4 ms·
Microsoft allows third parties to make Windows computers. Windows computers still get updates, and the manufacturer doesn't have to push Windows updates.
by coder543 3y ago
Microsoft allows third parties to make Windows computers. Windows computers still get updates, and the manufacturer doesn't have to push Windows updates.
- morepork 3y agoBut Microsoft doesn't make Windows open source and allow customers to fork the OS.
- coder543 3y agoCanonical allows third parties to make Ubuntu computers. Ubuntu computers still get updates, and the manufacturer doesn't have to push Ubuntu updates.
- morepork 3y agoBut Canonical isn't responsible for the Ubuntu forks, it's up to the community to get Kubuntu, Mint, etc. updates out
- coder543 3y agoRegardless, the updates do still flow. Any case where updates aren’t happening is the exception, not the rule. Android being open source isn’t the problem.
- morepork 3y agoFortunately the community doesn't have the perverse incentive of a hardware manufacturer. If updates stop flowing it encourages people to buy new devices.
- coder543 3y agoI'm not talking about "the community". There are multiple manufacturers/distributors of Linux laptops. They do nothing to stymie the flow of updates, even though your assertion about selling new hardware would theoretically apply just as much there.
- morepork 3y agoIt's a good comparison. I would speculate that it's the target market. If you're buying a Linux laptop you are likely very technical, and know about and want the latest updates. I doubt System76 would get many sales if Pop OS was based on Ubuntu 20.04 and wouldn't get any updates. However with Android, companies sell 100s of millions of devices to consumers that are more concerned about price point than updates. There just doesn't seem to be the incentive for OEMs to care about it, if the majority of consumers refused to buy devices based on old OS versions or ones that didn't get updates, those devices wouldn't get made.
- asadotzler 3y agoWindows OEMs replace significant components of the Windows stack from the trackpad drivers and well beyond. One of my machines is a Dell and they've basically replaced Windows Update because they serve more driver and other updates than Microsoft (slight exaggeration). Open source isn't the differentiator, IMO. OEM fuckwittery is. Just as Dell can junk up this $3,000 laptop with shitty drivers and shell extensions that are markedly worse than what Windows offers natively, so could other Windows OEMs. The major difference here I think is that until the recent era, MS wasn't competing with those OEMs so they had little reason to try to one-up MS and every reason to leverage MS for as much of the update infra as possible. For the last 5-10 years, with the Surface line, Microsoft has been increasingly encroaching on the top OEM user base and some are fighting back by trying to outdo MS (and failing). But I don't think anyone is putting the right blame here on Android. It's not the OEMs not serving enough software updates, it's that in many parts of the world, a 10 year old device can still connect to the network and the carriers are OK with that. That device, even it it was from Apple, would not be getting updates that late in its lifetime but large swaths of the world aren't so fucking hung up on phones as jewelry that they update every year, or even every two, or even every 5. Those ancient Android phones in Bangladesh, they're working just fine for their users and even Apple wouldn't be serving them any better with software updates.
- PhilipRoman 3y agoGuess that explains why there are companies still using windows xp