Time for 'Android Update' - like Windows Update

[Orange Battery]

With all the recent security problems,  surely its time that manufacturers have to take responsibility for the sale of shat is essentially a computer that lasts a lot longer than two years.   I personally feel that Google have a responsibility here,  they are releasing an OS which a lot of people will use as thir primary conduit to the digital world.  I have been an Android user since the early days and I don't like Apple's way of doing things or the new Windows Mobile 10 or whatever it will be called.  I guess I need Android, surely this is easy, its backed by Google!  How can they not use their power and dominance to control OS updates? 

[Melfster]

Google only cares about marketshare they don't really care about supporting old phones.  They blame the carriers or hardware vendors. They would rather you buy a new phone.   

[Orange Battery]

Google only cares about marketshare they don't really care about supporting old phones.  They blame the carriers or hardware vendors. They would rather you buy a new phone.   

In many ways, I'm probably a decent customer for them - I like an upgrade every 2 years and always go for a flagship.  The problem nowdays is these flagships can go without critical security patches for months - I don't think I'm willing to invest so much money next year if I know I'm so vulnerable. 

[TAZMINATOR]

In many ways, I'm probably a decent customer for them - I like an upgrade every 2 years and always go for a flagship.  The problem nowdays is these flagships can go without critical security patches for months - I don't think I'm willing to invest so much money next year if I know I'm so vulnerable. 

Most smartphones have flaws, bugs, etc..     if you don't want to be vulnerable, then you can get basic phone or stay away from smartphone...  it's really up to you....

Most people usually get a new phone in a year or two depends on the contract or phone program..   A few people get a new one in about 3 or 4 years.   

If it was me, I would love to have OS updates but it is really up to the carrier and/or vendor.   If no OS updates, then I can get a new phone every few years depends on the device and features.

[TPreston]

While they are at this they can also provide antivirus solutions the APIs they need for a comprehensive endpoint security suite.

At least then we can have these attacks blocked while google are developing their own fix.

[cork1958]

Stupid vendors!

[PGHammer]

Google only cares about marketshare they don't really care about supporting old phones.  They blame the carriers or hardware vendors. They would rather you buy a new phone.   

Actually, it is NOT a Google problem - it's not even a "carrier" problem, either (the same issue applies to wireless-only devices, which are not locked to a particular carrier - tablets, for example).  There is even an equivalent to Windows Update in the "Settings" section of every Android device.  (And I mean "every" Android device - not some, or most.)  The issue is vendor-specific variations to the AOSP.  Because only the vendor knows what changes got made, they have to approve of updates to their code - which ALSO makes a "generic" update all but impossible.  Such changes also increase time-to-delivery (of not just new products, but upgrades/updates to existing products) - worse, look at prices for Nexus products (which actually DO stick to the AOSP) compared to non-Nexus products - from the same company; oddly enough, ASUS is the most obvious example - compare the Nexus 7 (2013) to their other non-Nexus Lollipop-driven tablets of the same year - and even of the same size and features - which are cheaper?

[Darrian]

With all the recent security problems,  surely its time that manufacturers have to take responsibility for the sale of shat is essentially a computer that lasts a lot longer than two years.   I personally feel that Google have a responsibility here,  they are releasing an OS which a lot of people will use as thir primary conduit to the digital world.  I have been an Android user since the early days and I don't like Apple's way of doing things or the new Windows Mobile 10 or whatever it will be called.  I guess I need Android, surely this is easy, its backed by Google!  How can they not use their power and dominance to control OS updates? 

That's why Cyanogenmod

[Jolo]

if you don't want to be vulnerable, then you can get basic phone or stay away from smartphone... 

Or you can get an iPhone 4S, wich is 4 years old+ and couple of days ago received the same security update as the 6s, released to market last friday.

[LittleNeutrino Veteran]

Google recently started Monthly Android Security updates.

http://www.androidcentral.com/google-creates-android-security-updates-google-group-more-transparency

 

[PGHammer]

Or you can get an iPhone 4S, wich is 4 years old+ and couple of days ago received the same security update as the 6s, released to market last friday.

That is, in fact, the ONLY saving grace to iDevices - both OS and hardware are from the same company; however, you dearly pay through the nose for that "priviledge".  If anything, Android outside of Nexus is WORSE than Windows, oddly enough, in that proprietism area - and this is especially true of Android vs. not just W10M, but even Windows Phone.  However, I don't blame Google - nobody told the ODMs to vary from the AOSP.

 

[Melfster]

Actually, it is NOT a Google problem - it's not even a "carrier" problem, either (the same issue applies to wireless-only devices, which are not locked to a particular carrier - tablets, for example).  There is even an equivalent to Windows Update in the "Settings" section of every Android device.  (And I mean "every" Android device - not some, or most.)  The issue is vendor-specific variations to the AOSP.  Because only the vendor knows what changes got made, they have to approve of updates to their code - which ALSO makes a "generic" update all but impossible.  Such changes also increase time-to-delivery (of not just new products, but upgrades/updates to existing products) - worse, look at prices for Nexus products (which actually DO stick to the AOSP) compared to non-Nexus products - from the same company; oddly enough, ASUS is the most obvious example - compare the Nexus 7 (2013) to their other non-Nexus Lollipop-driven tablets of the same year - and even of the same size and features - which are cheaper?

This is a model Google chose for Android in order to get marketshare fast....That is why it Google problem rather then a vendor problem.   It creates all kinds of problems down  road for Android devices.  You can't blame the vendor for wanting to differentiate their devices. 

[+Warwagon MVC]

Part of the issue is that hand set makers customize their handsets so heavily that Google can't just push out an update to all handsets because it might break some of the heavily themed software and custom software running on these handsets. Now if every manufacture shipped vanilla android, then yes Google could  totally do it.

[PGHammer]

 

This is a model Google chose for Android in order to get marketshare fast....That is why it Google problem rather then a vendor problem.   It creates all kinds of problems down  road for Android devices.  You can't blame the vendor for wanting to differentiate their devices. 

Google ALLOWS ODMs to vary - however, it didn't tell them they HAD to - that makes it a vendor choice that Google allows, not a requirement.  Microsoft, on the other hand, says there are ways vendors can't vary, and Apple doesn't vary at all except for specifics in terms of a device (and the variations apply to a specific device - iPad vs. iPod, and iPhone vs. iPod touch, for example) - that is why I said it is NOT a Google problem.  A vendor still could, if it chose, stick to vanilla AOSP even outside Nexus - however, do any do so?

 

[Melfster]

Google ALLOWS ODMs to vary - however, it didn't tell them they HAD to - that makes it a vendor choice that Google allows, not a requirement.  Microsoft, on the other hand, says there are ways vendors can't vary, and Apple doesn't vary at all except for specifics in terms of a device (and the variations apply to a specific device - iPad vs. iPod, and iPhone vs. iPod touch, for example) - that is why I said it is NOT a Google problem.  A vendor still could, if it chose, stick to vanilla AOSP even outside Nexus - however, do any do so?

 

What I am saying is it is  Googles fault because they made business decision to allow vendors to do what they do without taking into account the long term ramifications they do today. Its like windows world Vendors could just have Vanilla Windows today without adding junkware but they still do because it lowers the price and differentiates their product.  Ultimately its Microsoft and Google that responsible for their product because their business models force hardware vendors into tough situations.   

[PGHammer]

In short, you are letting the ODMs (and carriers) off the hook.  No - they COULD have chosen to stick with vanilla; instead, both ODMs and carriers chose cuteness and adding crap. There is nothing that prevented either ODMs or carriers from staying "vanilla"; so why should either ODMs - or carriers, for that matter - get a pass from the results of their own stupidity?

Didn't "similar hamhandedness" on Microsoft's part get them in hot water when it came to IE?  Google didn't tie the hands of ODMs - or carriers - the way that Microsoft has been accused - repeatedly - of doing - and it definitely didn't need to happen with tablets (not phablets or phones) at all - remember, tablets aren't tied to carriers the same way phones (or phablets) are; so what is the excuse for TABLET ODMs?  (Samsung, Lenovo, and ASUS - I am, among others, referring to all three of you.)  The closest thing to a vanilla non-Nexus tablet today comes from Visual Land - and it's not easy to find in retail; in fact, it has, if anything, gotten HARDER to find in retail.

Basically, it's STILL the ODMs' fault - remember, they could have stayed vanilla.  On my earlier comparison of Nexus vs. non-Nexus, there is the MemoPad Tablet vs. the Nexus 7 2013 - both are quad-core ARM, yet the Nexus has twice the RAM, twice the emmc storage, and is almost twice the price as well.  Neither comes with Lollipop, either - the Nexus 7 2013 ships with JellyBean still (though it is upgradable to Lollipop today).

[danielpk1994]

I use android phone it is very copliceted use 

[adrynalyne]

 

This is a model Google chose for Android in order to get marketshare fast....That is why it Google problem rather then a vendor problem.   It creates all kinds of problems down  road for Android devices.  You can't blame the vendor for wanting to differentiate their devices. 

Which no other mobile OS allows. Your statements are in conflict with each other. It's Google's fault for the model, yet not the OEM's fault for differentiating their devices?

If Google switched to the iOS model, nobody else could make phones with Android. If they switch to MS model, nobody can customize them. You cannot have freedom to differentiate and then keep the benefits of a walled garden.

[adrynalyne]

With all the recent security problems,  surely its time that manufacturers have to take responsibility for the sale of shat is essentially a computer that lasts a lot longer than two years.   I personally feel that Google have a responsibility here,  they are releasing an OS which a lot of people will use as thir primary conduit to the digital world.  I have been an Android user since the early days and I don't like Apple's way of doing things or the new Windows Mobile 10 or whatever it will be called.  I guess I need Android, surely this is easy, its backed by Google!  How can they not use their power and dominance to control OS updates? 

And close the source? That's the only way to accomplish that.

[pack34]

And close the source? That's the only way to accomplish that.

Build it in the licensing for the software and restrict the store and services to only those that comply with the guidelines.

[adrynalyne]

 

Build it in the licensing for the software and restrict the store and services to only those that comply with the guidelines.

So they can get further scrutinized?

Did you not pay attention to the Russia fiasco?

[oldtimefighter]

Part of the issue is that hand set makers customize their handsets so heavily that Google can't just push out an update to all handsets because it might break some of the heavily themed software and custom software running on these handsets. Now if every manufacture shipped vanilla android, then yes Google could  totally do it.

 

That's wrong... Even if an OEM used stock Android on their phone, Google can NOT update their phone without the OEM agreeing and contacting with Google to do it.

I wish people would stop saying this and realize Google has no control over OEM phones. Google can't exert any more control over the platform as they are already under pressure by government regulators (ridiculous but real). Even if the government regulators stepped down, Google still can't do anything because some OEMs would just fork AOSP.

Personally, I am tired of people bitching about updates on Android. You need updates? Buy a Nexus or Android One phone or learn how to install a custom ROM. Choice is good, even if it means buying an iPhone...

[+Warwagon MVC]

 

That's wrong... Even if an OEM used stock Android on their phone, Google can NOT update their phone without the OEM agreeing and contacting with Google to do it.

I wish people would stop saying this and realize Google has no control over OEM phones. Google can't exert any more control over the platform as they are already under pressure by government regulators (ridiculous but real). Even if the government regulators stepped down, Google still can't do anything because some OEMs would just fork AOSP.

Personally, I am tired of people bitching about updates on Android. You need updates? Buy a Nexus or Android One phone or learn how to install a custom ROM. Choice is good, even if it means buying an iPhone...

 

Correct. But lets just assume for a moment we live in a world were google could. In that case they would then run into the issue with all of the modified OEM software.

 

for the record I am running a custom rom.

 

 

[PGHammer]

 

Correct. But lets just assume for a moment we live in a world were google could. In that case they would then run into the issue with all of the modified OEM software.

 

for the record I am running a custom rom.

 

 

Which puts the onus squarely on you (or the ROM kitchen developer) to keep up with updates - in what way is this different from the ODM problem?

The problem is - quite literally - no different from that of PC makers, regardless of scale. ROM kitchens target specific hardware (for example, there is no version of CyanogenMod for MediaTek SoCs, despite their popularity in the Android device space - yet.)  In fact, most ROM kitchens target AOSP/Nexus devices primarily if not exclusively - care to guess why?

[RGC1940]

I have installed every iteration of Windows since 3.1 & 3.11 - currently running Windows 10 Build 10568 (stable), installed may Linux distros, owned an AT&T 3b1 with SVR4 & I prefer Windows 8.1 or 10.

Owned HTC WD7 phone (Windows early version) and many other phones with diff OS'es - currently a BlackBerry Q10 happy user

Own a Samsung Galaxy Tab S 10.5" tablet - solid, reliable, very customizable & less expensive than Apple iPADs

Retired IT grunt - Every OS has its merits and drawbacks too

Just know exactly what you require a device for & the MAX amount of $$ you wish to spend

My preferred PC vendor is DELL