Database Develop

[Q] Is gingerbread(Android 2.3) coming to the Galaxy S I9000?

Roms based on froyo or gingerbread?
The discussion in the thread "30/Jun r1 (JFB) - MoDaCo Custom ROM for Samsung Galaxy S with Online Kitchen" is a bit confusing so I thought it best to make it a new topic to get it straight.
Will it be possible to make roms based on froyo, gingerbread or any other coming android version, before Samsung makes an update? As I understand psychoace it will be ”near impossible to get roms from other sources like Sense roms or Froyo”. Others are not so sure.
This is important as Samsung is known for its lack of interest in OS updates. Who knows if they will take gingerbread to GS? If they won't can it be done by the really smart guys?

I don't think even HTC will update there top line to V3 (ginger bread). Froyo is coming any way to GS in near future. Now ginger bread should be possible too as GS is power full enough to run. When? we should wait and see. Nexus just got updated to 2.2.
Will see how things go in future.

Samsung has released there kernel sources and there software sources. I haven't had a chance to look in to it deeply but if it has the code of the drivers etc.. it should be possible to merge (with some work obviously) sources and to compile froyo.

kimatrix said:
Samsung has released there kernel sources and there software sources. I haven't had a chance to look in to it deeply but if it has the code of the drivers etc.. it should be possible to merge (with some work obviously) sources and to compile froyo.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But don't those drivers only work with 2.1 and just simply won't with any version higher unless samsung releases new source and drivers for 2.2 and then 3.0. So if say samsung never releases anything any source/drivers that work with 3.0 then you would be out of luck to actually get everything to work.

MrDSL said:
But don't those drivers only work with 2.1 and just simply won't with any version higher unless samsung releases new source and drivers for 2.2 and then 3.0. So if say samsung never releases anything any source/drivers that work with 3.0 then you would be out of luck to actually get everything to work.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is true but if you have the full sources you are able to look what the differences are and maybe patch those by your self. Assume a wlan driver is using an function that has changed or is gone in 2.2, then you can try to patch that by finding the new one for it to work with. If you don't have the sources it's much harder to do those kind of things.
As I sad you have the sources so you can play by your self even if samsung does not do anything. It does not mean it's easy and it does not mean it can be done fast. But it does mean it could be done.

kimatrix said:
That is true but if you have the full sources you are able to look what the differences are and maybe patch those by your self. Assume a wlan driver is using an function that has changed or is gone in 2.2, then you can try to patch that by finding the new one for it to work with. If you don't have the sources it's much harder to do those kind of things.
As I sad you have the sources so you can play by your self even if samsung does not do anything. It does not mean it's easy and it does not mean it can be done fast. But it does mean it could be done.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But the video drivers are already compiled. Can they be easily decompiled? It's not a source file if it's already compiled.

psychoace said:
But the video drivers are already compiled. Can they be easily decompiled? It's not a source file if it's already compiled.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can they be decompiled and made to work? Of course!
Will someone be motivated to do all this work? Unknown.
Besides drivers arent the only issue to getting a new version of Android on a phone. If you dont have source for any proprietary userland daemons/apps (like radio?) that communicate with the hardware you will be SOL on that as well.

MMMMMMMMM if we can do it for the G1 we can do it SGS...the question is when and how much work. The Galaxy S will be Samsung's flagship device for A YEAR so I'd hope to get Gingerbread...unless Samsung are really stupid. Especially with a lot of US launches, they'll be able to relaunch with Gingerbread as it comes is my hope.

psychoace said:
But the video drivers are already compiled. Can they be easily decompiled? It's not a source file if it's already compiled.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Who told you that??? The source code of the GPU as well as every other coprocessor is there.
The two .o file that started this all fiasco are ok and you as long as the make file include them in the build they would work perfectly.
All they have inside is a simple elf code to tell the s3c*** to do whatever it needs to do. A source code wouldn't have been beneficial as it would have to be compiled differently for a different ARM instruction set .

kitsune223 said:
Who told you that??? The source code of the GPU as well as every other coprocessor is there.
The two .o file that started this all fiasco are ok and you as long as the make file include them in the build they would work perfectly.
All they have inside is a simple elf code to tell the s3c*** to do whatever it needs to do. A source code wouldn't have been beneficial as it would have to be compiled differently for a different ARM instruction set .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But when you need drivers for 2.2 the source code would be optimal because these drivers are not going to work without some hacking.

They are going to work as they are non kernel bound ELF files.
Guys this isn't a driver ,if it was a kernel module ( or "driver" s you call it) it would have been a .ko file and had a slightly different structure ( use readelf on a kernel module and then on this to see the difference). So no matter what it is when can use the compiled version as it not kernel bound
From quick inspection it seems like the injection code for the s3c*** . so basically its there so the kernel could reference to it when the code tells it to do so . So Basicly all we have to do is put it in the proper place when building the kerne.
So please DON'T PANIC

well the TP2 just got 2.2 FroYo (2.1 has more working drivers ATM).. but if we have it, how would it be different for the SGS to get FroYo?

You need to remember that while other companies can update kernel quite easily ( all the work is done for them by the chip manufacturer and some member of the community ) this isn't possible here as this is a chip only used in one android/other linux platform device and the company making the device also make the chip.
So give them a few weeks to work on it

J-Hop2o6 said:
well the TP2 just got 2.2 FroYo (2.1 has more working drivers ATM).. but if we have it, how would it be different for the SGS to get FroYo?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
let's just say it will be the first time a non Samsung Rom has worked on a Samsung Android phone.

psychoace said:
let's just say it will be the first time a non Samsung Rom has worked on a Samsung Android phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not true.
Look here: http://forum.samdroid.net/f28/lkmod-v-2-5-1-based-jce-en-upd-03-30-a-336/
I see a custom ROM made for the i5700
Everything is possible.

clubtech said:
Not true.
Look here: http://forum.samdroid.net/f28/lkmod-v-2-5-1-based-jce-en-upd-03-30-a-336/
I see a custom ROM made for the i5700
Everything is possible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did I say custom rom? No i said specifically non samsung based roms on a samsung device. That custom rom is based off of a Samsung rom.

This is the closest we have got to a Hero rom on a Samsung device.
http://androidforums.com/all-things-root-behold-2/60408-port-htc-hero-behold-2-wip.html
He couldn't get Rosie to boot so who knows what other problems he would of had after that (from the picture you can see he never got any network connection)
So there don't say I didn't give you any hope.

Froyo is offical. That's good, but we need to be looking past it to Gingerbread.
Froyo is announcedm confirmed, and now dated for the end of September, and that's great. But to me, that's not the question we need to be asking Samsung anymore, we need to be thinking past that.
The question people need to be asking Samsung, so we can get them on the record committed to it now, is will you release a Gingerbread update for the phone as long as the hardware is capable of supporting it. The OS is only 2-3 months from being unveiled if Google sticks to their time table, and if the rumors are true it'll be a much bigger overhaul than 2.1-2.2 is.
So unless we want our phones to be outdated before the end of the year, we need to start making a push as a community to get a commitment from Samsung to support not just the OS that was released 4 months ago, but also the much bigger one that's right around the corner.

2.2 is good.. proves everyone wrong who said "ooh its Samsung, of course they won't release Froyo."
but somehow, I doubt that samsung will somehow not upgrade SGS to 3.0. If they do, it might be a few months (at least) after everyone else gets it. The reason is, they could have new flagship devices out that they wanna push to the mass-markets, so putting gingerbread on that will boost the sales.
However, considering that they marketed the SGS so well, and have it well on its way, they might just put gingerbread on it
seriously, i see ads for SGS EVERYWHERE online.

mjgunn said:
[....]
So unless we want our phones to be outdated before the end of the year
[....]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I totally expect that my phone will be outdated by then. That's a consequence of the world we live in But then again, i'm a nihilist

[Q] Stock Froyo for Galaxy S

Hi folks,
This is a noob question. I am unable to find any post related to stock Froyo for Galaxy S. Is something like this out yet ?
By stock I mean, Android as Google release it, without any reseller trash on it.
Thanks in advance

there is no froyo for SGS yet, at least not officially
much less a stock froyo
there are tons of phone killing Beta froyos if you feel brave

Thanks for letting me know. I am not confident yet in any beta out there, although a lot of phones are using it without any issue...
Hoping that stock will be released soon.
Thanks

It won't (be released soon).
Currently there are community efforts going on to try and get stock 2.1 run on the SGS but they still have a way to go.
After that, once samsung releases the sources for 2.2 they can start trying to get a stock 2.2 running. They have to wait for Samsung because of drivers and such.
Hoping that what they've learned from 2.1 can largely be reused there's a good chance a stock/AOSP 2.2 ROM could make it's way relatively fast to the SGS but for now, don't hold your breath.

Ladduro said:
Hi folks,
This is a noob question. I am unable to find any post related to stock Froyo for Galaxy S. Is something like this out yet ?
By stock I mean, Android as Google release it, without any reseller trash on it.
Thanks in advance
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I really don't think it can ever be called stock. All releases have to be configured and customised to the platform they are running on. With Linux or Windows it is all on the disk and web server, drivers etc etc. You cannot do this with phone firmware as the download would be huge.
And just like Windows or Linux there are some stock programs that each will install. So what can we call "stock"? Even the Nexux 2.2 has to be configured to it.

By stock/vanilla Android, I meant of course a modified one that includes drivers for SGS, but does not include any customer UI made by Samsung.
So stock UI, no additional garbage (iPhone garbage style in SGS case) would be what I really need to see on my phone.
Or maybe a faster way for this is to modify current Samsung ROM and remove TW and Samsung's apps.
Thanks

Ladduro said:
By stock/vanilla Android, I meant of course a modified one that includes drivers for SGS, but does not include any customer UI made by Samsung.
So stock UI, no additional garbage (iPhone garbage style in SGS case) would be what I really need to see on my phone.
Or maybe a faster way for this is to modify current Samsung ROM and remove TW and Samsung's apps.
Thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have a look in the Dev threads. There are several Roms that do that.

Hi Tehpriest,
Can you route me to a ROM mentioned by you ? I searched but in vane... no result.
Thanks

+1. Have been seeking a stock UI-based ROM for i9000T for a while now, with no luck.
Cheers!

There seems to now be some skilled developers starting to get Cyanogen 6 (a vanilla version of Froyo) onto the Galaxy S. Assuming they get it running - which I think is likely when Samsung release the source for their spin on Froyo - it will take a while before it's stable and fully featured.
There's a steep learning curve for working out how to backup then flash your phone with a new rom. It took me three days to go through forum posts working it out, and I've now got a beta version of Froyo working fine. My advice is to get Samsung's official upgrade Froyo when it's out and wait until the devs get a chance to get something better running.
Also, use 'Launcher pro' from the market to replace Samsung's launcher, which makes things a whole lot more familiar.

official froyo is out, the wait should be shorter now

I am hoping too for this. I really like to benefit of OOB Android experience as Galaxy S is my first android phone.
Looking forward to see if it... hopefully soon.

wasnt CyanogenMod working on a release for the galaxy s?

[Q] How to get started making captivate roms

Hey Guys,
I'm a developer for a living, and I'm interested in possibly working on a custom rom for my captivate. I was doing some research on how to get started, but the stuff I found was for HTC phones and involved using a starter that only works for HTC stuff.
Where can I go to find information on doing this? I'm largely interested in trying to port gingerbread, but my understanding was that until we have the full source this wasn't really possible (at least for something actually useable on a daily basis). I see supercurio is working on gingerbread, so information specific to this would be really helpful.
Thanks guys, and sorry if this should have been put in the QA section, I figured it was related to development, and could possibly be a sticky if it leads to useful info.

Pretty broad question. First requirement, is obviously...learn java.
I'm not sure if there's any specific "HOW-TO CODE YOUR OWN CAPTIVATE ROM" threads anywhere; there's general information available on http://developer.android.com , but modifying ROM's depends on the device it was written for.
As far as porting gingerbread, it will be very difficult without source and will definitely require quite a bit of kernel work. For information specific on this, supercurio would be the one to ask. Of course, the IRC's are also a great place to get information.
By the way, welcome to XDA! And I commend your motivation to develop stuff for the community here.

http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=869614
Doc over in the I9000 forums has the above thread started. I look there.

geokhentix said:
Pretty broad question. First requirement, is obviously...learn java.
I'm not sure if there's any specific "HOW-TO CODE YOUR OWN CAPTIVATE ROM" threads anywhere; there's general information available on http://developer.android.com , but modifying ROM's depends on the device it was written for.
As far as porting gingerbread, it will be very difficult without source and will definitely require quite a bit of kernel work. For information specific on this, supercurio would be the one to ask. Of course, the IRC's are also a great place to get information.
By the way, welcome to XDA! And I commend your motivation to develop stuff for the community here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Again, I am a developer for a living. I know Java, I'm not looking for coding tutorials. I'm looking for information specifically regarding the captivate.
As far as gingerbread, it sounds like what you are saying is that what people like supercurio are working on is not really gingerbread? More of a Frankenstein created with the sdk, mashing together 2.2 kernels and what has been released for 2.3?

lbbo2002 said:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=869614
Doc over in the I9000 forums has the above thread started. I look there.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Looking at that thread, it appears the roms being made are just edited versions of already compiled roms? Is samsung not required to post the full source of their roms?
I'm assuming the issue with starting with the original android source, is that we wouldn't have drivers for half of the hardware in the phone. Is the only choice then to load the already compiled drivers from the samsung builds into the rom?

epoplive said:
Again, I am a developer for a living. I know Java, I'm not looking for coding tutorials. I'm looking for information specifically regarding the captivate.
As far as gingerbread, it sounds like what you are saying is that what people like supercurio are working on is not really gingerbread? More of a Frankenstein created with the sdk, mashing together 2.2 kernels and what has been released for 2.3?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are different levels of making ROMs IMO.
You can combine work from others and make your own ROM. This requires no coding experience. For instance, I took JH7_OTA, dropped in Atinms Voodoo 3 kernel, removed bloatware, added my own custom framework (icons), etc., signed it and flashed it.
Then there is the whole Kernel side of things that requires an entire development environment (Linux) and C/C++ programming skills. I'm trying to get to this point. You can start by downloading the source and building it in your own environment familiarizing yourself with the codebase.

Indeed. Packing a ROM and making the contents of the ROM are two different sides of the spectrum. Even some minor framework modifications can be performed by the most tech-inept, as long as they have a good resource to work off of.
epoplive said:
Again, I am a developer for a living. I know Java, I'm not looking for coding tutorials. I'm looking for information specifically regarding the captivate.
As far as gingerbread, it sounds like what you are saying is that what people like supercurio are working on is not really gingerbread? More of a Frankenstein created with the sdk, mashing together 2.2 kernels and what has been released for 2.3?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was only prodding fun when I mentioned learning Java, just to break the ice. All I'm saying is trial and error is the best way to learn Android if you're already a decent programmer. Without knowing what the source code looked like before Samsung owned it, we don't really have a base environment to work off of, which means we are modifying work that was already modified from stock; which is why it will be pretty hard to find a lot of definitive coding information about the Captivate.
Supercurio isn't making a frankenstein 2.2-2.3 hybrid. The kernel is where all of the information about your hardware resides. Supercurio needs to take the Gingerbread kernel from the Nexus S, and modify it to run with our hardware. You can't run a 2.3 ROM without a 2.3 kernel; so we CAN'T use a 2.2 kernel to run full gingerbread; and since a 2.3 kernel doesn't exist for the Captivate, he is using the Nexus s's kernel as a base, or as a reference to merge the differences between the two, creating a kernel that will support the Nexus S ROM on a phone that isn't the Nexus S.
epoplive said:
Looking at that thread, it appears the roms being made are just edited versions of already compiled roms? Is samsung not required to post the full source of their roms?
I'm assuming the issue with starting with the original android source, is that we wouldn't have drivers for half of the hardware in the phone. Is the only choice then to load the already compiled drivers from the samsung builds into the rom?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Correct. We don't have the source code for Froyo yet for the Captivate(or an OTA for that matter ), a lot of ROM's being made are based off of the SGS I9000 2.2 source, and because we have that source, we have a pretty much fully functional "captivated" i9000 kernel.

geokhentix said:
Indeed. Packing a ROM and making the contents of the ROM are two different sides of the spectrum. Even some minor framework modifications can be performed by the most tech-inept, as long as they have a good resource to work off of.
I was only prodding fun when I mentioned learning Java, just to break the ice. All I'm saying is trial and error is the best way to learn Android if you're already a decent programmer. Without knowing what the source code looked like before Samsung owned it, we don't really have a base environment to work off of, which means we are modifying work that was already modified from stock; which is why it will be pretty hard to find a lot of definitive coding information about the Captivate.
Supercurio isn't making a frankenstein 2.2-2.3 hybrid. The kernel is where all of the information about your hardware resides. Supercurio needs to take the Gingerbread kernel from the Nexus S, and modify it to run with our hardware. You can't run a 2.3 ROM without a 2.3 kernel; so we CAN'T use a 2.2 kernel to run full gingerbread; and since a 2.3 kernel doesn't exist for the Captivate, he is using the Nexus s's kernel as a base, or as a reference to merge the differences between the two, creating a kernel that will support the Nexus S ROM on a phone that isn't the Nexus S.
Correct. We don't have the source code for Froyo yet for the Captivate(or an OTA for that matter ), a lot of ROM's being made are based off of the SGS I9000 2.2 source, and because we have that source, we have a pretty much fully functional "captivated" i9000 kernel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah, thanks, that's pretty much the information I was looking for.

Honey Comb? 3.0

i just looked at this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4NqT6u_ODk and started looking at honeycomb. When i first looked at the froyo video the the gingerbread video i noticed how fast our devs started working on the project i was just curious if this is already being worked on or if its even been seen thanks for any replys

AFAIK, the source hasn't been released yet. Supposed to be today.

Honeycomb is for tablets only. I don't think it will work on any phone.

pfrederickjr said:
Honeycomb is for tablets only. I don't think it will work on any phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
from what ive heard it will be for phones as well

It's supposed to have some smartphone support...
http://www.engadget.com/2011/01/28/android-3-0-honeycomb-emulator-has-traces-of-smartphone-support/

Dude before we start hoping and dreaming for a honeycomb update to our phone why not lets see the gingerbread one get at least one stable release. Plus like others have said honeycomb is for tablets, for now.
From what i know, google is going to release android 3.0 as honeycomb for tablets and then later on work in and refine the smartphone side and release android 3.2 as honeycomb for smartphones.

Also, before we continue to build android updates for our hero we need a newer and more stable kernel.
S0be has been working on 2.6.35 and he's done a lot of good work, i'm pretty sure deca has also contributed to that as well and deca also maintains a 2.6.29.5 kernel.
S0be kernel
once that kernel is done then the likely hood of having honeycomb running on the hero is good.

By then there will be no devs left
--------
Sent from my Sprint SuperHero

Pocker09 said:
Also, before we continue to build android updates for our hero we need a newer and more stable kernel.
S0be has been working on 2.6.35 and he's done a lot of good work, i'm pretty sure deca has also contributed to that as well and deca also maintains a 2.6.29.5 kernel.
S0be kernel
once that kernel is done then the likely hood of having honeycomb running on the hero is good.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Notice: Don't take this as gospel truth, I'm not a rom modder, just a kernel hacker
The hard part in getting up and running on a new Android release has very little to do with the kernel. For the most part, the Kernelspace/Userspace APIs have stayed the same. Where the problems lie are in the Kernelspace Helper Libraries and their connection with userspace. We do not have the source code for all these libraries, which is why it's not just *POOF* it works every time a new android release comes out. My 2.6.35 kernel just means that any direct kernel dependence new android adds will be provided, but it does NOT solve these intermediary layers. There is, in fact, the possibility that a new android release won't be compatible with our libraries, and we'll be proper focked.

[Q] will samsung galaxy s get more updates ? or this is last

will samsung galaxy s get more updates or this update 2.3.3 XXJVK is last update ?

in my opinion after using JVK, it still got bugs (beta) and there will be more updates,
2.3.3 is
1st not officially released
2nd. other than Europe its not even leaked.
so logically yes I am expecting more updates...rest Time will tell

Samsung have the answer nobody else .
jje

3.0 honeycomb is for TABs. No way SGS's gonna get it. JVK is raw beta, sweeter versions are coming I guess.

seah87 said:
will samsung galaxy s get more updates or this update 2.3.3 XXJVK is last update ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
2.3.3 will be the last update, jvk is not official so there will be a series of ROMs available via Kies.
Sent from my HTC Desire using XDA Premium App

rdy2go said:
2.3.3 will be the last update, jvk is not official so there will be a series of ROMs available via Kies.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You seem quite sure of yourself there.. How do you know for sure?

Auzy said:
You seem quite sure of yourself there.. How do you know for sure?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because ->
rdy2go said:
Sent from my HTC Desire
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

i think sgs will get one more update

Auzy said:
You seem quite sure of yourself there.. How do you know for sure?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because his Desire wont be getting any updates in the future
On a more serious line, if the next updates will work on SGS the update will be taken into consideration... but as we know it SGS 2 is being released in the near future they will stop support for the sgs and focus on updating the sgs 2 to make people buy it
Sadly marketing and sales are everything for these companyes....

Why do some people think JVK was beta because of a few bugs? there have been far worse official kies releases in the past. It may well have been a beta just don't expect perfection if we do get another release, you'll only be disappointed. Personally JVK has been one of their better firmwares, I would gladly have this via kies. The only thing stopping me from using it is the lack of source and voodoo, anyway, I do believe we will have more updates, well I hope so anyway.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App

i think its weird that Samsung are still releasing more froyo versions so close to an official GB version release. With that in mind, hopefully there will be many GB versions from different regions around the world, just like froyo.... Wont hold my breath.
An additional question - Will the next android release (2.4?) be able to be adapted to SGS with no Samsung support e.g. CM8?

I think that we will continue to see more froyo builds for awhile, as not all carriers and regions will be upgrading to Gingerbread, or at least not at the same time.
Parallel to that I imagine over the next couple months the official Gingerbread firmwares will start, so like Froyo, we will have many different 2.3.3 builds from different regions to argue about and play with, likely appearing throughout 2011.
The next announced build is Ice Cream Sundae, that is 2.4. As this is said to be an extension of Gingerbread, I imagine it will work on the SGS, but as by the time it is released the SGS II will be out for several months, I wouldbe VERY surprised if we see an official Samsung SGS firmware based on 2.4 However, I am sure we will see some SGS ROMs based on 2.4 here in XDA, so do not fear...we haven't hit a dead end with this phone yet.
As for Honeycomb (3.0), it is optimized and designed from the ground up for tablets and larger screens so even if it could be ported to the SGS, I don't see why you would want it to be.

Well, after looking at the code for JVK olny for a few hours, Supercurio said on twitter that it has a major security flaw and that it probably is an unfinished version of the firmware that will be released officialy. Based on his track record I trust Supercurio.
pixie77 said:
Why do some people think JVK was beta because of a few bugs? there have been far worse official kies releases in the past. It may well have been a beta just don't expect perfection if we do get another release, you'll only be disappointed. Personally JVK has been one of their better firmwares, I would gladly have this via kies. The only thing stopping me from using it is the lack of source and voodoo, anyway, I do believe we will have more updates, well I hope so anyway.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Another Gingerbread firmwares - yes. Official Ice Cream firmwares - most probably no.

Truth is, nobody on here knows anything about future updates, the most anybody can do is speculate. If you had believed what people on here thought about the update probability for the Galaxy S upon its release, you wouldn't have believed we would even have froyo by now.
Wait and see.

As promised GB will be the last update to i9000
Hello Every one,
Gingerbread will be the final update for I9000,
The Version 2.3.X will be release to all the I9000 model.
There will be regular update for the Gingerbread only (Bug fix & Perfomance update).
Version 3.0 will be not given to i9000, But we can opt to Custom ROMS for V 3.0.
Samsung will constrate more on S2. Samsung Promised only Gingerbread for i9000. No more future OS update. (Gingerbread updates only)

I have heard that Icecream will be a merge of gingerbread and honeycomb and will be version 4.0
rschenck said:
I think that we will continue to see more froyo builds for awhile, as not all carriers and regions will be upgrading to Gingerbread, or at least not at the same time.
Parallel to that I imagine over the next couple months the official Gingerbread firmwares will start, so like Froyo, we will have many different 2.3.3 builds from different regions to argue about and play with, likely appearing throughout 2011.
The next announced build is Ice Cream Sundae, that is 2.4. As this is said to be an extension of Gingerbread, I imagine it will work on the SGS, but as by the time it is released the SGS II will be out for several months, I wouldbe VERY surprised if we see an official Samsung SGS firmware based on 2.4 However, I am sure we will see some SGS ROMs based on 2.4 here in XDA, so do not fear...we haven't hit a dead end with this phone yet.
As for Honeycomb (3.0), it is optimized and designed from the ground up for tablets and larger screens so even if it could be ported to the SGS, I don't see why you would want it to be.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA Premium App

Samsung will have an easier time rolling our updates because they produce the nexus S which is essentially a glorified stock GT-i9000. It'd be bad PR to stop producing updates. Samsung knows that if they want people to buy their new phones they have to support their previous ones.
My update will be to the phones after the Tegra 2 generation. And if my Galaxy S is stuck at 2.3.3 in Q4 2011 my next phone won't be a Samsung.

lvvine said:
Hello Every one,
Gingerbread will be the final update for I9000,
The Version 2.3.X will be release to all the I9000 model.
There will be regular update for the Gingerbread only (Bug fix & Perfomance update).
Version 3.0 will be not given to i9000, But we can opt to Custom ROMS for V 3.0.
Samsung will constrate more on S2. Samsung Promised only Gingerbread for i9000. No more future OS update. (Gingerbread updates only)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How about some proof? Did the Samsung PR team come to your house and tell you there will be nothing past 2.3.3? If they didn't then shut your mouth and form your post in the form of an opinion. Not as a statement.

I like os version more than costum rom