It is unlikely you spend much time following Dutch court cases; thankfully The Register had an ear out though as this particular case is of interest to many. The Dutch Consumers Association launched a case which would have made Samsung legally responsible for providing security updates to phones for up to four years after launch, two years after sale. A judgment in favour of this would have meant an appeal, of course, but could eventually have meant Android updates for all as it would be a bizarre decision on Samsung's part to geographically limit security updates. We should expect to see more cases, hopefully somewhere is a judge that does not consider a maximum of six years of security updates unacceptably onerous for Samsung to provide.
"The case could have had far-reaching impacts, since there's little point in writing software for only one market. The Consumentenbond wanted the court to force the smartphone giant to provide security updates for four years after a product was launched, and/or two years after a product was sold."
Here is some more Tech News from around the web:
- Half of all Windows 10 users thought: BSOD it, let's get the latest build @ The Register
- 15-Way Linux Distribution / Operating System Comparison, Including Windows 10 & WSL @ Phoronix
- Dell is reportedly working on an ARM-powered dual-screen Windows device @ The Inquirer
- Cisco turns to AMD Epyc for the first time in new UCS model @ The Register
This is why I will not buy
This is why I will not buy Android phones any longer. I expect to get 4 to 5 years out of a phone, not less than 2 years. I can do it with Apple – I use an iPhone SE at this point. My son has decided to move to Apple, as his Android is falling out of support at this point. And I am no Apple fanboy – but the whole family will soon be on iPhones.
Same story here. I got an
Same story here. I got an iPhone X recently. I had an HTCOne M8 that I now use as a media player from time to time. It was the first smartphone I ever owned. It is/was a nice phone, and I prefer the Android OS to iOS from a functionality and freedom standpoint, but I stopped getting security patches in March of 2016, and I would only get patches once every 6 months or so. However, HTC ironically still pushes out updates to this day for their crapware on the device, and I’ve had to disable various apps because they started to push advertising through notifications (one of them was an ad for the HTCOne M9 that made my blood boil). Many of these apps, obviously, can’t be uninstalled (and I don’t have the time/will to get into the whole root/ROM scene), so I just disable anything I see that I don’t use.
I’d rather pay the Apple hardware tax and get regular security patches, despite the fact that I still hate iOS. I would have considered a Pixel, but it’s overpriced and doesn’t have an SD card slot like the M8. Also, I remember reading that Google only guarantees updates for about 3 years anyway for their Pixel devices, and I’m guessing I’ll be able to stretch the X for at least 5 years unless there’s a complete shift in technology that makes it obsolete for some reason.
As far as I know Apple does
As far as I know Apple does not sell iPhones. It is rental only cause you have to pay developer fee to do anything with it.
Windows Phone was not so bad after all with it clear update policy and freedom to develop for.
They should give users the
They should give users the choice of some locked down Feature Phone sort of OS mode that’s just some flip-phone like basic OS that’s not designed for anything but text messaging and phone usage.
So for all the OEM’s and carriers after the Phone goes out of support for updates should be forced to provide a limited basic OS mode that’s only there so the device can be used to make and recieve phone calls and text messages.
The OS would have no method of installing Apps and other functionality. It’s the Apps and the Internet Access stuff and wifi/bluetooth that causes the majority of the security problems so create the devices with a Basic OS mode that turns the device into more of a cell phone only device and and less of a computer.
This Android update problem is Google’s fault in the first place for not creating an OS that can be updated without the OEM’s having to provide a new OS image. Google should have made Android with a proper abstraction layers between the Apps and the OS/drivers where the OS could be updated without OEMs/Carriers in charge of any OS updating.
I try and Keep all the android stuff turned off and just use the my phone to make and recieve phone calls but Samsung/OEMs need to not be allowed to customize the OS’s UI or Interface and the users need more OS control to properly disable wifi with even that automatic wifi discovery mode able to be disabled on the phones along with any other automatic bluetooth stuff that’s insecure. Users shoud be able to shut off and remove all the applications/functionality on the Phone that are not needed for Phone Calls. The Carriers need to be required to have a bare minimum mode and system applications that are less designed to snoop and more designed to serve the phone’s owner.
Carriers should be forced to unlock any phone that’s no longer getting OS updates and offer the phone’s user some optional minimal OS Mode that’s not even like Android and the user also able to load some other OSs on the phone than the one the carriers/phone OEMs customizied.
What you mean security
What you mean security update?
It is just jewelery, no?