The FCC and your 8.1 Cyan Update

[MadDogFL62]

"We welcome your complaints and concerns.  Please use the www.fcc.gov/complaints Website as this is the most expedient way to file a complaint.  After doing so, we will assign an FCC Agent to your complaint.  It is the goal of the FCC Agent to work with Verizon to establish some kind of resolution."

And so went my conversation with the FCC today regarding these "irregular", "illegal", "useless", "annoying" and other such-defined complaints that we have all been told "aren't worth filing". 

The FCC said that all complaints are considered "real" and that all are assigned to FCC Agents.  The FCC Agent then contacts Verizon to try to find a solution - then brings the customer into the loop to see that either (A) the problem is solved, or (B) the customer decides to escalate because they do not feel that the problem is solved.

"Escalate" was a fresh option so I asked my Rep to explain.  I was told that if you are not satisfied with what the Verizon Rep tells you during their call, that you can contact the FCC and ask for a Mediation Specialist to step in.  This request must be made in writing, must include your complaint number, and must be sent via mail or fax.  A request for mediation is an aggressive step, therefore the FCC can no longer receive electronic correspondence regarding the complaint.  This sounded extremely "official" - making the request in writing, etc. - but a legitimate option nonetheless as complaints in the past have gone nowhere with Verizon.

My FCC Rep was eager to know what my concerns with Verizon were and confirmed that they were legitimate complaints.  She also said that since the Verizon Customer Contract could come into play during mediation, that they always suggest that the consumer's State Attorney's Office receives communication about the complaint as well.  I was told that the State Attorney's Office would take a serious look at the complaint - especially after seeing that I took the time to go through the FCC complaint process and that I am asking for mediation.

I planned on going to the State Attorney's Office with a pile of paperwork after this round of complaints, but the whole idea about FCC mediation may accomplish the goal of getting someone to pay attention at Verizon.  It may accomplish something simple like a documented public update schedule for Windows Phones from Verizon (as has been discussed out here in the past), or it may be something big like a resolution that involves Microsoft working more closely with Verizon to participate in pre-release testing programs. 

Do you have your 8.1 Cyan Update yet?  Do you have a better plan to promote you getting your update (or future updates) faster?  If you answered "no" to both, then please join me by filing your complaint.  Feel free to ask for mediation when Verizon calls to ask how things are going and by all means, be sure to let your State Attorney's Office know as well.  No one is looking to sue anyone.  No one is looking for fees or fines.  There is nothing illegal happening here that we are the whistleblowers on.  Just looking for a change that benefits the paying customer when it comes to updating our Windows Phone devices.  Please join me.

FCC Consumer Line:  1-888-225-5322

Federal Communications Commission

Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau

Consumer Complaints

445 12th Street, SW

Washington, D.C. 20554

FAX:  1- 866-418-0232

FCC Complaints:  File Complaint | FCC.gov

State Attorney's Offices throughout the US:  NAAG | Current Attorneys General

[rcschnoor]

rednibkram wrote:

Verizon has been provided the update by Microsoft and they are taking entirely too long to test it.

This is only an opinion, one which Verizon seems to disagree with.

[#3]

But you should ultimately receive all the updates we send out."

The word is Ultimately not guaranteed. No device maker nor government agency can force any carrier to update your device.

Maybe I should post a web site and say the same as Microsoft said in their reply. It would be just a meaningless as what Microsoft  told you.

[rednibkram]

Really, are you going to play the dictionary game now.  Come on man!  You know what he was saying.  Microsoft will work with the carriers to assist them in their testing, but if Microsoft really wants their device updated and Verizon refuses to update it, Microsoft will drag Verizon into court in a heartbeat.

[#5]

Microsoft has no grounds for legal action. The device as it at time of sale was a working device with a stable OS.

One time Microsoft would be hard pressed to get any legal action started.

Verizon does not even have to carry the Windows Phones. Lets see they no longer carry and support the Windows Phones (Like T-Mobile has done) and guess what....Microsoft doesn't have a legal leg to stand on.

It is just an enhancement not the end of the world.

[rednibkram]

And again, it's not about the enhancement.  Its about customer service satisfaction.  Why are you so hard pressed to express that Verizon is faultless in promoting customer dissatisfaction?

OK, so lets say that Verizon has Microsoft in a bind, that they can delay the update as long as they want.  That they can use this delay to promote another device they wish and are well within their rights to do so.  Let's say none of us have a leg to stand on because Verizon is in full control of all of this.  Does this make it right?  Is this the moral compass we want in our society today?  Might makes right?  What I say goes?  "Let them eat cake"?

Where is the customer satisfaction in disregarding your customers?  Where is the compassion for their complaints when you belittle them?  And, personally, where is your compassion for your fellow customers here on Verizon when you so blatantly disregard the issues and make excuses for Verizon, instead of assisting in attempting to "request" Verizon make minor changes in their testing process to speed it up?  Is that your personality, to make excuses and allow things to stay the same, or to join the masses and attempt to "request" Verizon make a few changes.

We are not asking for the world here, we are only asking Verizon examine their testing process and make a few changes to speed it up.  What is so horrific about that?

[#7]

We are not asking for the world here, we are only asking Verizon examine their testing process and make a few changes to speed it up.  What is so horrific about that?

I am not unsympathetic to your cause. Because this affects other OS on many other devices.

What I am trying to convey that you can complain that is your right I however know that some things in life just doesn't happen or go the way we want it to. You can keep complaining and feel that this is customer disservice, or you can take a wait and see attitude and when it comes be happy that the device received any update.

What is so much a hurry for an update that was not on the phone originally?

And then say you get the updates faster and the device is working screwy? Do you now come back here as posters on AT&T are now doing and blame the carrier for the malfunctions others are complaining about?

I personally and not in any way speaking for any company or other person just don't care if my device ever gets any updates.

Lets say the device makers decided that no updates are given for a previously purchased device, and that if you want that newer updated device you shell out the cash for it, are you now going to be sending complaints to these companies because your device does not have a better camera, a better FM radio, a better GUI, a better storage capacity, and on and on?

In fact of reality this could and does take place. It happened to one of my cell phones and it happened to my older iPad from Apple. what is a person to do? I just went and bought a new cell phone (Apple iOS device) and a new iPad with retina display. Yes it was more money but I know my threatening the companies would be for naught.

Both the phone and older iPad work (still do) but no neat add on or stability upgrades. But I know its pure profits that these companies are striving for. In some cases the devices cannot handle the updates lacking components.

But I am thankful for what I have, not for what can be. If it comes it comes and I will benefit.

But I in no way believe I am entitled to those updates.

We just reason differently, nothing wrong in that.

[rednibkram]

"What is so much a hurry for an update that was not on the phone originally?

And then say you get the update faster and the devie is working screwy?  Do you now come back here as posters on AT&T are now doing and blame the carrier for the malfunctions other are complaining about?"

To answer your first question, the whole reason I purchased the device in the first place is because I was told (right or wrong) by a Verizon salesperson that the Lumia Icon would receive the Windows Phone 8.1 and Cyan firmware update.  Now, maybe it's foolish to put faith in a salesperson, but that salesperson is not the only place these "update promises" were made.  Advertisements, articles, etc were all contributors.  Regardless, the "assumption" was that this device would receive the updates and therefore we customers purchased it based on that (mis)leading.

Now, in response to  your second statement:  The answer is, to an extent, yes!  I would come back and place some blame on Verizon.  Why?  Because Verizon placed themselves in the line of fire when they demanded the testing process.  If Verizon is supposed to be testing this software to ensure there is no problems before they approve it, then there should be no problems.  That is, afterall, the supposed purpose of the testing phase.  So, if Verizon gives the thumbs up on an update and there is a problem discovered, then yes, I will call Verizon and ask them why they did not catch this error and also "request" assistance in resolving the issue either with Verizon's help or from the manufacturer with Verizon assistance.  Why wouldn't I?  Would I say the actual device problem is their fault?  Of course not, but if they are demanding the testing of the device to ensure proficiency, then why shouldn't I expect proficiency?  Otherwise, what is the purpose of the testing phase?

If I were selling you four new Firestone tires on your car and you entrust me to inspected those tires before I placed them on your car to ensure there are no defects in the tire.  Wouldn't you expect me to find a defect before I placed them on your car?  Especially if I told you that is what I would do before placing them on your car.  True there could be a "hidden" defect, but regardless, when the defect is discovered, whom would you call first about the defect, Firestone or me?  By my inspecting/testing (and selling you) the tires, I wouldn't expect you to call anyone but me first.  That is part of being in the merchandise business.  And another part of that business is to assist you if you do have a problem.  That's called "customer service."

Now could I deflect the call to Firestone?  Of course, just as Verizon could deflect the calls to a manufacturer.  No inspection is ever going to be 100% perfect.  They could test an update for years and still not find 100% of the defects that could emerge.  But when you place your company in the direct path of these updates, you can't complain when customers point a finger at you for experiencing defects that they have entrusted you to detect.  You accept that you missed an error, try to assist and then, if necessary, point the customer in the right direction for assistance.  But, you surely don't complain about customer complaints.  Dealing with issues like this is part of a customer service representatives job.  It's what they are paid for.  Surely I have simpathy for them as many people can be outright rude, but at the same time, they have an opportunity to reduce the complaints by adjusting their attitudes towards the update process.  Make the process shorter and work closely with the manufacturers for additional support should errors arise to have those discovered issues corrected quickly.

I don't mean to sound heartless against Verizon tech support personnel.  I do have respect for the hard work they do.  However, I don't expect them to be heartless towards me and my desires either.  You get out of a company and it's customers what you put into it.  Respect flows both ways.

[#9]

Like I said I don't totally disagree with you. However if Verizon by default or via fault in the testing more than likely does not test everything.

The device makers and OS developer makes code, makes changes and then prays it will operate at minimal standards on the different carriers.

The Bluetooth or the USB or the other components are not really Verizon concerns. Personally I have never read what just is tested.

But more than likely not any problems with screen freeze up (GUI) or sound or WiFi connectivity or Bluetooth or NFC and I am sure the list can go on. Or the head phone jack not working or the charging port no longer holding a charge (battery). I cannot see any carrier checking those situations. So what is left?

That would be a question I would like answered if carrier testing is so important.

And again Apple devices have these issues ( data leak, screen won't turn on, WiFi disabled, messaging not going out/in, contacts missing, device ringer no longer working, etc. etc. etc.)

Verizon has nothing to do with what Apple updates in their iOS, yet look again as I said the posts blaming Verizon for all the ills of the iOS update.

I suspect Windows Phones are just as quirky and yet unless we know what was tested, why would Verizon outside of security concerns actually be liable for OS updates that render the devices inoperable?

Too many questions to blame the carriers. I personally would like all updates to come directly from the device makers and if there is/are any device failures then Verizon should simply say "Take it up with the devices manufacturers or OS developers" (Apple, Google, Blackberry or Microsoft)

Then watch the yelling and threats posted here. Direct blame for no involvement. Just like with Apple complaints here right now.

Lets just say the carriers test for cellular radio use, or interference with or on the network only. Again not directly responsible for any other issues.

Maybe someone can actually say what cell carriers test for. That would be helpful.

Until then we are just going to disagree on what service we are entitled to.

That is the American way, agree to disagree!

[rednibkram]

OK, so we agree that Verizon cannot test for "everything."  Yes, there could be problems associated with any device that is the fault of the manufacturer.  But, again, I say, Verizon is the one that placed themselves in the direct line between the customer and the manufacturer.  It is their decision to do so, so they can't expect not to be in the line of complaints when something doesn't work.  Regardless of the reason, if Verizon doesn't want the complaints, then they should get out of the way of the updates and point the finger at the manufacturer when something is broken.  If I have a problem with my HP laptop and something goes wrong with the screen, I'm surely not calling my ISP about it because my ISP doesn't demand to be in between me and HP for firmware updates.  If I have a problem with Windows OS, I'm calling Microsoft, not my ISP.   

[#11]

All of which makes sense.

But Verizon in the middle is not really accurate. They are protecting their networks. All carriers do the same. And they do have a Customer Agreement resolving them of any liability for such anything. (Could not think of a funny word here)

[rednibkram]

You just hit the nail on the head.   I understand they need to protect the network, and in order to do that they must voluntarily or involuntarily place themselves in the middle of the update process.  It comes with the territory and I can sympathize with them.  But, if they are going to be there, they have to accept the "complaint line" comes with the territory and they can't very well complain about the "complaint line."

However, our (we customers) concern isn't really with that fact that they are in the middle of the process, or even that there is a process.  Our concern is that Verizon simply refuses to "amend" the process to speed the process up any.  We don't want the process eliminated, just enhanced to speed it up. 

But, in my attempt to bring this to the attention of Verizon, what I have actually experienced from Verizon employees and executives has been rudeness, carelessness, beligerance, disrespect, obstruction, denial, and flat out lies.  So I ask again as I have before, is this the type of behavior that a company should demand respect of it's customers?  Instead of resistance and belittlement, Verizon should be taking our complaints to heart and using them to increase customer satisfaction, not creating customer resentment.

[#13]

But, in my attempt to bring this to the attention of Verizon, what I have actually experienced from Verizon employees and executives has been rudeness, carelessness, beligerance, disrespect, obstruction, denial, and flat out lies.  So I ask again as I have before, is this the type of behavior that a company should demand respect of it's customers?  Instead of resistance and belittlement, Verizon should be taking our complaints to heart and using them to increase customer satisfaction, not creating customer resentment.

I don't believe any company should act that way towards any customers. I firmly believe that in the complaining process the carrier is getting annoyed. They will not come out and say it but if what you have felt and experienced it must now show you that this may be the case.

I would hope in the future these updates no matter what OS or device you use is taken out of the carriers hands and just sent out and let the chips fall where they may.

Who knows what may happen in the future?

[Tepid]

The way I see it, Smart Phones are as smart as any PC.

They are in Fact, tiny computers.

Think if Dell or HP decided that they were going to take over as middle man for the hardware they sell

They build you a PC with and Nvidia or ATI card in it, then demand that all firmware updates go through them exclusively.

Who in their right mind is going to stand for that?

Especially when there are fixes for new games,

"nope, sorry, we know you bought that game a month ago, and we are still testing and tweaking the drivers/firmware that Nvidia/ATI sent us. We don't know when we will release it."

Yeah, that would never ever fly in a million years.

Personally I think it's time to start legislation on taking this away from ALL Carriers.

as well as phone not being locked down by the Carriers.

I am not referring to Radio stuff. Just that they can't put a lock down on the firmware and OS.

Or try this one, Your ISP sells you a Dell PC and pulls this garbage with Drivers and Firmware updates

They won't be selling PC's for very long.

[#15]

I don't know if you are old enough to remember when computers were actually branded to an ISP.

They either gave you one for a term of service, and they did control the system updates and the browser activity.

It did not last long but many folks did get their first system this way.

The computers of yesterday are not even one tenth of what cell phones (smart phones) can do today.

My first home PC was a $3000 Packard Bell Legend Supreme 60 it had a 256 MB hard drive, a 1200 baud modem, which I upgraded to a 56 K Zoom Modem. The graphics card and sound card were a combo deal. I purchased a Creative Labs sound blaster, and a better graphics card. The memory was only expandable to 2 MB and I had to update the 60 MHz chip set to an Intel overdrive processor. So those first machines were expensive, but the replacement parts jumped the price over $5000.00

Today smart phones have quicker processing speeds, the graphics are outstanding, the memory is starting out at 8 GB and more, it connects at 3G and 4 G LTE speeds and it makes calls and takes photos and much more.

For around $800 technology has leaped from the days I remember.

But again the updates were slow coming, the computer makers actually stopped or stifled updates. BIOS updates being a big hold out. In fact some computer makers made the customers buy the updated BIOS or legacy sound and video drivers. That is why I purchased replacement units. So the control was there.

The big thing with cell phones is when I buy one I buy it for clear calling and for occasional texting and web searching. I did not ever care if updates came out or not. If they did it was great, if not no big deal.

Letting device makers take total control of updates would be OK. It would also take carriers out of the process. But who knows if that will happen

[Tepid]

Yes, I remember, but again, the ISP gave that up, partly because the overhead was too high

and the Home PC became very prolific pretty quickly starting right around 1992/93 and exploded from there

They would never have been able to keep up with the demand.

And the OEM's didn't really want to take on the responsibility of the ISP.

At that time, Internet was getting faster and away from BB's and going full on Web browser

Win95, IE and Mozilla changed that scene forever.

Fast forward to now, and regardless. If all you want is a simple calling phone

and basic browsing, great, there are super cheap devices for that.

But when I spend the money on a top of the line Mobile Device, that happens to be able to make phone calls

All bets are off. I want the improvements that come with the updates.

I expect them, actually demand it, everyone should.

If the manufacturer never releases an update to their device,, fine, that's one thing.

But for Carriers to deny them or hold them hostage, or just take their sweet time with them, is unacceptable.

[sethen]

What are you smoking?  There were the days when you could rent a terminal from the ISP if you didn't have access to one yourself, but that was a whole different animal.  You know it and now you're just throwing anything you can think of out there to be difficult.

[#18]

What are you talking about?

My god another one.....!

Explain what you are saying.

You make absolutely no sense what so ever

[jharris326]

Elector wrote:

"I don't believe any company should act that way towards any customers. I firmly believe that in the complaining process the carrier is getting annoyed. They will not come out and say it but if what you have felt and experienced it must now show you that this may be the case."

Then the carrier needs to keep it's hands out of the update process!  Despite what several have said THEY ARE HOLDING UP the update(s) for the Windows Phones.  NOT the FCC, NOT Nokia/Microsoft, but Verizon.  Microsoft released them to the carriers over a month ago.  It does not take 6+ weeks for the testing despite what some would like to say.  Microsoft will not bypass the carrier unless given permission to do so by the carrier.  There is very little difference between an ISP and a wireless carrier at this point in time.  An ISP that was as heavy handed with blocking updates would quickly be sued and most likely would stop the bull Verizon is pulling.

[#20]

But in forward thinking Verizon and other carriers are also testing other operating system updates.

The greater selling devices are Androids and iOS so Windows devices with low market share will not get a priority over the other two.

I won't even mention Blackberry (RIM) they are in worst shape than Windows devices. That was why I posted that link about sales and the links to show how android devices get approved. And in that case android devices are behind as well.

It is just not an earth shattering event to get any update. As long as the device functions as when purchased people will have to just wait. Complaining is not doing much good as you can see.

And only AT&T has done the windows phone updates and they have problem complaints after releasing the update. Similar to all the android complaints you read on this forum.

[Tepid]

But that is the issue, We SHOULD be entitled to every update that comes along.

Generally, updates improve a product or fix bugs, improve security.

No Carrier should be allowed to control or hold hostage any update for any phone.

As large as Verizon and other carriers are, they should have no problem working closely with

manufacturers to make sure these updates work properly, and release them in a timely fashion.

The update was released to the carriers about 2 months ago.

Any company this large that can not get an update tested and released in that amount of time..

1.) is not working with the manufacturers closely enough to ensure a timely release

2.) is wholly incompetent

3.) Holding it hostage

I MIGHT agree with a firmware upgrade that involves numerous devices getting the same firmware

but 3 devices and going on 2 months Plus is far longer than it should be.

This is the same issue I have with many Device Manufacturers and Windows.

They have an over abundance of time to be ready at release of a new Windows OS.

Yet, for Vista, it took them a solid 7 months to get proper drivers released.

They had well over a year to plan and be ready.

They were slightly more ready for Win8, but even then, many fell short at release.

You can't tell me that these companies do not have the resources, BS, yes they do.

[BDub43]

You hit that right on the headed it is the vendors, I bought this phone from Verizon because I knew it was getting the update. The Lumia 930 release with the Cyan Firmware I do not understand the issue.  From a hardware\firmware perspective outside of the LTE bands enabled they are identical.  There should be no holdup from Verizon. Verizon please respond with what the hold up is?  I am a new customer that came from Sprint for this phone only.  AT&T received the update form all its phones and it has been deployed.  You are suppose to have the best network how about release the best software form the manufacturer of the devices you sell. Every employee gets a new phone rather frequently so testing a phone and getting feedback should be a very easy task.

Microsoft should push the update separately from the Carriers through the Developer preview, they made the phone.  It is evidently obvious that the foreign carriers are more friendly to the Mobile Device Manufactures than US carriers. I have already started purchasing other phone unlocked from Expansys or Amazon unbranded(WP of course) that my kids use on T-Mobile, I guess that will be the move going forward.  Updates just come a lot faster and the phones do not have bloatware installed.