9 ms·
Sign-in on Android 2.3.7 or lower will not be allowed starting September 27
- prophesi 5y agoThe title is a bit clickbaity. This is for Android versions 2.3.7 and lower, which was released in September 21, 2011.
- ainiriand 5y agoI think the title is perfectly accurate. That is exactly what's going to happen.
- n4bz0r 5y agoI wouldn't go as far as saying "perfectly". What is "old"? I clicked thinking my Android 4 device (which I use daily) is fucked.
- eptcyka 5y agoI wonder if iOS5 devices can still log into the apple store.
- ainiriand 5y agoGood question. Maybe someone here can confirm. Is the app store covering so much ground as not being able to access the Google account? Maps, Gmail, analytics...
- eptcyka 5y agoActually, even though iOS5 was released in 2011, all devices that supported iOS5 were able to update to iOS6. I wonder, how functional an iOS6 device could be today.
- Doctor_Fegg 5y agoThe original iPad is stuck on 5.1.1 I think.
- EvanAnderson 5y agoFor kicks I pulled out an iOS 5.1.1 device and I was able to sign-in to the App Store and install an old version of an app using my current Apple ID. I'm genuinely surprised it worked.
- dspillett 5y agoNot as direct a question as it may seem: the iPhone 4s (IIRC the first device released with iOS5) could be upgraded as far as iOS9 but many Android devices never saw much by way of upgrades unless you count rooting them to install something manually. Though how well those devices run newer versions of the OS and newer apps is likely a question with many answers (most, but not all, negative).
- virgilp 5y agoThat's typically an argument that "iDevices have more value because you can use them longer than Android". You can't have it both ways - "old android devices" in this context are devices older than iPhone 4s, and iPhone 4s themselves are not very much in use today, so it's that much less likely that Android phones would be. Realistically, very few people will be affected, and the business backlash for Google is going to be 0. BUT, on the other hand, if anybody at all is going to be affected - those are probably some of the poorest and most vulnerable members of the society (which is also why they're going to not have a strong voice). The social cost, if any, will only be known by Google.
- jfoster 5y agoIt could be much more exact by mentioning the version & date that it was released on.
- yupper32 5y agoIt's click-baity because it withholds necessary information in order to get you to click on it. Saying the version number or release date would stop most people from clicking on it, because it matters much less.
- tantalor 5y agoThat's how all headlines work.
- KoftaBob 5y agoNowadays, yes, but that’s not necessarily how they’re supposed to work. A headline should give a reader actionable information, with the article itself serving to give more detailed context. This headline doesn’t give actionable information, because you have no idea whether your android version is affected.
- dave5104 5y agoNot really, and they don't have to. A simple change would suffice: > Old Android versions [from 2011 and earlier] will no longer be able to log into Google account
- rhdunn 5y agoBy that logic you have headlines like "Windows installs will now require a Microsoft account", with the article saying it only applies to Windows 11 Home. I tend to avoid reading articles where the headline deliberately avoid information in an attempt to get clicks.
- mdp2021 5y agoStochastic language ("Topitanians are strong"), "S is P" = "The median of S is P" = "Android 7 will..." (Very stretched interpretation.) Logical language ("[All/Some] Topitanians are strong"), "S is P" = "All S are P" = "All old Android versions...". Without an explicit quantifier, a statement to be interpreted in logical language easily defaults to using the universal "All": the statement "Coal burns", if not stochastic (envisaging exceptions) but logical, is meant to express that all of the instances do. "Old Android versions" does not default to "Some old Android versions".
- ainiriand 5y agoThis is very interesting, thank you for teaching me a bit about logic today. Also, it looks like the headline was amended.
- dpwm 5y agoThe title of the page conveys more information, albeit in more words: > Sign-in on Android devices running Android 2.3.7 or lower will not be allowed starting September 27
- toast0 5y agoIt's Android, release date of the OS doesn't matter so much as when was the last device that doesn't upgrade past 2.3.7 released and/or when did that device leave mass retail. Or some other threshold. A ton of 2.3 devices weren't upgradable to 4. And there were a lot of devices made with 2.3 well after 4 was available. The numbers are probably small though, WhatsApp (where I used to work) ended support for 2.3.7 in early 2020 because the user numbers no longer justified the effort to keep that working. Usage was enough to justify almost a two year notice period though.
- kllrnohj 5y agoThe number of 2.3 devices still alive is under 0.1%. Independent dashboards like https://www.appbrain.com/stats/top-android-sdk-versions https://www.appbrain.com/stats/top-android-sdk-versions and https://gs.statcounter.com/os-version-market-share/android/mobile-tablet/worldwide https://gs.statcounter.com/os-version-market-share/android/m... don't even list Android 2.3 at all anymore the population is so small. According to https://www.phonemore.com/systems/android/2-3-6-gingerbread/ https://www.phonemore.com/systems/android/2-3-6-gingerbread/ it looks like ~2014 was the last new Gingerbread device released?
- citrin_ru 5y agoIt's a sad state of Android ecosystem that on 10 years old hardware you can run only 10 years software because vendors rarely provide updates after end of sales date and at the same time they make it very hard to install something like LineageOS (e. g. use locked bootloader and closed-source drivers). I have a 15 years old notebook and can install a modern Linux/FreeBSD versions on it, but I cannot upgrade 7 years old smartphone.
- zozbot234 5y agoThat's really an issue with the embedded ecosystem in general. Pre-Android devices were far worse.
- blihp 5y agoSure, pre-Android devices dropped support shortly after you bought them, but they were often still functional. Disabling Google login on an Android (non-AOSP) device effectively bricks it for most users.
- xbmcuser 5y agogood
- orf 5y agoI wonder what the technical reason behind this is?
- m45t3r 5y agoProbably TLS version and maybe Google wants to drop Google Play Services from very old devices?
- spankalee 5y agoThose phones are insecure.
- dleslie 5y agoOnly because Google stopped supporting them.
- ggggtez 5y agoThe actual problem is OEMs. These devices have no auto update, so Verizon/Samsung etc has to write the updates afaik.
- cyberlurker 5y agoDid Apple also drop support for equally old iPhones? I believe they provide security updates for at least 5 years, but I’m not sure.
- LucidLynx 5y agoiOS 15 will support at least iPhone SE (1st gen), released in 2016 - so approximately 6 years of support indeed (if iOS 16 does not support the iPhone SE too).
- Hamuko 5y agoI don't think Apple has any official "at least X years" support but they're generally pretty good about it. iOS 15 will be on the iPhone 6S when it launches this year, which will be a 6-year-old device at that point.
- CJefferson 5y agoNote that the original title is "Sign-in on Android devices running Android 2.3.7 or lower will not be allowed starting September 27". Android 3 was released February 22, 2011 -- I haven't seen any devices running Android that old in a while.
- walrus01 5y agoFour years ago, in some of the poorest developing nation markets on earth, the local currency equivalent of $60 Android phones for sale in local stores (random cheap Mediatek chipset and 3.5" screens), were running either Android 4.0 or 4.4
- vagrantJin 5y agoCan confirm this to be accurate. My own device is running 5.1.1
- baybal2 5y agoYep, 4.X Android is still going strong, almost like Windows XP. It's because it's the last Android version Google released without turning it unusable without Gapps. It is simple to customise. Put any of the crazy CyanogenMod era skins on it, and then customise UI any way you want with your own brand look. And it is simple to code for, unlike overengineered APIs of later Android versions, with simple raw filesystem access being a particularly highly sought feature.
- derefr 5y agoThat's interesting. If there are use-cases for this old version of Android, is there a reason that the people who want to build such devices, haven't created a "living" descendant OS forking off from Android 4.x, with the old APIs but a modern kernel et al? Sort of like the living GTK2 that stuck around for so long after GTK3.
- zozbot234 5y agoYou can add back the Gapps-free applications quite easily - clones of them are widely available in F-Droid, or as part of custom ROMs like LineageOS and formerly CyanogenMod.
- remus 5y agoI wonder what proportion of android devices are running <3.0?
- opencl 5y agoThe stats from Google lump everything under 4.1 together at 0.2%. I would link to it but Google removed the chart from the web a while ago and just tells you to look at it in Android Studio's new project wizard.
- david_allison 5y agoAndroid Studio doesn't allow you to target less than Android 4.1 (also lumped at 0.2%) Screenshot from the Project Wizard: https://i.ibb.co/bgjQQ4W/image.png https://i.ibb.co/bgjQQ4W/image.png
- sslayer 5y agoImagine if it was your 10 year old Tesla!
- gjsman-1000 5y agoImagine if it was your Tesla after 10 years of no software upgrades. (Except all Teslas are still receiving updates.) And also signing into Google on Tesla accomplishes what exactly?
- ggggtez 5y agoThis assumes that your phone hasn't had any updates for 10 years. If your Tesla had no updates for 10 years, you probably would also be wise to not check your email on it.
- dleslie 5y agoI have a Nexus S with a decent battery; and while it _can_ log in, the relevant Google services and apps that it ships with are broken beyond usability. It would be nice if Google endeavoured to keep old Android working and security patched, rather than force a faster e-waste cycle.
- gjsman-1000 5y agoAndroid 2.3+ accounts for less than 0.2% of devices. It doesn't really force an e-waste cycle when its that microscopic already. The e-waste cycle has already occurred. By that logic we'd still be supporting the Space Shuttle, the NES, the Sega Genesis, the Apple II, the Altair, the 80286, the Laserdisc player, the Video CD, the Kodak cameras... We should never drop legacy, ever. Plus, your Nexus S actually got 4.1.2, which means it's still supported even after this.
- djaychela 5y agoI'm not sure that logic holds - many of the devices you mention will still work (space shuttle aside) - whereas that will not be the case with these older android devices. While it may be 0.2%, it'd be interesting to see what numbers that actually equates to.
- pizza234 5y agoAndroid 8.0 is not supported anymore, and it suffers from very serious security vulnerabilities. Versions up to 8.0 constitute around 20% of the phones (as of June 2021¹), which creates a significant amount of e-waste, particularly embarrassing when considering phones like the Nexus 5x, which is a perfectly usable model. [¹] https://www.statista.com/statistics/921152/mobile-android-version-share-worldwide/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/921152/mobile-android-ve...
- gjsman-1000 5y agoI'm talking mainly about the OG article (which discontinues 2.3 and earlier from Google Services), not Android's terrible long-term support compared to iOS which wholly deserves criticism. But they can still access Google.
- ncr100 5y agoCan a person download Google Chrome without Google Play Store / Google Account? I tried and failed.
- gjsman-1000 5y agoYou can sideload the APK downloaded online from APKMirror, and that will work.
- slim 5y agoWhy would you do that? There's a million webview based browsers readily available for download from f-droid or directly from github
- toast0 5y agoBecause Chrome would give you an updated browser engine. I don't think I want a gingerbread webview, thanks.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- wing-_-nuts 5y agoI know this is for a very old version of andriod, but man, it would be really nice if they just said 'android x has these spec requirements, you can try to update any device to any version at your own risk. Why do smart phone manufacturers get to decide what version of andriod I can run?
- zozbot234 5y ago> but man, it would be really nice if they just said 'android x has these spec requirements, you can try to update any device to any version at your own risk. You can try and run an android GSI, if your device is recent enough to support those. Though even GSI's come in a variety of 'flavors', so they're not literally one-size-fits-all.
- yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago> Why do smart phone manufacturers get to decide what version of andriod I can run? Because they (and the chip vendors) are the ones writing drivers and never upstreaming them or porting them to new enough kernels to support newer Android versions.
- fsflover 5y agoIf you want a device with lifetime updates, consider a GNU/Linux phone, Librem 5 or Pinephone.
- caymanjim 5y agoThere's no evidence that those phones will support indefinite updates, and plenty of reason to think that they won't.
- fsflover 5y agoRunning mainline kernel pretty much guarantees lifetime support. It does not matter whether the companies who made the smartphones will exist. My 12-year laptop works fine with latest Debian. https://source.puri.sm/Librem5/community-wiki/-/wikis/Frequently-Asked-Questions#311-how-can-purism-provide-lifetime-software-updates-for-the-librem-5 https://source.puri.sm/Librem5/community-wiki/-/wikis/Freque...
- IntelMiner 5y agoNo, it doesn't Linux has dropped plenty of obsolete hardware over time. Things like AGP, 386 processors and many others
- yjftsjthsd-h 5y agoIf my phone gets a lifetime as long as the 386 got, I will be perfectly happy with it.
- zozbot234 5y agoAlternately, consider postmarketOS for your older devices. Though I doubt that any device which shipped w/ Android 2.3 or earlier would run pmOS all that well; even if you managed to get all the hardware working with free drivers, tight limits on RAM and internal storage are generally a showstopper.
- euanc 5y agoThis could cause some problems for archiving and preserving historic apps, famous persons' devices, and data from those devices.
- extrememacaroni 5y agohackernews: I can't believe 10+ year old hardware and software is forcefully made obsolete also hackernews: man do I hate working on and maintaining legacy stuff
- rafaelturk 5y agooh the irony!