Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Android OS upgradability

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    ED E
    Registered Users Posts: 36,167 ✭✭✭✭ED E


    Treble cant go anywhere until ARM/Qualcomm do a big body of work to help write up the abstraction layer they're adding. Its a hugely wide API to cover every subsystem in the phone. Whether MTK will keep up is another question.


  • Options
    #33
    ED E
    Registered Users Posts: 36,167 ✭✭✭✭ED E


    Basil3 wrote: »
    But you could have an Android device running kit kat, which would essentially work the same as the day you bought it.

    Try todays FB app on a KK phone and come back to us.


  • Options
    #34
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    ED E wrote: »
    Try todays FB app on a KK phone and come back to us.

    A huge proportion of Android users worldwide are on KitKat and use Facebook. They might not be able to run the latest play store version visible to N users, but there would be a functioning version available to them.

    Not having Facebook could hardly be viewed as a negative anyway :pac:


  • Options
    #35
    OldMrBrennan83
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,658 ✭✭✭✭OldMrBrennan83


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #36
    cal60
    Registered Users Posts: 89 ✭✭cal60


    Basil3 wrote: »
    But you could have an Android device running kit kat, which would essentially work the same as the day you bought it.

    True - but you could say the same of a PC running Windows XP and would you use such a PC online ?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    cal60 wrote: »
    True - but you could say the same of a PC running Windows XP and would you use such a PC online ?

    I don't know why you would compare XP to KK. XP is a 15 year old OS. A better comparison would be Windows 7, and yes....I'm sure there's lots of people out there happily running Win 7.


  • Options
    #38
    Dravokivich
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,360 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    Basil3 wrote: »
    I don't know why you would compare XP to KK. XP is a 15 year old OS. A better comparison would be Windows 7, and yes....I'm sure there's lots of people out there happily running Win 7.

    You're missing the point that I made. The other guy just referenced Facebook as it's a common app in use by a lot of people. But there's functional apps, not just social media that have already set there requirements to lollipop as a minimum.


  • Options
    #39
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Apple are the best for updates. Windows Phone was also good.

    Android is brutal. Probably easier just to sell and upgrade if you want to have the latest updates.


  • Options
    #40
    Dravokivich
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,360 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    It's a pain with budget and mid range to an extent. They typically have a very short retail period so for the limited numbers of devices sold it's not really worth having updates run through. Apple only focus on premium goods and like premium Android's have a longer period for updating. I think there's a lot of folks who don't take that into consideration.


  • Options
    #41
    cal60
    Registered Users Posts: 89 ✭✭cal60


    Dravokivich wrote: »
    It's a pain with budget and mid range to an extent. They typically have a very short retail period so for the limited numbers of devices sold it's not really worth having updates run through. Apple only focus on premium goods and like premium Android's have a longer period for updating. I think there's a lot of folks who don't take that into consideration.

    A case of "you get what you pay for" ? Question is whether what is essentially a communication device is worth €500+ ? Basic phone + tablet or laptop a better investment ?

    @beauf . I agree with your analysis ( off topic - have you suggestions as to best way to sell ?)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    beauf wrote: »
    Apple are the best for updates. Windows Phone was also good.

    Android is brutal. Probably easier just to sell and upgrade if you want to have the latest updates.

    But do people want the latest updates? I'm an android nut, but I'd say the average user couldn't even tell you the changes that happened from LP > MM > N. You could hand them a phone and they wouldn't know the android version, even if you allowed them to try to find it in settings.

    There's also a huge argument that things get worse with updates. Look at all the S7 users complaining of battery life since N arrived.


  • Options
    #43
    cal60
    Registered Users Posts: 89 ✭✭cal60


    Basil3 wrote: »
    But do people want the latest updates? I'm an android nut, but I'd say the average user couldn't even tell you the changes that happened from LP > MM > N. You could hand them a phone and they wouldn't know the android version, even if you allowed them to try to find it in settings.

    I think you are right there. I reckon the average user just wants a phone that looks good and works for them - they don't consider security (which in my opinion is a mistake)


  • Options
    #44
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Basil3 wrote: »
    But do people want the latest updates? I'm an android nut, but I'd say the average user couldn't even tell you the changes that happened from LP > MM > N. You could hand them a phone and they wouldn't know the android version, even if you allowed them to try to find it in settings.

    There's also a huge argument that things get worse with updates. Look at all the S7 users complaining of battery life since N arrived.

    The main reason for updates is security.

    That people are ignorant of the issue doesn't mean is not an issue.


  • Options
    #45
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    beauf wrote: »
    The main reason for updates is security.

    That people are ignorant of the issue doesn't mean is not an issue.

    How big an issue is it? I'd guess that less than 1% of android users are running Android N on the latest security patches. How is everyone else surviving?


  • Options
    #46
    Horace Cope
    Registered Users Posts: 63 ✭✭Horace Cope


    beauf wrote: »
    Apple are the best for updates. Windows Phone was also good.

    Android is brutal. Probably easier just to sell and upgrade if you want to have the latest updates.
    Disagree with you over Apple, their browser & webview is not updated near as often as Android.
    For most of us, almost everything we do on our phones depends on the browser & webview. A quick comparison on http://html5test.com/ can show you how far behind their browser is. Android's browser and webview is updated every 6 weeks, irrespective of phone manufacturer.

    Yes, they (Apple) may update the OS for longer periods, but less of Android depends on OS updates, more of it depends on Google Play Services. So, you're not comparing like with like. But yes, their marketing around updates is amazing, Google could learn a lot about how to bullsh1t people like Apple do. Try using a iphone 4s with iOS 9 and then come back and tell me it's a great thing that they update the OS for years.


  • Options
    #47
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    iPhone 4s had 5yrs of updates. From IOS 5 to 9. Its main issue was low ram for IOS 9. not much you can do about that. Up to that point didn't hear much complaining.
    iPhone 5s was launched 2013 still runs the latest OS/Software fine.

    Android you'd be lucky to get 2yrs out of it. Probably annoying you long before that. With low to mid end phones even shorter than that. I don't use an iPhone. But with Android, forced obsolescence due to lack of OS updates or Applications incompatible is a really pita in our house with similar android phones.

    That html5test is more about open standards and proprietary strategies than security.


  • Options
    #48
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    beauf wrote: »
    iPhone 4s had 5yrs of updates. From IOS 5 to 9. Its main issue was low ram for IOS 9. not much you can do about that. Up to that point didn't hear much complaining.
    iPhone 5s was launched 2013 still runs the latest OS/Software fine.

    Android you'd be lucky to get 2yrs out of it. Probably annoying you long before that. With low to mid end phones even shorter than that. I don't use an iPhone. But with Android, forced obsolescence due to lack of OS updates or Applications incompatible is a really pita in our house with similar android phones.

    That html5test is more about open standards and proprietary strategies than security.

    Your view is a bit skewed. Firstly, iOS 5 to 9 is only 4 updates. The final update crippled the device, so only really 3 decent updates.

    Lucky to get 2 years out of an Android flagship is also completely false. I know people happily using the HTC M7 from 4 years ago. It might not be on the latest version of Android, but still runs well. One of my workmates is using a Note 3 from almost 4 years ago, and is still really happy with it even though I tell him on a regular basis to upgrade.

    The thing is that Android has improved and evolved at a much faster rate than iOS, both from a hardware and software point of view. iOS has been refined for years and only has small iterations. Android is only now getting to that point.


  • Options
    #49
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Grendels wrote: »
    Are there any particular Android companies or phone series that offer good upgradability of the OS?

    About 6 years ago I had an Android phone that I could upgrade the OS perhaps twice only. I'm hoping things have changed since then, so I can get something with more upgrade longevity, rather than having to buy a new phone every year....

    Its seems we are imaging problems with updates. You'll be fine with Android phone you'll never have to update it. But don't get an iPhone they never update them well only for 4 or 5yrs. But it doesn't count because its an iPhone :rolleyes:

    https://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/android-distribution-news/


  • Options
    #50
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Grendels wrote: »
    Are there any particular Android companies or phone series that offer good upgradability of the OS? ...

    Generally the most expensive high profile phones get the updates and are useful for the longest. For Android I'd be looking to maximize the RAM and Storage.

    http://www.androidauthority.com/ram-overkill-poll-754927/


  • Options
    #51
    god's toy
    Registered Users Posts: 4,241 ✭✭✭god's toy


    hmmm... it's not apples to apples here, ask blame Qualcomm...

    In case it's not been said: Not too long ago, chip manufacturer Qualcomm dealt android-OS a blow when they refused to give driver compatibility updates to any of their 32bit CPU's, that's the snapdragon 801 and anything before it...
    That means a load of phones were unable to updated in android 64bit os even if the phone's manufacturer wanted to update to newer versions of the OS..


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Many of my previous android phones had updates in other regions they just weren't by made available by the operator here. You'd have to download a compatible ROM from some where else. In some cases the company would release a bunch of new models with almost identical hardware, the only difference is updated software. Its forced obsolescence. Apple does it by dropping hardware off the app store.


  • Options
    #53
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    beauf wrote: »
    Many of my previous android phones had updates in other regions they just weren't by made available by the operator here. You'd have to download a compatible ROM from some where else. In some cases the company would release a bunch of new models with almost identical hardware, the only difference is updated software. Its forced obsolescence. Apple does it by dropping hardware off the app store.

    What are these many Android phones? I know you're not referring to Sony, Samsung or HTC. Interested to know if it was many phones from many manufacturers, or many phones from just one manufacturer.

    I'm only really familiar with HTC and Samsung flagships, so keen to learn.

    You'll be pleased to know that carriers holding back updates isn't generally an issue with android any more. They tend to come through reasonably quickly.


  • Options
    #54
    T-Bird
    Registered Users Posts: 1,317 ✭✭✭T-Bird


    Basil3 wrote: »
    Your view is a bit skewed. Firstly, iOS 5 to 9 is only 4 updates. The final update crippled the device, so only really 3 decent updates.

    Lucky to get 2 years out of an Android flagship is also completely false. I know people happily using the HTC M7 from 4 years ago. It might not be on the latest version of Android, but still runs well. One of my workmates is using a Note 3 from almost 4 years ago, and is still really happy with it even though I tell him on a regular basis to upgrade.

    The thing is that Android has improved and evolved at a much faster rate than iOS, both from a hardware and software point of view. iOS has been refined for years and only has small iterations. Android is only now getting to that point.

    Just a thought re all these Android "upgrades". Personally I think its all gone a bit 1984. I feel that the upgrades are complete tracking systems that are used for advertising, selling information to the advertisers and targeting the phone user with information obtained from it.

    The devices listen to you, watch you, communicate to these new electronic billboards and show adverts just for you. Hell I bet in another couple of years they will have analyzers that smell your farts and recommend a diet for you. And then show you adverts from the pharmaceuticals to as a temporary cure. :P

    I'm all for upgrades and have always gone for the alpha and beta versions etc. But unfortunately I think these new upgrades have gone the way of how they can use the technology to watch the end user lol.

    Now wheres my Tinfoil hat???


  • Options
    #55
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    You have a point. Updates and security doesn't mean privacy.


  • Options
    #56
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Basil3 wrote: »
    What are these many Android phones? I know you're not referring to Sony, Samsung or HTC. Interested to know if it was many phones from many manufacturers, or many phones from just one manufacturer.

    I'm only really familiar with HTC and Samsung flagships, so keen to learn.

    You'll be pleased to know that carriers holding back updates isn't generally an issue with android any more. They tend to come through reasonably quickly.

    Mainly Sony and Samsung Mid Rangers, around the time of Kitkat. A while ago. I switched to Windows Phone for a while. Currently we've mainly motorola's. They all seem to get one major OS update only. But then we have some apps that work on one Moto and not on another similar one. All on 6.0 or Nougat. Switched to Motos as their updates don't come from the operator, but from Motorola. Actually thats one of the reasons I switched to Windows Mobile back when I did.

    Can't help you with Flagships never bothered with them. Flagships seem to be best supported in terms of getting updates. Which is hardly a surprise.


  • Options
    #57
    ED E
    Registered Users Posts: 36,167 ✭✭✭✭ED E


    beauf wrote: »
    Can't help you with Flagships never bothered with them. Flagships seem to be best supported in terms of getting updates. Which is hardly a surprise.

    They might get an extra incremental, but usually not much better. Samsung and Sony have always pumped and dumped. OnePlus as a single line OEM are a bit better.

    Oppo are terrible for updates.


  • Options
    #58
    Dravokivich
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,360 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    T-Bird wrote: »
    Just a thought re all these Android "upgrades". Personally I think its all gone a bit 1984. I feel that the upgrades are complete tracking systems that are used for advertising, selling information to the advertisers and targeting the phone user with information obtained from it.

    The devices listen to you, watch you, communicate to these new electronic billboards and show adverts just for you. Hell I bet in another couple of years they will have analyzers that smell your farts and recommend a diet for you. And then show you adverts from the pharmaceuticals to as a temporary cure. :P

    I'm all for upgrades and have always gone for the alpha and beta versions etc. But unfortunately I think these new upgrades have gone the way of how they can use the technology to watch the end user lol.

    Now wheres my Tinfoil hat???

    Don't need a smart phone for any of that. We were tracable with standard mobile phones. Smart Advertisement Displays can have camera's which'll profile you (Age Range / Race / Gender) and present an ad that it thinks will get your attention.


  • Options
    #59
    cal60
    Registered Users Posts: 89 ✭✭cal60


    ED E wrote: »
    They might get an extra incremental, but usually not much better. Samsung and Sony have always pumped and dumped. OnePlus as a single line OEM are a bit better.

    Oppo are terrible for updates.

    Really beginning to wonder about android . Why put up with a phone being supported for only a couple of years ? If the high-end phones are no better then is this not a case for just using budget phones or even a feature phone?

    As an aside my Moto G4 just today is receiving an OTA update which brings it to March security update. I have to say this seems not bad - it updated to 7.0 a couple of months back


  • Options
    #60
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    cal60 wrote: »
    Really beginning to wonder about android . Why put up with a phone being supported for only a couple of years ? If the high-end phones are no better then is this not a case for just using budget phones or even a feature phone?

    As an aside my Moto G4 just today is receiving an OTA update which brings it to March security update. I have to say this seems not bad - it updated to 7.0 a couple of months back

    An Android device will work well past 2 years. A flagship Android will generally be on the latest version of Android for 2.5 years before it falls behind. This doesn't mean that it stops working - you'll still get another couple of years use out of it easily.

    Why use a flagship? They have the best cameras, best screens, best features, best dev support if you're into that etc etc. If those things don't bother you, then just get midrangers. Personally, I have at least one Android flagship per year, sometimes 2.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    cal60
    Registered Users Posts: 89 ✭✭cal60


    Basil3 wrote: »
    ..........Personally, I have at least one Android flagship per year, sometimes 2.

    You must've won the lotto ? :D


Advertisement