SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
On the heels of Microsoft bashing Google's hands-off Android update policy at Ignite 2015, Lucian Armasu at Tom's Hardware has an editorial reaffirming Android's update woes:
Android 5.0 and Android 5.1 (Lollipop) [...] currently represent 9.0 percent and 0.7 percent of the Android market, respectively, for a combined total of 9.7 percent. That's definitely nothing to be proud about, because it could be years by the time the vast majority of users are on the Android 5+ platforms. By then, 10 percent of users could be on Android 8.0.
Because Android is open source and because so many (essentially) OEM-tweaked "forks" of it exist, a "clean" upgrade path is almost impossible. To have a clean standardized update system would mean all the OEMs would have to agree to abide strictly by Google's guidelines for what they can and cannot modify on the platform. However, as soon as Google tries to do something like that, the OEMs usually cry foul that Google is making Android more proprietary and restricting what they can do with it. Google may also not want to upset the OEMs too much by forcing a unified update system on them either, because of the fear that those OEMs could take their business elsewhere, as it were.
When we look at the matter practically, though, we see that some have already tried that (Samsung with Tizen), and it hasn't worked very well. The reality is that Android and iOS are so entrenched in the market right now that it's hard to believe a significant third platform could arise on mobile when it comes to apps. Even Microsoft, after spending billions upon billions trying to make Windows Phone popular, has essentially admitted failure on the app store front, and is now trying to make Android and iOS apps work with Windows instead.
Google also can't and shouldn't leave the responsibility to OEMs and carriers anymore, because so far they've proven themselves to be quite irresponsible from this point of view. At best, we see flagship smartphones being updated for a year and a half, and even that is less than the time most people keep their phones. Even worse, the highest volume phones (lower-end handsets) usually never get an update. If they do it's only one update, and it comes about a year after Google released that update to other phones, giving malicious attackers plenty of time to take advantage of those users.
This update "system," if you can call it that, ends up leaving the vast majority of Android users with security holes in their phones and without the ability to experience new features until they buy new phones (which is sadly a kind of planned obsolescence as well). This can't be an acceptable state of affairs for Google, and it shouldn't be. Google already has a great six-week update system for Chromebooks, and it's time to have Android catch up to that, as well.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by snick on Wednesday May 06 2015, @01:57PM
Not everyone has $600 to drop on a phone. You can get a no-contract Android phone for $10 [amazon.com] And yeah, the phone sucks, and is back level on the OS, and we can all sneer at it, and the carrier associated with it. But it is still just $10. The cheapest no-contract iPhone on Amazon is over 10x as much. (also with a sneer-worthy carrier)
Shitty Android phones fill a niche in the market that _would_not_upgrade_ to the latest Android/iOS phones. Are you saying that Google should walk away from this market?
(Score: 2) by Leebert on Wednesday May 06 2015, @02:05PM
Shoot, even for those of us who ARE willing and interested in dumping the money on such a phone, it's not just as simple as firing up an Amazon window and one-click ordering a phone. You have to do some research into non-intuitive things like whether or not the particular version of the phone you are ordering will work on your carrier's network. Super complicated? No, but not the kind of thing you do in 20 minutes while eating breakfast.
I'd have already ordered an Android-based phone to replace my dying iPhone 4s if it weren't for that (and the associated analysis paralysis of having quite a few options).
(Score: 2) by TheRaven on Thursday May 07 2015, @12:22PM
You have to do some research into non-intuitive things like whether or not the particular version of the phone you are ordering will work on your carrier's network
Really? Of all the things that I've thought to check when buying a phone, that's one that's never crossed my mind. It might be a US-only thing.
sudo mod me up
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday May 06 2015, @02:17PM
LOL I googled around for fun and the LG phone you linked to isn't even an android phone, its just a skinned feature phone. No apps, no nothing, just some trademark/copyright violation graphics. Its my old 1990s StarTac with a touch screen instead of buttons.
As a happy customer of republic wireless since the beta days they offer one for $100. Thats only like 5 months of monthly payment, practically a rounding error.
Tablets are worse. I imagine that sitting on retail shelves you can still find some old 2.2 era android tablets at walmart or whatever for like $50.
Go to amazon and search for "Unnecto U-660-2NA Drone Unlocked GSM Quad-Band Mobile Phone - US Warranty - Silver" and you'll find a Froyo Android 2.2 brand new generic phone with prime shipping for $58.86. I guarantee it'll never be upgraded. They don't list the storage which implies its awful like 128 megs or something.