As another vendor promises 3 years of Android updates, we ask: How long should mobile devices receive support?
- Reference: 1620667531
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2021/05/10/vivo_android_support/
- Source link:
The Chinese company is promising at least three years of software and security updates for selected premium devices introduced after July.
And? It's underwhelming. When it comes to software updates, most smartphone vendors fare dismally. Three years is a decent figure, on par with the Android One programme, although slightly below what Samsung has [2]provided newer Galaxy devices .
[3]
[4]
[5]
But the devil's in the details, or lack thereof. In [6]a spectacularly fluffy piece of marketing *, Vivo avoided the important question of how it'll structure the cadence of OTA patches. Can phone owners expect monthly or quarterly updates? How long will users have to wait between Android system upgrades? We've asked Vivo for clarification.
Vivo was similarly vague about the devices covered by its new policy, which only applies to "selected" premium devices, with other models presumably left at the company's mercy.
More fundamentally, three years of updates is increasingly insufficient to cover the lifespan of a device, which has elongated massively in recent years.
[7]
"We have seen the length of ownership for smartphones increase dramatically over the last five years," said Ben Wood, chief analyst at CCS Insight. "On average we estimate consumers are now keeping their smartphones for four years so software updates are more important than ever, particularly from a security perspective."
There are a number of factors in play here. Wood waxed lyrical about improvements in display and camera technologies, which have rendered the traditional two-year upgrade cycle obsolete. Speaking to El Reg , Paolo Pescatore, mobile and telecoms analyst at PP Foresight, attributes the phenomenon to the 5G rollout.
Feeling insecure
Ultimately, even if you buy a phone with three years of guaranteed support, most people will experience a period when their device won't receive any security. For obvious reasons, that's bad.
Vendors can't be entirely blamed. The Android operating system was conceived without any thought of long-term support. Google left the task of issuing software patches to vendors, who were not held to any levels of long-term support. That situation only changed in 2018, when the Chocolate Factory obligated vendors to provide at least two years of updates.
Compounding matters, Android wasn't really designed to make patching easy, thanks to its initially monolithic design. This original sin has resulted in over a billion insecure devices, as well as chronic ecosystem fragmentation.
[8]
In recent years, Google has addressed this through [9]initiatives like Project Treble , which decoupled low-level device-specific code from the rest of the OS. Another strategy has updated system tools and frameworks through the Google Play store, rather than periodic system updates.
And earlier this year, Google and Qualcomm [10]announced a partnership that would reduce the amount of work required of the San Diego chipmaker to support new system-level updates. These modest architectural changes would permit up to four Android versions and four years of security updates, provided the device used [11]the Snapdragon 888 platform or newer.
Wood argues that Vivo's embrace of a longer lifecycle is indicative of an industry-wide recognition that people are holding onto their phones for longer, and will help vendors compete with Apple, which continues to provide software updates to the iPhone 6s, despite its nearly five-year vintage.
"It is notable that Android phone makers have really stepped up in the last couple of years on the number of updates they provide and the period of time they offer support," he said. "It is something Apple has been doing for years and was a significant differentiator not only for the longevity of the device but also the residual value. This is increasingly important given the growing number of consumers that are trading in their phones after a couple of years."
This was echoed by Pescatore, who claimed the move "raises the bar [for support] among licensees" which had previously languished around two years.
"A lot of these devices get handed down, and there's a vibrant second-hand market for phones. [Vivo] is putting pressure on rivals," he said.
And on that basis, maybe Vivo deserves some credit. But there's a larger discussion to be had about whether the current three-year target is fit for purpose. Based on current ownership patterns, the answer is a resounding "no." ®
*Which presumably ran through an English-to-marketing translator prior to publication. "[Vivo] aims to extend the high-end smartphone experience offered by the X series devices by ensuring continuous improvements based on evolving consumer trends and exciting new software innovations."
Get our [12]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.theregister.com/2020/10/21/the_corpse_of_huaweis_mobile/
[2] https://www.theregister.com/2020/04/07/samsung_pulls_galaxy_s7_security_updates/
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/personaltech&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2YJms9zbYtItnQUFxFFigPAAAAJU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/personaltech&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44YJms9zbYtItnQUFxFFigPAAAAJU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/personaltech&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33YJms9zbYtItnQUFxFFigPAAAAJU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/vivo-commits-to-three-years-of-android-upgrades-for-future-premium-x-series-devices-301286977.html
[7] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/personaltech&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44YJms9zbYtItnQUFxFFigPAAAAJU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[8] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/personaltech&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33YJms9zbYtItnQUFxFFigPAAAAJU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2017/11/29/the_end_of_abandonware_treble_can_rescue_android_from_ota_hell/
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2020/12/17/google_qualcomm_patching/
[11] https://www.theregister.com/2020/12/02/qualcomm_snapdragon_888/
[12] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
I would rather NOT have support
Frankly every single android update has caused my phone to react even slower and even less reliably (a Nokia 2.3 is to be avoided, the worst phone I have ever owned by a very considerable margin).
My work provided a windows 10 machine, roughly 2 updates a week losing me at least an hour each time as well as an annoying popup plastering itself over the screen and deciding to update whether I was busy or not.
No, I prefer to choose IF and WHEN I want to take an update. I would prefer to wait for others to have shown it to be stable and working.
Yes I understand about the crap nature of the over complex software churned out by these people who seem never to have heard of testing, I know it can be hacked, I also know that with no shadow of a doubt there will be yet another hack path found in seconds after the latest patch.
The best thing to do is be more than a bit cautious about what you do with the machine you use for work and banking. Keep the machine used for rhyming slang banking separate.
Re: I would rather NOT have support
I've never had a problem caused by an android update. My Pixel 2 has gone from 8 thru to 11 without a hitch. This makes me wonder if the problems you have seen are caused by the added gorp many vendors add to the base OS.
As for windows, I am not a fan or defender of that system but it is easy to set up so that updates do not occur at inconvenient times. TBH, my system also autoblocks OS updates by 1 year and non-security patches by 30 days or thereabouts. If you cannot access these sorts of settings because your provider has locked down the system on a work phone I would suggest you should loudly at your IS support department.
Of course neither of these systems can compete with linux for ease and reliability of upgrades. It is not perfect but certainly it is light-years ahead of android or windoze.
With more manufacturers jumping on the marketing bandwagon of 'we are providing updates for 3 years' it might drag up the other phone companies to do the same, or even try and out do each other by offering 4 or 5 years of updates.
I think 5 years is around the sweet spot. I am not bothered about getting a new Android version every year as I doubt a 5 year old phone would run the latest Android version particularly well anyway. Just update to whichever is the oldest version still getting security updates and then provide the patches. Then when support runs out, unlock the boot loader so you can flash other community build firmware etc.
If the open source Linux distros such as Debian can produce LTS versions with 5 years of updates, then surely these billion dollar companies, Google and Samsung can do it as well.
There's nothing wrong with my 5 year old GalaxyS7, battery is still good for a day or more, it runs everything I want at a decent speed, photos and video are decent. Now I've cleared the pocket fluff which was preventing the charging cable connecting securely, it's got years more life in it. The last firmware update was September 2020, but I don't think its getting any more, as they've announced the S8 isn't.
"support" is a sales "feature"
Think about software support vs battery life - essentially phones are designed to be replaced after a year or two. Batteries have a limited life, and more updates will reduce the battery life.
Re: "support" is a sales "feature"
Support as a sales feature doesn't work for me. The target should be "security by design", as in the Sale of Goods Act definition "FIT FOR PURPOSE". If it ain't secure when it's sold, it ain't fit to be sold. Simples.
And as for "batteries have a limited life" - this means they MUST be replaceable.
I know I'll get downvotes for this next statement, but IT suppliers should get out of the mindset of "our stuff is complicated, we'll fix it later". I was going to write that no other industry gets away with that mindset but then I realised that the exception that proves that rule is Boeing.
Re: "support" is a sales "feature"
Batteries have a limited life, and more updates will reduce the battery life.
That doesn't follow at all. There is no reason an update would have any impact on battery life other than poorly written code.
As I have mentioned elsewhere I own a Samsung Galaxy S8, which will no longer be supported by Samsung, despite being only 4 years old.
There are however, community supported ROMs available, some even based on Android 11 which will run fine on my hardware.
This begs the question why a group of nerdy blokes in basements can manage that, but a corporation with $32 billion in profit last year can't.
Five years of support should be the minimum. Smartphones are not free, and a depreciation cost of £50 per annum seems expensive. There is no inherent reason why a 5 year old phone with today's OS should be any slower than when it was new.
I have a 2007 laptop that initially shipped with Vista which now runs W10 on SSD which works fine. I should be able to do the same with a phone.
runs W10 on SSD
Why would you like to run W10 on a phone? :-)
support for what?
I'd rather have a phone that makes and receives phone calls and texts and doesn't need any updates. I'd like it to keep working for at least ten years.
I have an Android phone but what's the point? To download any apps that made it do anything else would mean I'd need a Google account, which (a) I don't want in any case (why would I invite tracking?) and (b) I can't figure out how I'd even set up an account on the phone.
Re: support for what?
Then you aren't in the market for a smart phone which this article is about.
Do you lurk on threads about fridges telling people that you don't like your food refrigerated and therefore don't see why anybody should have a fridge?
Be careful watch youi wish for...
A lot of these low-end Chinese phones use the firmware update .apk to remotely install adware apps, remote code exucution using LUA scripts and can grant any permission to any app through reflection and run with system permissions.
https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/chinese-backdoor-still-active-on-many-android-devices/
(I suggest you purchase a used Pixel device or an iPhone SE and avoid any third-party apps if you're trying to save money without compromising security/privacy)
Mobile tech gets old quickly
I can understand the predicament that vendors have with mobile phones as even though the form factors aren't changing that much, the componentry dramatically changes in new phones across 5 (or even 3 years). We have problems keeping spare parts for enterprise IT equipment for that long because of the supply chain changes. You should see how much HPE charge if you want hardware support beyond those periods.
I'd be of the opinion that vendors should allow you to move to a generic Android or customised ROM once support for your device ends, so you can at least continue to receive software updates.
Going back to the hardware topic, it's possibly an option like what they have done with some OS's to have a long term release version that people can choose to purchase that gives them a longer period of support and parts availability. The question though would be whether it was in anyone's financial interest to do so.
Android Automotive?
And what about the updates for the soon to be released crop of Android Automotive systems from loads of car makers? Somehow I don’t see cars being scrapped after 3 years of updates
5.
At least. See Fairphone.