5 ms·

I 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 wou

I 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 ago
Android 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 ago
  I'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 ago
  Android 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 ago
    I'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.
  - nyanpasu64 5y ago
    The Nexus 5X would be a perfectly usable model, but some fail over time due to a SOC with defective "big" CPU cores (IIRC).
- snypher 5y ago
  How many gajillion Android devices are sold per year? It seems misleading to use a percentage of a giant unknown number. Edit; if there are 3 billion active android devices, this is putting 6 million into landfill?
  - gjsman-1000 5y ago
    It's not like they still won't work. You won't be able to sign into your Google account on them, but you can still use the web browser. Honestly, if having every other app than Google drop support for your device didn't motivate you to upgrade, Google dropping support probably won't either.
- dleslie 5y ago
  With a cap kit, battery replacement (if relevant), then the NES, Genesis, Apple II, Altair, 286, Laserdisc, Video CD, and Kodaks still work just fine. Importantly: they are repairable. My Nexus S is a paperweight because Google kept it relatively closed. My BlackBerry Priv is even worse, since I can't root it.
  - md_ 5y ago
    Repairability seems like only half the story. The devices you list are all mostly non-networked; nobody cares about security vulnerabilities in your NES because it isn't connected to the Internet and handling highly confidential information. That's not true of your smartphone. Unfortunately, the reality with online devices is that: a) They are sufficiently complex that they have an indeterminate (and effectively unending) supply of vulnerabilities b) Effective vulnerability management requires vendor support c) The market favors one-time ("sale") models, not ongoing ("subscription") models As a result, vendors support devices for a fixed amount of time, often subject to arbitrary constraints (like going out of business or unexpectedly high costs of fixes). From a consumer perspective, this usually manifests as computing devices getting worse over time--less performant, less secure, and surprising and arbitrary end-of-lifing. You might argue that a more open device ecosystem allows open source contributors to fix vulnerabilities. This is true, to a degree, but only to a degree--just as (past some point) it isn't worth it for a vendor to keep patching a long-obsolete product with a tiny userbase, it's similarly true that an esoteric open source product won't attract a robust community that can meaningfully support it. While free software advocates like to say "But at least it would be up to me to patch it," in practice, for most users (who aren't going to write their own patches, or hire a team of professionals to do so!), predictability, transparency, and fairness are the critical components in the products they use, not "openness" per se.
    - dleslie 5y ago
      Debian can run on any i386 compatible device. That's 25+ years of support for general computing devices. If phones had followed a similar open architecture as PCs then they might have enjoyed such support, as well.
- citrin_ru 5y ago
  > Android 2.3+ accounts for less than 0.2% of devices. It doesn't really force an e-waste cycle Because it is already forced in multiple ways and most devices which can run only 2.3 are already on landfills.
- dredmorbius 5y ago
  There are billions of Android devices. A tenth of a percent of billions is double-digit millions. Google+ userIDs were for a long time effectively new Gmail and Android registrations. Those peaked at about 3 billion before the automatic assignment of a G+ account was broken in 2015. Conservatively, there are likely well over 6 billion such registrations, which would be 12 million Android 2.3 devices. Small fractions at Google scale are large numbers. Realise too that Android shows up in numerous devices, including some embedded tools, as well as tablets, e-readers, and other systems a casual reader might not be aware of.
- blihp 5y ago
  What the parent is saying is that even though you can still login, the functionality of the other gapps has been hobbled for a long time. I can confirm a variety of problems with old Android 4-6 devices. This includes a no longer functional Play store on a couple of devices, YouTube app slowly but surely failing etc.

gjsman-1000 5y ago

Android 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 ago
I'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 ago
Android 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 ago
  I'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.
- nyanpasu64 5y ago
  The Nexus 5X would be a perfectly usable model, but some fail over time due to a SOC with defective "big" CPU cores (IIRC).
snypher 5y ago
How many gajillion Android devices are sold per year? It seems misleading to use a percentage of a giant unknown number. Edit; if there are 3 billion active android devices, this is putting 6 million into landfill?
- gjsman-1000 5y ago
  It's not like they still won't work. You won't be able to sign into your Google account on them, but you can still use the web browser. Honestly, if having every other app than Google drop support for your device didn't motivate you to upgrade, Google dropping support probably won't either.
dleslie 5y ago
With a cap kit, battery replacement (if relevant), then the NES, Genesis, Apple II, Altair, 286, Laserdisc, Video CD, and Kodaks still work just fine. Importantly: they are repairable. My Nexus S is a paperweight because Google kept it relatively closed. My BlackBerry Priv is even worse, since I can't root it.
- md_ 5y ago
  Repairability seems like only half the story. The devices you list are all mostly non-networked; nobody cares about security vulnerabilities in your NES because it isn't connected to the Internet and handling highly confidential information. That's not true of your smartphone. Unfortunately, the reality with online devices is that: a) They are sufficiently complex that they have an indeterminate (and effectively unending) supply of vulnerabilities b) Effective vulnerability management requires vendor support c) The market favors one-time ("sale") models, not ongoing ("subscription") models As a result, vendors support devices for a fixed amount of time, often subject to arbitrary constraints (like going out of business or unexpectedly high costs of fixes). From a consumer perspective, this usually manifests as computing devices getting worse over time--less performant, less secure, and surprising and arbitrary end-of-lifing. You might argue that a more open device ecosystem allows open source contributors to fix vulnerabilities. This is true, to a degree, but only to a degree--just as (past some point) it isn't worth it for a vendor to keep patching a long-obsolete product with a tiny userbase, it's similarly true that an esoteric open source product won't attract a robust community that can meaningfully support it. While free software advocates like to say "But at least it would be up to me to patch it," in practice, for most users (who aren't going to write their own patches, or hire a team of professionals to do so!), predictability, transparency, and fairness are the critical components in the products they use, not "openness" per se.
  - dleslie 5y ago
    Debian can run on any i386 compatible device. That's 25+ years of support for general computing devices. If phones had followed a similar open architecture as PCs then they might have enjoyed such support, as well.
citrin_ru 5y ago
> Android 2.3+ accounts for less than 0.2% of devices. It doesn't really force an e-waste cycle Because it is already forced in multiple ways and most devices which can run only 2.3 are already on landfills.
dredmorbius 5y ago
There are billions of Android devices. A tenth of a percent of billions is double-digit millions. Google+ userIDs were for a long time effectively new Gmail and Android registrations. Those peaked at about 3 billion before the automatic assignment of a G+ account was broken in 2015. Conservatively, there are likely well over 6 billion such registrations, which would be 12 million Android 2.3 devices. Small fractions at Google scale are large numbers. Realise too that Android shows up in numerous devices, including some embedded tools, as well as tablets, e-readers, and other systems a casual reader might not be aware of.
blihp 5y ago
What the parent is saying is that even though you can still login, the functionality of the other gapps has been hobbled for a long time. I can confirm a variety of problems with old Android 4-6 devices. This includes a no longer functional Play store on a couple of devices, YouTube app slowly but surely failing etc.