At least according to this post:
I feel that Telus mishandle the 10.3.1 rollout and needlessly delayed it. The boilerplate response is that they test the OS beforehand, but that's all done from the source, and then BB opens its servers to carriers. If Telus tested, they wouldn't have rolled out the version of 10.3.1 that contained the flicker issue. Any hold up is solely the responsibility of the carrier at that point, not BB.
Telus, do the right thing with 10.3.2 and make up for the semi-botched 10.3.1 rollout, please.
Solved! Go to Solution.
I will have to respectfully disagree with you there. While TELUS does extensively test firmware roll outs (primarily for call handling, and mobile service related parameters) certain things are bound to fall through the cracks. In the case of the 10.3.1 roll out however, BB themselves halted the release for a while before addressing some critical bugs. So TELUS is not one to blame as they don't develop the software themselves. You could otherwise state the same thing for all the past "botches" with Android and IOS releases. It's ultimately up to the manufacturer to QC the software roll out, TELUS's extensive testing primarily relates to Network related services.
Thanks for your reply Dimo. Well, based on how smoothly 10.3.1 went for other carriers and how bumpy it was through Telus, I have to respectfully disagree back. I don't work for them so don't proclaim to know all the inner workings, but they released the buggy 10.3.1 build well after BB established a fix.
So I find it hard to believe that Telus does extensive testing of any kind, otherwise they would've held off on the initial 10.3.1 update. Frankly, I think the point they reiterate about extensive testing and holding off on an update to be sure it's fully validated is a save-face.
Well-aware that Telus doesn't develop the software, but they're the ultimate gatekeeper to the BB servers where the updates are released. This is pretty well documented.
Would love to be proven wrong!
I can't speak to Android rollouts, but I know they're spurious anyways from the source. iOS is a bad example, too, because Apple has it in their power to avoid any carrier holdup and push updates out directly.
Except they did share 10.3.1 release dates (albeit delayed) ahead of time, on Twitter. So why not for 10.3.2?
Even Rogers has a 10.3.2 plan and release dates shared.
I like Telus, but their BB10 treatment is lazy.
Thanks, NFtoBC! Most helpful post by far.
Even if they don't hit that target, that is a projected date so it's something. ET, why did you suggest that Telus doesn't share release dates when it's plainly stated here?
I have to respond to the OP here. You've basically got it all wrong. I follow BB updates closer than most. TELUS far from botched the release of 10.3.1. If anything, they're the carrier that did it right. 10.3.1 had issues before it officially roll out (I tested leaked OS builds) and BB released it to the carriers anyway. It is NOT the role of the carriers to test for software bugs, UX, or judge the OS in any way OTHER than its ability to connect to the network. For all its flaws. 10.3.1 did not have any connectivity issues. So, they were simply doing what they're supposed to by initially releasing BB's buggy 10.3.1 update. Then, when the BB community cried out that it was super buggy, in a rather surprising move, BB recommended halting the rollout by carriers. Some carriers continued anyway (Rogers), but TELUS complied with the recommendation and ceased rollout until a fixed (kinda) build was produced, then tested by TELUS for connectivity problems.
In short, TELUS did exactly what they're supposed to, and they are not responsible for any bugs in the OS. That's not what they test for. TELUS isn't a software company, its a network company. Your frustrations with 10.3.1 are misplaced, and should be directed at BB.
To the Mod, your answer was perfect.
@ campbecw: I don't fully agree. When BB fixed the bugs in 10.3.1 that were not network related, I assume they did not touch the network modules of the OS. Therefore, if Telus only tests network related issues, they should have applied common sense and not brainlessly redo the entire testing procedure. As an option they could have requested BB to provide a release that comes with the end-user-demanded fixes and the previously certified network modules. I highly doubt such request would have been rejected.
Agreed with Martian.
The bugs were not network related at all. And Telus did in fact release the OS with the flicker issue after it was widely known at that point. I'm aware of the role that network carriers play (but thanks for the reeducation); yet, Telus reps claimed time and time again that they were testing the OS for things beyond the scope of a network carrier.
BTW, I test leaked OSes too. What's your point?
Appreciate others' responses in this thread.