Original topic:

Tab S7+ owner; getting sick of being ignored

(Topic created on: 10-15-2020 11:01 PM)
Active Level 2

I'm getting tired of repeating myself but I'm back to talk about MONTHLY security patches for the Tab S7 and S7+. I've heard the generic response from many reps: that they'll forward it to the software team, but I haven't found a single response from said software team. 


For users unaware, the Tab S7 and S7+, despite being the best tablets Samsung make, get the same software treatment as their much cheaper A-series phones. They get security patches once every 3-4 months, possibly 5 if history repeats itself from the S6 and S4, and will get OS updates also likely a few months after the S20 and Note 20 despite being comparable in price and specs. This is unacceptable.


For those who think security isn't important, here's a great analysis I got from a very knowledgeable user online in regards to OTA updates from OEMs and Google Play Project/Mainline updates introduced in Android 10:


"Last year 30% vulnerabilities were patched in android kernel. Rest of them were in android framework, OEM drivers and SoC firmwares. Mainline updates some critical portion of android framework so there is still some dependency on OEMs to cover rest of the android framework, drivers and firmwares. Securing mainline modules alone is not enough.

What matters more is where the vulnerability is. Vulnerability in kernel is likely to have more severity so kernel updates are much more important than updates for non-core android framework components. This is what GKI is promising to update. Vulnerability in drivers and firmwares can be as much critical but don't show up quickly. Once your device stops receiving updates for any of these critical components, vulnerabilities of your version that show up after that date, your device will become more vulnerable as the gap increases."


To recap, 70% of vulnerabilities found in Samsung's Android devices can only be patched via OTA updates from Samsung. If a vulnerability shows up a month after a QUARTERLY update, that means the Tab S7 and S7+ will be far more vulnerable to attack for 3-5 months. This would not happen if they got patches monthly, which would fix the vulnerabilities found within 30 days instead of 3-5 months. 


Users are very interested in seeing improvements, as you can see below. (They're all safe links, so don't even think of removing them "because it violates our policy". It only proves my point. I have brought up the issue and many people agree it needs fixing.)



As an owner of multiple Samsung devices, including the Galaxy S20+, Gear S3 and the older S9+ and Tab S4, it is disheartening and disrespectful to me a customer to not the get the best experience possible considering my other devices get it.


For those who think it's infeasible for a multi-billion dolar company to actually support another 2 of their products they charge a pretty penny for, you're only fooling yourself. I also want to point out that the company Essential provided this level of support up until their bankruptcy, which had nothing to do with software support. (They went under for selling a poor-man's Pixel that had no purpose to exist, not wasting money on updates)


Considering competing devices in the same market like the Apple iPad and Microsoft Surface receive monthly security patches AND LONGER SOFTWARE SUPPORT, I see absolutely no reason for Samsung to skimp.


For those saying I should buy them instead, Samsung has us all by the balls. There is no other 12 inch HDR10+ 120hz AMOLED device, so it's the Tab S7+ or bust. I'd rather improve the software experience here than beg Apple or Microsoft to step-up their display game. 


I want to see actual change. Monthly security patches for the Tab S7 and S7+!

1 Comment
Expert Level 5
They could do that. Sadly, the rollout could still takes ages for no reason. I had to flash OneUI 2.5 manually on my Tab S6 because it's still not released in Canada, while it was released in Europe last month (and yes, it's the exact same firmware). Their whole update structure should be revised.