5 ms·

I thought the whole point of Chromebooks was that they were essentially thin clients for the web, or Google services in general. That they have such short expir

I thought the whole point of Chromebooks was that they were essentially thin clients for the web, or Google services in general. That they have such short expiry dates seems absurd. iPads are supported for longer. (And at <$500, not much more expensive.)

preommr 3y ago
> (And at <$500, not much more expensive.) It's even worse. From the article: > But right now, you can buy a "new," unused Flip C302 for $550 from Amazon or $820 via Walmart's Marketplace So it's actually cheaper to buy an ipad than an unsupported chromebook.
- darkclouds 3y ago
  Buyer beware.
bushbaba 3y ago
Shows how apples iPads for education might come out ahead in the long run.
- HenryBemis 3y ago
  Perhaps an institution may go for the iPad as it is harder to bypass the security and root/jailbreak and install apps (APKs) from a PC. On the other if you are like me and prefer to read from a 10" or a 12.4" (Samsung) tablet, for which I don't mind the 'no updates', as I use it only as a reader that is always on Airplane mode and never connects to the internet. But I have no idea how many people go to that extreme (use a tablet only for reading and zero online connection).
btown 3y ago
https://support.google.com/chrome/a/answer/6220366?hl=en https://support.google.com/chrome/a/answer/6220366?hl=en is the program in question. > These updates depend on many device specific non-Google hardware and software providers that work with Google to provide the highest level of security and stability support. For this reason, older Chrome devices cannot receive updates indefinitely to enable new OS and browser features. For this reason, older Chrome devices cannot receive updates indefinitely to enable new OS and browser features. https://support.google.com/chromebook/answer/9367166?hl=en https://support.google.com/chromebook/answer/9367166?hl=en confirms that security updates are also discontinued after the AUE date. By contrast, Microsoft supported security updates for Windows 7, across all the hardware supporting it, from its release in 2009 all the way through early 2020. A five-year AUE, less than many students' times in post-secondary education, is comparatively user-hostile - and downright dangerous from a security perspective.
- bob-09 3y ago
  Dumb question, but aren't iPads full of non-Apple hardware too? I can't imagine buying a brand new device and be told that it's already too old for system updates because Google and the hardware provider are choosing not to work together to provide support. Google can point the finger all they want, but this is entirely a self-inflicted issue that other system software providers seemed to have worked past.
  - mschuster91 3y ago
    > Dumb question, but aren't iPads full of non-Apple hardware too? They are but the parts that matter (i.e. the SoC containing the CPU and GPU, as well as anything RF such as WiFi/BT) is either made by Apple themselves or at least Apple has the full spec sheets - Apple writes all the drivers on their own, which was why NVIDIA got the boot, they didn't want to give Apple the documentation they needed (and were still dealing with the fallout of Soldergate, which made it an even easier decision for Apple). I think they also do the binary firmware blobs for RF devices, or at least that was the suspicion years ago when I was more involved in Hackintoshes as the stability of the same chipset was night and day between Windows and macOS. Apple controls the full stack from hardware over kernel to a huge part of userspace. No other vendor comes even close to that level of control and experience, even Google only started rolling their own SoC (Tensor series) in the Pixel 6 and above two years ago.
    - bob-09 3y ago
      To me it seems like Google wants the same level of control, but is sacrificing user experience and ChromeOS brand impression to achieve it. To me, resolution of this issue looks like either letting hardware providers release their own drivers to enable them to support the sales of hardware currently on the shelves, or refuse to license ChromeOS to hardware providers unwilling to meet support standards that Google’s customers expect. Selling unsupported hardware as new seems like a recipe to drive customers away from the ChromeOS experience.
- robotnikman 3y ago
  >By contrast, Microsoft supported security updates for Windows 7, across all the hardware supporting it, from its release in 2009 all the way through early 2020. Exactly. Whats the point of getting a chromebook if you need a cheap laptop, when you can get a cheap windows one which you know will receive updates for at least a decade
numbsafari 3y ago
Most of the people I know who have switched from Android to Apple did so because a premium phone they had purchased stopped receiving updates after the first year or so they were stuck with bugs for which the only fix was “buy another phone”. Everyone has EOL dates in this game, but Google consumer device ecosystems are the worst of the bunch in this regard.
- moonka 3y ago
  This is the main driver for me in considering a switch to Apple. I almost did the last time I needed to upgrade, but the trade-in offers were good enough that I didn't. It doesn't feel like an upgrade though, I lost the back fingerprint scanner that worked great, but at least I get the security updates for a bit longer.
  - smolyeet 3y ago
    While I use an iPhone and would recommend it , you could easily get a phone like the pixel , one plus , etc that support lineageos or other 3rd party roms and that will keep support years after the vendor does. I will probably go that route next time because it’s not like the phone is unusable or slow after no more updates.
    - moonka 3y ago
      I have been on pixel my last few phones (currently on 6a). While I've done 3p roms on my phones before, I'm not as interested in tinkering with them anymore.
- ajdude 3y ago
  This is actually the exact reason why I switched! The phone that I got before my iPhone was a razor phone 2. I was hoping it would be one of the last androidphones I'd have to buy for a while due to its beefy specs. Unfortunately they dropped support for it within the year that I bought it and it never got the latest android. Now it's it's in my basement.
jauntywundrkind 3y ago
Chrome has recently started really driving folks to upstream their drivers to Linux. But many of these Chromebooks are from a before-time, when it was more traditional vendor development models. Aka a huge gnarly vendor ask code drop. That may or may not matter be replaced by a other similar or quite different code drop. This is how wireless routers mostly exist today. Most embedded devices. Alas. Because it's utterly unsupportable over time. There's huge piles of hacks to get Chrome, the thing running the OS, going. And the new platform sdk changes everything around and introduced new issues and it's just a mess. Now though, two things are happening. A lot a lot a lot more devices have Linux kernel mainstream support. So the kernel should support these devices basically forever-more, which is a huge change. ChromeOS is also a moving target with a shifting sea of services & standards & expectations. Just a thin client maybe the end goal but there's basically a pretty complex featureful desktop, and with cause really. There's real burden upgrading a device to support newer ChromeOS, to keeping up. The good news here is that ChromeOS is decoupling chrome the browser from Chrome the OS. So users may be stuck on an old ChromeOS desktop perhaps, ut they can keep upgrading Chrome the browser, which should expand effective lifetime a lot. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36977107 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36977107 Albeit the question exists of how long hardware/desktop support will last. I spoke to how mainline drivers should make the task much easier. But whether companies actually do support their hardware beyond the current short lifespan or not is unknown, is anyone's guess.

preommr 3y ago

> (And at <$500, not much more expensive.) It's even worse. From the article: > But right now, you can buy a "new," unused Flip C302 for $550 from Amazon or $820 via Walmart's Marketplace So it's actually cheaper to buy an ipad than an unsupported chromebook.

darkclouds 3y ago
Buyer beware.

bushbaba 3y ago

Shows how apples iPads for education might come out ahead in the long run.

HenryBemis 3y ago
Perhaps an institution may go for the iPad as it is harder to bypass the security and root/jailbreak and install apps (APKs) from a PC. On the other if you are like me and prefer to read from a 10" or a 12.4" (Samsung) tablet, for which I don't mind the 'no updates', as I use it only as a reader that is always on Airplane mode and never connects to the internet. But I have no idea how many people go to that extreme (use a tablet only for reading and zero online connection).

btown 3y ago

https://support.google.com/chrome/a/answer/6220366?hl=en https://support.google.com/chrome/a/answer/6220366?hl=en is the program in question. > These updates depend on many device specific non-Google hardware and software providers that work with Google to provide the highest level of security and stability support. For this reason, older Chrome devices cannot receive updates indefinitely to enable new OS and browser features. For this reason, older Chrome devices cannot receive updates indefinitely to enable new OS and browser features. https://support.google.com/chromebook/answer/9367166?hl=en https://support.google.com/chromebook/answer/9367166?hl=en confirms that security updates are also discontinued after the AUE date. By contrast, Microsoft supported security updates for Windows 7, across all the hardware supporting it, from its release in 2009 all the way through early 2020. A five-year AUE, less than many students' times in post-secondary education, is comparatively user-hostile - and downright dangerous from a security perspective.

bob-09 3y ago
Dumb question, but aren't iPads full of non-Apple hardware too? I can't imagine buying a brand new device and be told that it's already too old for system updates because Google and the hardware provider are choosing not to work together to provide support. Google can point the finger all they want, but this is entirely a self-inflicted issue that other system software providers seemed to have worked past.
- mschuster91 3y ago
  > Dumb question, but aren't iPads full of non-Apple hardware too? They are but the parts that matter (i.e. the SoC containing the CPU and GPU, as well as anything RF such as WiFi/BT) is either made by Apple themselves or at least Apple has the full spec sheets - Apple writes all the drivers on their own, which was why NVIDIA got the boot, they didn't want to give Apple the documentation they needed (and were still dealing with the fallout of Soldergate, which made it an even easier decision for Apple). I think they also do the binary firmware blobs for RF devices, or at least that was the suspicion years ago when I was more involved in Hackintoshes as the stability of the same chipset was night and day between Windows and macOS. Apple controls the full stack from hardware over kernel to a huge part of userspace. No other vendor comes even close to that level of control and experience, even Google only started rolling their own SoC (Tensor series) in the Pixel 6 and above two years ago.
  - bob-09 3y ago
    To me it seems like Google wants the same level of control, but is sacrificing user experience and ChromeOS brand impression to achieve it. To me, resolution of this issue looks like either letting hardware providers release their own drivers to enable them to support the sales of hardware currently on the shelves, or refuse to license ChromeOS to hardware providers unwilling to meet support standards that Google’s customers expect. Selling unsupported hardware as new seems like a recipe to drive customers away from the ChromeOS experience.
robotnikman 3y ago
>By contrast, Microsoft supported security updates for Windows 7, across all the hardware supporting it, from its release in 2009 all the way through early 2020. Exactly. Whats the point of getting a chromebook if you need a cheap laptop, when you can get a cheap windows one which you know will receive updates for at least a decade

numbsafari 3y ago

Most of the people I know who have switched from Android to Apple did so because a premium phone they had purchased stopped receiving updates after the first year or so they were stuck with bugs for which the only fix was “buy another phone”. Everyone has EOL dates in this game, but Google consumer device ecosystems are the worst of the bunch in this regard.

moonka 3y ago
This is the main driver for me in considering a switch to Apple. I almost did the last time I needed to upgrade, but the trade-in offers were good enough that I didn't. It doesn't feel like an upgrade though, I lost the back fingerprint scanner that worked great, but at least I get the security updates for a bit longer.
- smolyeet 3y ago
  While I use an iPhone and would recommend it , you could easily get a phone like the pixel , one plus , etc that support lineageos or other 3rd party roms and that will keep support years after the vendor does. I will probably go that route next time because it’s not like the phone is unusable or slow after no more updates.
  - moonka 3y ago
    I have been on pixel my last few phones (currently on 6a). While I've done 3p roms on my phones before, I'm not as interested in tinkering with them anymore.
ajdude 3y ago
This is actually the exact reason why I switched! The phone that I got before my iPhone was a razor phone 2. I was hoping it would be one of the last androidphones I'd have to buy for a while due to its beefy specs. Unfortunately they dropped support for it within the year that I bought it and it never got the latest android. Now it's it's in my basement.

jauntywundrkind 3y ago

Chrome has recently started really driving folks to upstream their drivers to Linux. But many of these Chromebooks are from a before-time, when it was more traditional vendor development models. Aka a huge gnarly vendor ask code drop. That may or may not matter be replaced by a other similar or quite different code drop. This is how wireless routers mostly exist today. Most embedded devices. Alas. Because it's utterly unsupportable over time. There's huge piles of hacks to get Chrome, the thing running the OS, going. And the new platform sdk changes everything around and introduced new issues and it's just a mess. Now though, two things are happening. A lot a lot a lot more devices have Linux kernel mainstream support. So the kernel should support these devices basically forever-more, which is a huge change. ChromeOS is also a moving target with a shifting sea of services & standards & expectations. Just a thin client maybe the end goal but there's basically a pretty complex featureful desktop, and with cause really. There's real burden upgrading a device to support newer ChromeOS, to keeping up. The good news here is that ChromeOS is decoupling chrome the browser from Chrome the OS. So users may be stuck on an old ChromeOS desktop perhaps, ut they can keep upgrading Chrome the browser, which should expand effective lifetime a lot. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36977107 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36977107 Albeit the question exists of how long hardware/desktop support will last. I spoke to how mainline drivers should make the task much easier. But whether companies actually do support their hardware beyond the current short lifespan or not is unknown, is anyone's guess.