Softcard now available for Verizon, enables NFC purchases with your Windows Phone | Windows Central
I think you meant "Those of us with Lumia devices are SOL until Microsoft is done messing with the update and releases it".
Why does Softcard only work with the new HTC M8 with Windows and not any other Windows Phone that also has NFC?
Unfortunately you will not be able to use this application until VZW releases CYAN to all Lumia phones. The HTC M8 for Windows has CYAN so anyone with that phone will be able to use Softcard.
FYI, Cyan is Lumia device specific frimware version and doesn't pertain to HTC devices.
HTC M8 does have 8.1 and HTC's updated firmware to work with Softcard.
Those of us with Lumia devices are SOL until VZW is done messing with the update and releases it.
Softcard now available for Verizon, enables NFC purchases with your Windows Phone | Windows Central
I think you meant "Those of us with Lumia devices are SOL until Microsoft is done messing with the update and releases it".
HTC Firmware allows Softcard to work on their device. Lumia devices, such as the Icon, require the Lumia Cyan firmware update that Verizon has dragged their feet on. Yes, WP trolls, the update is now back in Microsoft's hands for development due to Big Red's need to have their bloatware work flawlessly.
The 830 on AT&T is looking much nicer these days.
The 830 is a really nice device and Microsoft is pushing it hard. They were on display all over the Microsoft Store...I'd say 10-15 of them. The camera is way faster than the Icon's which I imagine is due to Verizon's negligence in not getting updates out to it's customers in a reasonable amount of time.
Careful with the troll allegations.
It was said from intelligent posters here that Verizon for what ever reason did not have it.
Even if they had it (Verizon) no law or regulation requires them to even give any update.
When Joe at Microsoft posted his tweet he never said anything about Verizon apps. For any delay.
He said due to Verizon's Quality standards, Big difference.
Funny how you answer to "troll". (What's your handle on AT&T forums?)
Yep! Verizon living up to it's contractual obligations by not releasing updates. Caveat emptor!
I think there are some reasonable expectations here to keep customer's happy. When one carrier offers upgrades there is an expectation the same will happen across all the carriers. We have seen that except Big Red.
Verizon could have said the update is in MS court months ago and stilled the voice of the disgruntled, or at least redirected it, but instead chose to be silent. Not for market share but for partial blame I think.
We will have to agree to disagree since you only see Terms & Conditions and I, see customer satisfaction.
My Handle is ELECTOR on all forums. And I belong to many of them.
I don't think because a carrier stayed silent on who had what at what time really mattered. Think now, does it really matter? we have no idea if the carrier had a gag agreement and after getting a pounding (wrongfully) about the update that Verizon contacted Microsoft and told them to straighten out these complaints.
Notice how carefully Joe's tweet was made. Information? Diversion? Truthfulness? not one iota of anything other than to cast dispersions on the carrier for not approving the update under quality concerns.
I have no objection to disagreeing with anyone. But it is my right to disagree and to say why.
Elector,
I suspect Joe is trying to be politically correct and not throw Verizon under the bus for the delay. It's hard to believe that the build that has worked great for numerous of our users on the dev program would have quality issues so detrimental as to be unsuitable for release. It's hard to take Verizon claims of quality control seriously when they allow new .0 versions of iOS which are consistently significantly more buggy than any WP release at least until the the first point upgrade or two.
It just strains credibility to say quality control is the reason for delays for one OS while releasing a considerably buggier OS on day one.
Although I see your point, let's look at it this way. The T-Mobile & AT&T carriers are GSM. Verizon is CDMA and using that new Volte I think its called. It could simply be at the time Verizon received it this new LTE was not rolled out yet.
Now the OS update is not functional on Verizon's network. Does that make more sense than the "speculation" of it was because of Verizon apps which can be grabbed from the play store and apple app store?
Joe could have been deflecting that it was in deed Microsoft that dropped the ball? Remember Microsoft is famous for constant patches even to the newest Windows 8, which less than a month later was upped to Windows 8.1
And Joe never said when they got the rejected OS back. Could have been sooner than his tweet.
So windows phone users really don't know who is at fault. Maybe a little from both companies.
Wouldn't that be fair to question?
I try to see both sides. Sure Verizon keeps silent, but in all likely hood they have to. And you don't see any verifiable information from Microsoft forthcoming outside of Joes one tweet.
Actually there is a Law. When Verizon Leased the LTE spectrum the law stated they must allow and not hinder any device or software that does not cause damage to the physical network. It is on the carrier to prove such damage exists. This is also why LTE phones are unlocked.. it wasn't out of the goodness of their hearts.
Also Do you research Verizon is also the Biggest Brother out there. They are adding a tracking identifier token to all HTTP requests, that track you better than any IP address ever could., and refuse to let us opt out.
Actually not a law. The FCC does not make laws. They make rules and regulations. Big difference.
I personally don't care what tracking methods they use, in the old days it was just as sneaky.
You could set a metatag to have web pages show up all over the place. There are other methods.
There use to be a way to have a transparent HTML page that would overlay. Just a blank page that set a tracking code. There is not much you can do about it.
It's not Cyan it's 8.1 that is the stopping point. Now, if Verizon gave a damn about their customers they would unlock the app for people on the DP 8.1 devices. They should just release it. If a phone doesn't have 8.1 the app won't work. Why block it for everyone? And of course, they never give their customers updates and information.
It's gotta be Cyan related for the Lumia's. I'm running 8.1.1 and I cannot install the app so that only leaves the firmware as the missing piece.
MrGecko wrote:
HTC Firmware allows Softcard to work on their device. Lumia devices, such as the Icon, require the Lumia Cyan firmware update that Verizon has dragged their feet on. Yes, WP trolls, the update is now back in Microsoft's hands for development due to Big Red's need to have their bloatware work flawlessly.
The 830 on AT&T is looking much nicer these days.
calling people trolls aside... a little tidbit of information(pun intended)... You do realize Software is also a Verizon application right? So what if that isn't working flawlessly? Doesn't it hurt the brand and in general reduce people adopting NFC payments?
Why not sell your Icon and move to AT&T and get the Icon equivalent or the 830? Why wait? Seems too much of a headache to complain on a forum full of users than it is to actually enjoy a carrier and a phone you like right? The kind of hoopla people are making I wouldn't bother and let my wallet do the talking.
T-Mobile and Sprint have that ETF offer you are looking for.
If you actually READ what I said instead of calling people trolls I wasn't talking about Verizon's brand. Sure it may be a Verizon branding app, but these CC companies as well as other NFC payment companies want people to adopt NFC payment. We are talking TRILLIONS of dollars. That "brand"(NFC payments) is what I am talking about.
Then you will not get your answer here. The reps here will not be able to give you the answer and this is a peer to peer forum. You can contact Verizon higher ups through email or contacting them. There was someone here who supposedly got insider information by calling them not sure if his information is true or trolling.
As per my tiraid on Windows Central with him (his posting name on that site is NolaTechy) he states it was a tech support call with Nokia & Verizon Wireless and he stated Nokia said it was apps for the rejection and then the Verizon tech person confirmed it.
Then he tipped off Windows Central who "confirmed" his tip was correct. However the writer of the piece never produced how or whom verified it. Only that it was investigated by their sources.
I have been searching other sites to investigate that app claim myself. So far a dead end.
However on Windows User Forum (Official Microsoft site) others have questioned that app theory since Joe Bellfore never said that in his tweet. And no OFFICIAL word from Microsoft either confirming or denying the issues.
And as you know Verizon tech support would not have any in the know information on the issue.
"As per my tiraid (tirade) on Windows Central with him (his posting name on that site is NolaTechy) he states it was a tech support call with Nokia & Verizon Wireless and he stated Nokia said it was apps for the rejection and then the Verizon tech person confirmed it.
Then he tipped off Windows Central who "confirmed" his tip was correct."
Nice to finally see you finally got the scenario correct Elector. Thanks. But while you have every right to be skeptical of the occurrence, that exact scenario IS what happen. As we discussed on WindowsCentral, I can't provide proof it happened, but at the same time can't provide prove, outside of speculation and belief, that it didn't. I WAS told by the Nokia representative that Verizon apps were the cause of the return, and the Verizon Tech Support person did agree. That is FACT, that is TRUTH, regardless of your skepticism or belief, and the good Lord above knows this.
Now, could either of those persons been lying to me? Sure, that's possible. But that doesn't mean they didn't say it to me.
Another thought, given the NON-RESPONSE from Verizon on this, even if I was lied to, Verizon has no one to blame for any finger pointing in their direction but themselves. If they would be more respectful to us paying customers and provide decent information as to the status of the update (despite any legal obligation that you or Tidbits might quote) , then no one would need to speculate, or rely on information told by support personnel.
Yes, Verizon has no "legal" obligation to provide an update, but does that mean they shouldn't? Even Sprint has now announced that all of their Windows Phones will be updated to 8.1 leaving Verizon as the only carrier in the U.S. to not have updated a single Lumia Phone. Don't you think Verizon would WANT to release this update? Given the VERY BAD reputation Verizon is now receiving GLOBALLY, don't you think it would be in their BEST INTEREST to get this update release as soon as possible? And even if it is not 100% their fault, don't you think it would benefit Verizon to, at the very least, put some kind of official announcement out as to the status of this update?
Why can't you and Tidbits, and anyone else at Verizon not see that despite any legal obligations, a moral obligation to care about your customers satisfaction is, at least, implied? If there is some sort of "gag order," as has been previously mentioned, would it not be benefitial to ALL parties to release an official statement, because not only is Verizon looking bad here, but also Microsoft. There are lots of people on the Microsoft site blaming Microsoft for this delay as well.
While neither company has any legal obligation to provide information, morally it would be the right thing to do. Afterall, if it wasn't for us paying customer buying Verizon's service and Microsoft's product, neither company would even be in business. All we are asking for, and have been asking for, is the update and a reason for it's delay. Despite any "legal obligation" I don't think that is too much of a moral request.
Start a new topic or ask questions in the open forum.
