3 ms·

> Android is far, far behind the competition when it comes to device security. No, it's not. Carriers and OEMs that have picked up AOSP and bloated it needless

> Android is far, far behind the competition when it comes to device security. No, it's not. Carriers and OEMs that have picked up AOSP and bloated it needlessly are the ones who are behind. You wouldn't blame Linus Torvalds for all the computers out there running outdated kernels, or for anybody still using git 1.x. The difference is that downstream companies have decided that since the have the source, they might as well add a year of dev work on top of Android to "improve" it. If they had these options for Windows or iOS, I'm pretty sure they would do so (ever bought a new windows laptop with no crapware?) and bring security updates for those devices to a grinding halt.

madeofpalk 11y ago
These phones boot up with 'Android by Google' and come with the Google Play Store. Google blesses these phones and is aware of them. Ultimately, they're the ones allowing manufacturers and carriers to add on and slow down/stop the update release cycle. I know it's not a straight comparison, but Apple managed to wrangle the carriers into not making this a problem. Why can't Google?
- andrewstuart2 11y ago
  Here, I think it's the multiple layers of people with their hands in the source code. Just because Google and OEM X have some agreement doesn't mean that Carrier Y trusts OEM X not to muck up their network (or their bloatware). So carriers end up adding their own drawn-out testing process for their own reasons, probably including time to update their carrier bloatware. I should point out as evidence that I use a major carrier and run a Nexus phone, and I have no issues whatsoever getting Google updates, security or otherwise. I expect to have Android Marshmallow on my handset by the end of the week.
  - madeofpalk 11y ago
    But why can't Google enforce trust between AT&T and Samsung to ensure updates are received in minimal time? As a platform vendor, IMO that's their job. At a bare minimum , to ensure their users get the security updates they need.
    - wldcordeiro 11y ago
      If you recall the history of Android, Google had to make concessions with regards to control of the operating system to the carriers and other partners. So now years down the line we're dealing with the repercussions of their compromise.
TD-Linux 11y ago
On a laptop, I can trivially install a new OS on it, right from the OS vendor. On Android, the vendor needs to build the OS for me. Even with AOSP that's true, the Android driver model basically means modifying Android. Vendors are generally doing a good job of upstreaming kernel drivers, but Android has this whole awful userspace driver stack as well. You'd think at least one benefit you'd get from the Android HAL is pluggable drivers, but sadly no.
- hahainternet 11y ago
  > On a laptop, I can trivially install a new OS on it, right from the OS vendor. What rot. Driver problems are not exclusive to phones, nor are custom terrible drivers. This is a problem that exists throughout the spectrum of products.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

madeofpalk 11y ago

These phones boot up with 'Android by Google' and come with the Google Play Store. Google blesses these phones and is aware of them. Ultimately, they're the ones allowing manufacturers and carriers to add on and slow down/stop the update release cycle. I know it's not a straight comparison, but Apple managed to wrangle the carriers into not making this a problem. Why can't Google?

andrewstuart2 11y ago
Here, I think it's the multiple layers of people with their hands in the source code. Just because Google and OEM X have some agreement doesn't mean that Carrier Y trusts OEM X not to muck up their network (or their bloatware). So carriers end up adding their own drawn-out testing process for their own reasons, probably including time to update their carrier bloatware. I should point out as evidence that I use a major carrier and run a Nexus phone, and I have no issues whatsoever getting Google updates, security or otherwise. I expect to have Android Marshmallow on my handset by the end of the week.
- madeofpalk 11y ago
  But why can't Google enforce trust between AT&T and Samsung to ensure updates are received in minimal time? As a platform vendor, IMO that's their job. At a bare minimum , to ensure their users get the security updates they need.
  - wldcordeiro 11y ago
    If you recall the history of Android, Google had to make concessions with regards to control of the operating system to the carriers and other partners. So now years down the line we're dealing with the repercussions of their compromise.

TD-Linux 11y ago

On a laptop, I can trivially install a new OS on it, right from the OS vendor. On Android, the vendor needs to build the OS for me. Even with AOSP that's true, the Android driver model basically means modifying Android. Vendors are generally doing a good job of upstreaming kernel drivers, but Android has this whole awful userspace driver stack as well. You'd think at least one benefit you'd get from the Android HAL is pluggable drivers, but sadly no.

hahainternet 11y ago
> On a laptop, I can trivially install a new OS on it, right from the OS vendor. What rot. Driver problems are not exclusive to phones, nor are custom terrible drivers. This is a problem that exists throughout the spectrum of products.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]