Answers from Olympus

[Pingme]

This is what Olympus emailed me back in regards to a few questions I had.

"When using a digital camera to photograph subjects that are very strongly back lit, a purple or white halo effect may be present in high contrast areas of the image. For example, this could occur when photographing beams of light coming through leaves of a tree. This phenomenon is normal and is not a malfunction of the digital camera. It appears when different wavelengths of light are not focused onto the same focal point when going through the camera lens. An UV filter can be used to minimize the effect.

Olympus does not offer firmware upgrades that can be loaded by the customer. In the rare event that a firmware update is released, the camera must be sent in to the service center to have the firmware updated. Olympus rarely produces a fimware update. Most updates do not enhance or add features to the camera. The cost of the update will depend on each situation and the reason the update was released".

 

[Wayne Smith152120]

This is what Olympus emailed me back in regards to a few questions
I had.

This is a pretty standard answer regarding CA.

"When using a digital camera to photograph subjects that are very
strongly back lit, a purple or white halo effect may be present in
high contrast areas of the image. For example, this could occur
when photographing beams of light coming through leaves of a tree.
This phenomenon is normal and is not a malfunction of the digital
camera. It appears when different wavelengths of light are not
focused onto the same focal point when going through the camera
lens. An UV filter can be used to minimize the effect.

The real answer is that Olympus will use whatever method to maximize profits at any cost to the consumer. They sell them cheaper so they've got to get in your wallet someway. Nikon/Canon charges more that probably includes pricing for "X" number of fixes.

When I bought my Kodak DC260 (Still great pictures) a few years back, they put out a number of upgrades/fixes at no charge and they were internet available.

Olympus does not offer firmware upgrades that can be loaded by the
customer. In the rare event that a firmware update is released,
the camera must be sent in to the service center to have the
firmware updated. Olympus rarely produces a fimware update. Most
updates do not enhance or add features to the camera. The cost of
the update will depend on each situation and the reason the update
was released".

Cordially,

Wayne D

 

[Corne26033]

This is what Olympus emailed me back in regards to a few questions
I had.

"When using a digital camera to photograph subjects that are very
strongly back lit, a purple or white halo effect may be present in
high contrast areas of the image. For example, this could occur
when photographing beams of light coming through leaves of a tree.
This phenomenon is normal and is not a malfunction of the digital
camera. It appears when different wavelengths of light are not
focused onto the same focal point when going through the camera
lens. An UV filter can be used to minimize the effect.

A uv filter? Interesting. I would have expected a ps filter might help ;-) I don't buy it, but maybe I'm missing something. Thanks for posting.

 

[Ben Herrmann]

Pingme:

My patience wears thin at the responses offered by Olympus regarding firmware updates. Firmware upgrades - regardless of how minor - are released for a specific reason, and that is to address problems (whether minor or major) that occurred within the camera system. For Olympus to state that firmware upgrades are not released by Olympus is ridiculous at best. Why then are there the following firmware versions for the 5050: v558-76, v558-77, v558-78, and v558-79 (and by the time you read thisk, perhaps the v558-80 has been released already). What gives with Olympus' mentality?

My camera is currently in California with a request to upgrade it to the latest firmware update. I am hoping that since I sent it in with explicit instructions, Olympus will honor my request. I'll keep you posted on its return.

Why don't they just say, "okay, yes, these are the firmware upgrades that have occurred since the camera first was released. We don't believe that upgrading your 5050 will result in anything significant at this time, however, if you desire to have it upgraded, contact your nearest service center for details and shipping information." I can even see if they say that shipping must be covered by the consumer for both to and from. It's just the honesty I'm interested in here.

I doubt very seriously if that will ever occur.

Regards...

Ben Herrmann
Fuquay-Varina, North Carolina USA

 

[Humpty Dumpty]

. Most

updates do not enhance or add features to the camera. >

If this is so, then what is the purpose of the update? An update that does not enhance or add features to a camera, is this what they mean by "a non sequitor"?

 

[Steve Price]

Hi Humpty

Firmware versions can serve any number of different purposes, although fixing bugs is probably the most common. I read somewhere that the difference between v. 76 and 77 was support for an additional language - not an enhancement or a useful feature for anyone not using that language.

Olympus claims that the various firmware versions simply support different combinations of hardware that they use in making the camera. That is, v. 78 is not an "upgrade" from v. 77, just a version taht supports slightly different hardware. Is this the truth? I can't think of any reason why they would lie about it, other than stupidity or malice toward their customers. Those don't seem likely to me.

I've seen an astonishing number of problems attributed to the firmware, but if my memory is correct, the only one that seems pretty unequivocal (that is, hasn't been contradicted by some user's experience) is that the default sharpening is less extreme in v. 78 than in v. 76 or 77. I guess this is an enhancement - it means the sharpening is best left at the default instead of changed. But since several other settings are still best when not in the default, it hardly makes any difference whether sharpening needs tweaking or not.

Regards,

Steve Price

updates do not enhance or add features to the camera. >

If this is so, then what is the purpose of the update? An update
that does not enhance or add features to a camera, is this what
they mean by "a non sequitor"?

 

[Inigo Montoya]

A uv filter? Interesting. I would have expected a ps filter might
help ;-) I don't buy it, but maybe I'm missing something. Thanks
for posting.

I'm surprised they didn't mention stopping down the lens to help with it.

Odd that they'd call it "normal" and to be expected instead of calling a common problem shared by all digicam makers, and addressed in Olys' newest models with ED glass?

 

[Karen Stuebing]

My understanding is that it is a combination of lens and firmware. Look what this camera can do otherwise. Coming from a SLR background like most people here, I certainly can't complain. Just PS it out.

Karen

This is what Olympus emailed me back in regards to a few questions
I had.

"When using a digital camera to photograph subjects that are very
strongly back lit, a purple or white halo effect may be present in
high contrast areas of the image. For example, this could occur
when photographing beams of light coming through leaves of a tree.
This phenomenon is normal and is not a malfunction of the digital
camera. It appears when different wavelengths of light are not
focused onto the same focal point when going through the camera
lens. An UV filter can be used to minimize the effect.

Olympus does not offer firmware upgrades that can be loaded by the
customer. In the rare event that a firmware update is released,
the camera must be sent in to the service center to have the
firmware updated. Olympus rarely produces a fimware update. Most
updates do not enhance or add features to the camera. The cost of
the update will depend on each situation and the reason the update
was released".

 

[Inigo Montoya]

Firmware upgrades - regardless of how minor - are released for a specific > reason, and that is to address problems (whether minor or major) that > occurred within the camera system.

Why do you continue to refuse to acknowledge that updates also occur to support new parts incorporated into the system during production? Do you really need updated firmware to handle a component your camera wasn't made with?

For Olympus to state that firmware upgrades are not
released by Olympus is ridiculous at best.

They never claimed that upgrades aren't released. What they said was:

Olympus does not offer firmware upgrades that can be loaded by the customer. In the rare event that a firmware update is released, the camera must be sent in to the service center to have the firmware updated. Olympus rarely produces a fimware update.

"Released" can also mean a number of things. In this case it appears they mean "release" of a specific firmware revision to the public as a for-fee upgrade vs the "release" from engineering of a new firmware revision to support changes in components, manufacturing, etc.

In that context, and just as they claimed, updates have been rare. I can only think of two -- the upgrade for the old D600 series and a few others to handle larger SM cards, and the more recent update to add pixel mapping to the E-10. Both were handled by people shipping their cameras back to Oly and including a nominal fee ($30 ??).

While I'd also like to see them offer freely downloadable updates with improvements and new features, this is not, and has never been their policy. I think you're off the mark acting as if you're being cheated by the company for not providing you with something they never promised.

If you're having a specific issue with your camera, write to Oly support, describe the issue, provide example image files if applicable, and they should take care of it under warranty regardless of whether it's a hardware or firmware modification that's necessary to fix the problem.

 

[Jerrydf]

"Non sequitur" literally translates to "not in sequence" meaning "out of sequence". That meaning is not appropriately applied here.

updates do not enhance or add features to the camera. >

If this is so, then what is the purpose of the update? An update
that does not enhance or add features to a camera, is this what
they mean by "a non sequitor"?

 

[Dimitrios]

"When using a digital camera to photograph subjects that are very
strongly back lit, a purple or white halo effect may be present in
high contrast areas of the image. For example, this could occur
when photographing beams of light coming through leaves of a tree.
This phenomenon is normal and is not a malfunction of the digital
camera. It appears when different wavelengths of light are not
focused onto the same focal point when going through the camera
lens. An UV filter can be used to minimize the effect.

I would be almost 100% correct to say there's no way for a firmware to address purple fringing problems. The latter is induced by a combination of lens chromatic aberration at the peripheral of the lens and ccd blooming.

But, as I said before, I am not 100% correct. There is a way to correct ca (the lens part) to some degree : barrel distortion correction with different parameters for each colour (the way PanoTools and ImageFactory work). But I assume that kind of correction is too complicated and slow. Not to take into account accessory lenses etc or blooming. The latter makes complete fixing totally impossible.

Final conclusion is, don't expect a firmware update to resolve "ca" problems. I hope that makes you feel a bit better with Olympus firmware policy . Btw, my experiments with uv filter didn't show any improvement too.
--
Dimitrios
Olympus C-5050 & Minolta 7xi film SLR

 

[Ben Herrmann]

Inigo:

Okay, let me try this again. Perhaps, my use of the term firmware update was misleading. Firmware revisions - yes - address a series of issues whether they be new components or minor problems. Gosh, you certainly sounded like you were starting to get hot under the collar - definitely not my intention, that's for sure. Sit down, have a glass of wine, perhaps a slide of cheese - and of course, count to 10. Now, that's better, isn't it. But as an aside, I now know that if for some reason I elect to push your buttons, I know to do so by rattling on about firmware issues -

I do know that items such as noise, autofocusing, and shutter lag issues seemed to have been "magically" corrected with these firmware revision releases. So I guess I have to ask, why is that?

Now perhaps you've had some luck with Olympus Customer Support, but I haven't (and I surmise there are others who didn't either). The runaround I received when making call after call was ridiculous. Now perhaps if Olympus was the only camera I owned, I would have just chalked up the entire experience as par for the course. But my experience with ownership of other brands has given me the opportunity to experience customer support across a broad spectrum. And again, at least in my case, Olympus just gave me headaches in regards to my questions. So I can ONLY base my opinions on the way I was handled.

And then there is the issue of consistency. Why is it that I receive a variety of responses depending on the location I call. Then I contact service centers across the border and I basically get the information that yes, if I send in the camera they would do the firmware updates.

I love the 5050 - it's a work of art. I'm just the type of person who enjoys keeping up with new releases - whether they be software or firmware, especially when I surmise that they fix small issues (that might be irrelevant to others, yet important to a few of us). And yes, if the Olympus 4/3 system pans out and proves to be a real winner, I'll look into that also.

Have a great day...

Regards...

Ben Herrmann
Fuquay-Varina, North Carolina USA

 

[edsiajb]

I agree that different firmware revisions could relate to various internal hardware components (chips, etc). In my line of work, we frequently have to match firmware revisions to serial numbers on hardware that has the same model number. Often, we will have a particular model of server or disk array that certain serial number ranges will require a firmware upgrade and other serial number ranges will not.

"When using a digital camera to photograph subjects that are very
strongly back lit, a purple or white halo effect may be present in
high contrast areas of the image. For example, this could occur
when photographing beams of light coming through leaves of a tree.
This phenomenon is normal and is not a malfunction of the digital
camera. It appears when different wavelengths of light are not
focused onto the same focal point when going through the camera
lens. An UV filter can be used to minimize the effect.

I would be almost 100% correct to say there's no way for a firmware
to address purple fringing problems. The latter is induced by a
combination of lens chromatic aberration at the peripheral of the
lens and ccd blooming.
But, as I said before, I am not 100% correct. There is a way to
correct ca (the lens part) to some degree : barrel distortion
correction with different parameters for each colour (the way
PanoTools and ImageFactory work). But I assume that kind of
correction is too complicated and slow. Not to take into account
accessory lenses etc or blooming. The latter makes complete fixing
totally impossible.
Final conclusion is, don't expect a firmware update to resolve "ca"
problems. I hope that makes you feel a bit better with Olympus
firmware policy . Btw, my experiments with uv filter didn't
show any improvement too.
--
Dimitrios
Olympus C-5050 & Minolta 7xi film SLR

 

[Steve Price]

Hi Ben

I think much of the Olympus Firmware Frenzy of 2003 is a result of the use of the words "upgrade" and "update" in describing the versions. Those words have value implications. "Different" would have been a better word to use.

There are loads of posts from people who sent cameras in for service and found all sorts of problems solved or weaknesses strengthened when the camera came back with a different firmware version. The conclusion that it was the firmware that solved all these problems cannot be drawn from those reports. Other things happened as well, and the firmware change may have been necessitated by them.

Let's do a little fantasy. I make a camera that has three hardware components plus firmware that lets them work together. Those components are "a", "b" and "c". My firmware for them is version 1, and it's perfect (I told you this is a fantasy). One day, my supplier of "c" stops producing - his employees are on strike. So, I substitute component "d", from another supplier. Happily, it works just fine with firmware 1. Then that supplier has problems, so I switch to another, who provides me with component "e". Uh-oh, component "e" won't work with firmware 1, so I have to put firmware 2 in those units. Firmware 2 is also backward compatable with component "d", but not with "c".

Now I have three different hardware configurations - "abc", "abd" and "abe". The first two, but not the third, work with firmware 1. The second two, but not the first, work with firmware 2. The owners of cameras with "abc" and "abd", discovering that firmware 2 exists, all want that in their cameras. They get really angry when I won't let them install it themselves, and refuse to believe that it will make some cameras work badly and won't improve the function of any camera that doesn't already have it.

This, in a very simplified form, is what Olympus tells us is the reason they won't permit users to change their firmware. It makes sense to me, in part because so much of what has been reported on these boards is consistent with it, in part because the alternative explanations for Olympus' position seem nearly paranoid.

I think most lies are told because the liar has something he thinks he can gain from lying. I don't see what that might be for Olympus in this instance, and they have much to lose (good will is valuable). There are forms of mental illness in which people lie by default, but I doubt that Olympus suffers from a corporate borderline personality disorder.

Regards,

Steve Price

Inigo:

Okay, let me try this again. Perhaps, my use of the term firmware
update was misleading. Firmware revisions - yes - address a series
of issues whether they be new components or minor problems. Gosh,
you certainly sounded like you were starting to get hot under the
collar - definitely not my intention, that's for sure. Sit down,
have a glass of wine, perhaps a slide of cheese - and of course,
count to 10. Now, that's better, isn't it. But as an aside, I now
know that if for some reason I elect to push your buttons, I know
to do so by rattling on about firmware issues -

I do know that items such as noise, autofocusing, and shutter lag
issues seemed to have been "magically" corrected with these
firmware revision releases. So I guess I have to ask, why is that?

Now perhaps you've had some luck with Olympus Customer Support, but
I haven't (and I surmise there are others who didn't either). The
runaround I received when making call after call was ridiculous.
Now perhaps if Olympus was the only camera I owned, I would have
just chalked up the entire experience as par for the course. But
my experience with ownership of other brands has given me the
opportunity to experience customer support across a broad spectrum.
And again, at least in my case, Olympus just gave me headaches in
regards to my questions. So I can ONLY base my opinions on the way
I was handled.

And then there is the issue of consistency. Why is it that I
receive a variety of responses depending on the location I call.
Then I contact service centers across the border and I basically
get the information that yes, if I send in the camera they would do
the firmware updates.

I love the 5050 - it's a work of art. I'm just the type of person
who enjoys keeping up with new releases - whether they be software
or firmware, especially when I surmise that they fix small issues
(that might be irrelevant to others, yet important to a few of us).
And yes, if the Olympus 4/3 system pans out and proves to be a real
winner, I'll look into that also.

Have a great day...

Regards...

Ben Herrmann
Fuquay-Varina, North Carolina USA

 

[Inigo Montoya]

Inigo:

Okay, let me try this again. Perhaps, my use of the term firmware
update was misleading. Firmware revisions - yes - address a series
of issues whether they be new components or minor problems. Gosh,
you certainly sounded like you were starting to get hot under the
collar - definitely not my intention, that's for sure. Sit down,
have a glass of wine, perhaps a slide of cheese - and of course,
count to 10. Now, that's better, isn't it. But as an aside, I now
know that if for some reason I elect to push your buttons, I know
to do so by rattling on about firmware issues -

LOL. All in good fun here Ben. Nothing personal.

But as for pushing buttons, it wasn't so much "firmware" as a hot issue -- that seems to be yours ;-) -- but even in this message, you're still not acknowledging that sometimes firware revisions are necessary for things other than new features or problems. Olympus has given you an answer that is a least plausible, but you act as if either they never said it, or they're plain lying.

I do know that items such as noise, autofocusing, and shutter lag
issues seemed to have been "magically" corrected with these
firmware revision releases. So I guess I have to ask, why is that?

Are you sure it's just the firware mods and not some other adjustment(s) that Olympus has made to these cameras as the production cycle gets refined? Also, sometimes there's often a perception of other things being better after your've sent a camera out for repair for a particular issue.

Now perhaps you've had some luck with Olympus Customer Support, but
I haven't (and I surmise there are others who didn't either). The
runaround I received when making call after call was ridiculous.
Now perhaps if Olympus was the only camera I owned, I would have
just chalked up the entire experience as par for the course. But
my experience with ownership of other brands has given me the
opportunity to experience customer support across a broad spectrum.
And again, at least in my case, Olympus just gave me headaches in
regards to my questions. So I can ONLY base my opinions on the way
I was handled.

Poor handling by customer support people is one issue, firmware is another. I get the impression that if you call Olympus and ask to get "the latest firmware", they'll send you away, but if you tell them "I'm having auto-focus problems" or ask "why does my friend's 5050 have less shutter lag?" they'll address that question.

And then there is the issue of consistency. Why is it that I
receive a variety of responses depending on the location I call.
Then I contact service centers across the border and I basically
get the information that yes, if I send in the camera they would do
the firmware updates.

Sadly the general quality of people staffing customer support lines these days is not very good. Most are given a script of things to run you through, and if you stray off that script in your questioning they get hopelessly lost. Some will say they don't know, others will start making things up. This is a problem not just with Olympus.

I love the 5050 - it's a work of art. I'm just the type of person
who enjoys keeping up with new releases - whether they be software
or firmware, especially when I surmise that they fix small issues
(that might be irrelevant to others, yet important to a few of us).
And yes, if the Olympus 4/3 system pans out and proves to be a real
winner, I'll look into that also.

I like to keep updated too -- no problem with that, but one drawback to choosing Olympus is that those kinds of updates have never been a feature/service they provided.

Again, I think if you were to contact them with an explicit list of issues you're having with your camera and send it off, they'll do whatever is necessary to make it right. If in fact there have been firmware revisions for things other than new parts, they'll probably upgrade it as a generic attempt to fix things.

Since you love your 5050 though, another strategy might be the old "if it ain't broke..." You never know when the next update might tweak a setting (like saturation?) such that it's no longer to your taste.

 

[Jola]

Steve, firmware is normally written in such a way that all the older hardware revisions would work with the latest firmware version. Not to do so would be suicidal, and it is quite clear that all the other camera manufacturers follow the upwards compatible approach. It is fairly simple to do this type of conditional programming, and most (all ?) manufacturers of electronic devices do this.

It is of course possible that Olympus have a lack of technical expertise and follow the approach that you suggest. But although I do not agree with their standpoint on the firmware upgrades, I don't for a moment believe that they have a lack of technical expertise, which you seem to be implying.

They have just taken a view, made a decision, and come hell or high water will stick to it. So have Sony, for that matter, but because their cameras have too many disadvantages (memory stick, proprietary batteries, weird shapes) for me to even consider them, I am not really interested in what they do.

But the others that do provide these upgrades (Nikon (5000, 5400, 5700, etc) and Canon (G2, G3, G5), Minolta, etc., certainly do attract my interest. I just think that it indicates a more mature and responsible approach, and certainly is more considering of the people who pay their salaries.

 

[Clint D]

Exactly. They just can't admit it.
-Clint

updates do not enhance or add features to the camera. >

If this is so, then what is the purpose of the update? An update
that does not enhance or add features to a camera, is this what
they mean by "a non sequitor"?

 

[Clint D]

v78 at least has different sharpening algorithms. Maybe more things.
-Clint

Firmware versions can serve any number of different purposes,
although fixing bugs is probably the most common. I read somewhere
that the difference between v. 76 and 77 was support for an
additional language - not an enhancement or a useful feature for
anyone not using that language.

Olympus claims that the various firmware versions simply support
different combinations of hardware that they use in making the
camera. That is, v. 78 is not an "upgrade" from v. 77, just a
version taht supports slightly different hardware. Is this the
truth? I can't think of any reason why they would lie about it,
other than stupidity or malice toward their customers. Those don't
seem likely to me.

I've seen an astonishing number of problems attributed to the
firmware, but if my memory is correct, the only one that seems
pretty unequivocal (that is, hasn't been contradicted by some
user's experience) is that the default sharpening is less extreme
in v. 78 than in v. 76 or 77. I guess this is an enhancement - it
means the sharpening is best left at the default instead of
changed. But since several other settings are still best when not
in the default, it hardly makes any difference whether sharpening
needs tweaking or not.

Regards,

Steve Price

updates do not enhance or add features to the camera. >

If this is so, then what is the purpose of the update? An update
that does not enhance or add features to a camera, is this what
they mean by "a non sequitor"?

 

[Jola]

Olympus claims that the various firmware versions simply support
different combinations of hardware that they use in making the
camera. That is, v. 78 is not an "upgrade" from v. 77, just a
version taht supports slightly different hardware. Is this the
truth? I can't think of any reason why they would lie about it,
other than stupidity or malice toward their customers. Those don't
seem likely to me.

Then how would you explain Framer's 5050 v77 that was upgraded in 20 minutes to a v78? Of which half the time was probably taken to do the paperwork. Certainly not enough time for hardware changes.

Most of these companies, including Olympus, I'm sure, produce upwards compatible firmware, ie older hardware revisions will still work with the new firmware, and any bug fixes / enhancements will carry through.

I am sure that the newer firmware caters for hardware changes, but I don't for one moment believe that it doesn't incorporate bug fixes.

 

[Clint D]

"RARE EVENT"????? Hell, they've released THREE versions in just a matter of months!! Jerks.

Regarding the CA (chromatic aberration); they just can't admit that they have inferior lens manufacturing, nor the fact that the C5050 has the worse CA of any "decent" digital 'cam. Sure, CA is ALWAYS there, but the more the elements, the higher the quality of the elements, (and in their case) the more CONSISTENT THE MANUFACTURING PROCESS IS, the LESS CA you have. Proof of this is that some C5050 has almost NO CA at all, while others have it so bad there is purple tint to the ENTIRE image! I think everyone with severe CA needs to send their 'cams to OM and have them fixed. This may "shake them" into putting some better quality control on the lens manufacturing process. This also may be due to the fact the C5050 uses the SAME lens assembly as some of their other OLD lower end digicams. Bonehead move. We need to get on these peoples' case.

They ARE capable of some of the BEST lenses made, proof of that is my perfect (and a few times) award winning shots 20 yrs. ago with the top-notch Zuiko's on my OM-2n, OM-2s & OM-4. Now why they refuse to apply that technology or quality control to cam's such as the 5050, is beyond me. Evidently it all comes down to trying to scrimp on quality to have a larger profit margin at the expense of quality. We all know that with CAD, lensmakers have at their disposal the ability to make PERFECT LENS assemblies....and certainly better than what they are doing on the C5050 for example.

..and yes, WE ARE being cheated when every other digicam maker HAS the firmware updates at their respective websites for FREE.

Now all that being said, the C5050 IS still about the best pro-sumer digicam out there, the review websites prove that. It's always at the top, or in the top 3 at worse. The pitiful thing is, it could be SO MUCH BETTER! If you notice some of the sites REALLY note the CA (lemon camera), while others don't (perfect lenses on that camera). Again this is obviously due to a lax quality control program. (Yes, mine DOES have some bad CA, will probably send it to OM to fix this, that's the only way to be sure you have a camera that IS within "perfect parameters").
-Clint

This is what Olympus emailed me back in regards to a few questions
I had.

"When using a digital camera to photograph subjects that are very
strongly back lit, a purple or white halo effect may be present in
high contrast areas of the image. For example, this could occur
when photographing beams of light coming through leaves of a tree.
This phenomenon is normal and is not a malfunction of the digital
camera. It appears when different wavelengths of light are not
focused onto the same focal point when going through the camera
lens. An UV filter can be used to minimize the effect.

Olympus does not offer firmware upgrades that can be loaded by the
customer. In the rare event that a firmware update is released,
the camera must be sent in to the service center to have the
firmware updated. Olympus rarely produces a fimware update. Most
updates do not enhance or add features to the camera. The cost of
the update will depend on each situation and the reason the update
was released".