands of the carriers? It doesn't
Pick an argument and stick with it. That you have collapsed all of Android's many advantages into such a biased, nonsensical anti-Android growl is absurd enough, but keep some coherency in your argument.
Neither the carriers nor the manufacturers will spend a dime to rush out Android 4.
Yet the next 30 days will see tens of millions of devices updated. I'm curious what you'll say then. Oh I know what you'll say: Google is hard at work trying to push the next version of Android out, and then the next version after that, reaching a frantic pace, even if it provides ammunition for bores to declare fragmentation.
Phone manufactures sell phones to carriers, not consumers. Success in the phone industry depends entirely how well you meet the demands of the carriers. RIM knows it (or knew it), Nokia knows it, Samsung knows it.
Android is merely a platform that allows Samsung to tailor their devices to the carrier's requirements, in a way they couldn't do when they were selling Windows Mobile devices.
So how does Android 4 help Samsung better meet the demands of the carriers?
It doesn't. Carriers want devices that show off their network, they want devices that compare well against the iPhone, and they want you to buy a new phone and sign a new contract in 2 years. They obviously have no trouble selling Samsung devices with outdated software to the unsuspecting public; it made Samsung the largest smartphone manufacturer in the world.
Neither the carriers nor the manufacturers will spend a dime to rush out Android 4.