Mobile phone lifetime

goodValue

I used the qualifier "In terms of cost only", as the issue will be of interest to those who have price as their primary criteria, and not in a wide variety of features.

I was interested in finding websites that discussed/compared security updates, rather than those that compared specifications.

The reason that versions are limited is because Google just makes 'stock' versions available to manufacturers and the manufacturer must then carefully tailor the new version to each of their range of phones.

I think this is getting to the heart of what I didn't understand.

So, is Android only a partial OS, and the phone makers have to build what is missing?

Or, is the extra work to cater for the phones having a variety of hardware?

Or something else?

Is it possible that phones will evolve such that they will have an update model like Windows, and the OS is the same for all phones?

I think something to consider when buying a phone you're intending to use is its release date. 

I'll know this for my next purchase.

PHK

goodValue said:

I used the qualifier "In terms of cost only", as the issue will be of interest to those who have price as their primary criteria, and not in a wide variety of features.

I was interested in finding websites that discussed/compared security updates, rather than those that compared specifications.

The reason that versions are limited is because Google just makes 'stock' versions available to manufacturers and the manufacturer must then carefully tailor the new version to each of their range of phones.

I think this is getting to the heart of what I didn't understand.

So, is Android only a partial OS, and the phone makers have to build what is missing?

Or, is the extra work to cater for the phones having a variety of hardware?

Or something else?

Is it possible that phones will evolve such that they will have an update model like Windows, and the OS is the same for all phones?

I think something to consider when buying a phone you're intending to use is its release date. 

I'll know this for my next purchase.

No, Android is a full OS but the manufacturers (including Google ) add their own features and also need drivers/apps for the specific hardware such as different cameras and screen. 

What used to make updates difficult is that the chipset maker wouldn't necessarily update the hardware drivers to support new versions of Android. And as someone mentioned cost is also an issue so cheaper phones often have fewer updates because they use older chipsets and there's less money.

It's often said and I agree, that a second hand older  iPhone or Pixel perhaps with new battery is the way to go if you want a cheaper phone. 

Samsung now promise five years updates for their cheapest phones - but these are likely to be not as frequent as they are at the start. They might start out with bimonthly updates but by year four only six monthly updates.   

400ixl

Android is complex software, and manufacturers make their own skins and include their own bloatware applications. This all costs money to develop and test for each release.

This means for a cheap phone it is not cost effective to be doing this for more than a couple of iterations as a new model will have replaced it.

Google has tried to simplify the software, make more an more of it so it does not need customising as much for the skins and bloatware. This is now allowing for the cost to keep them up to date is reducing, but it is still only some manufacturers who are moving forward supporting their phones for longer.

Google Pixels get the major releases first, Samsung typically followed quickly for the flag ship devices, although that is becoming longer (months later) and the cheaper ones even longer. OnePlus then tends to be the next released, and the others then follow (you are usually 6 months+ by then).

Some phones (e.g. Samsung and Google) have the ability to stop charging at 80% which extends the battery life. There is no reason for a battery not to be at 90% of original capacity after 4 years of use these days. Less and typically it has been charged incorrectly.

goodValue

I had to look up what bloatware, and skins were. I don't doubt that there is a lot of time and effort dealing with these and features/drivers.

However, personal computers have to deal with those same issues.

Why is it that pc's can be updated by Microsoft, but phones require the intervention of the manufacturer.

Emmia

goodValue said:

I had to look up what bloatware, and skins were. I don't doubt that there is a lot of time and effort dealing with these and features/drivers.

However, personal computers have to deal with those same issues.

Why is it that pc's can be updated by Microsoft, but phones require the intervention of the manufacturer.

If you want to avoid manufacturer imposed delay to updates and additional bloatware (Samsung is bad for this) then you probably limit yourself to Google phones.

I have automatic updates enabled on my phone so (much like windows update) it just happens automatically.

booneruk

goodValue said:

I had to look up what bloatware, and skins were. I don't doubt that there is a lot of time and effort dealing with these and features/drivers.

However, personal computers have to deal with those same issues.

Why is it that pc's can be updated by Microsoft, but phones require the intervention of the manufacturer.

PCs have a shelf life too (however you can upgrade parts in a desktop PC to extend its working life)

Microsoft, rightly or wrongly, don't support some computer equipment released as recently as 2017 with Windows 11. This isn't a new thing either, 486 CPUs (a part from the 90s) did not run Windows XP when it was released. 

The original release of Windows XP required 64megabytes ram, Windows 7 required 1GB ram. This would have upset a lot of users at the time. Oh and Windows 11 (correctly) dropped support for 32bit CPUs that are actually getting on for ancient.

Additionally, manufacturers of the various PC parts have to submit drivers to Microsoft for their devices to work. If a manufacturer stops writing drivers for the latest version of Windows then those parts will stop working with the latest version too.

goodValue

As they both have similar problems, I'm still not getting what the fundamental difference is between phone and pc updates, such that the phone updates need the intervention of the makers.

Windows updates seem relatively stable now (judging by seeing less posts about problems), but with occasional posts about some incompatability.

Is it these incompatabilities, that the phone makers are fixing before releasing an update, that requires their intervention in the update process?

Whereas with Windows the user deals with it themselves?

With more facilities/access to the OS, pc users are more able to deal with those problems themselves?

PHK

goodValue said:

As they both have similar problems, I'm still not getting what the fundamental difference is between phone and pc updates, such that the phone updates need the intervention of the makers.

Windows updates seem relatively stable now (judging by seeing less posts about problems), but with occasional posts about some incompatability.

Is it these incompatabilities, that the phone makers are fixing before releasing an update, that requires their intervention in the update process?

Whereas with Windows the user deals with it themselves?

With more facilities/access to the OS, pc users are more able to deal with those problems themselves?

One difference is that PC manufacturers submit their drivers to Microsoft before Microsoft delivers the update. 

If they don't then you won't get the Windows update. This is one reason why Windows Updates take a long time to roll out. 

mrochester

goodValue said:

I had to look up what bloatware, and skins were. I don't doubt that there is a lot of time and effort dealing with these and features/drivers.

However, personal computers have to deal with those same issues.

Why is it that pc's can be updated by Microsoft, but phones require the intervention of the manufacturer.

PC manufacturers don’t customise windows the same way that phone manufacturers customise Android. It’s that customisation and tweaking to their own brand/style that takes all the effort and money. 

Phone manufacturers don’t want to give up that customisation either because it’s part of what makes their device different/better than a competitors. If Android looked, felt and worked the same on all devices then manufacturers would lose a way to differentiate their devices. It would also result in less software variety/competition for consumers. 

goodValue

So Microsoft do a lot of the update work(for the  drivers), and the phone makers add a lot of branding (not necessarily a benefit to the user?), giving quite different methods for doing updates.

I can see that the corporate world would not want this branding/customisation for pc's as it would cost them money with lack of consistency, and their employees having to deal with different systems.