3 ms·
> The big problem that remains is getting it onto devices is a timely manner. This. I own devices from a manufacturer that supposedly uses close to vanilla And
by danieldk 11y ago
> The big problem that remains is getting it onto devices is a timely manner.
This. I own devices from a manufacturer that supposedly uses close to vanilla Android to roll out quick updates. My Moto X 2013 is still rocking 4.4.4, despite the fact that it was just over a year old when Lollipop came out.
My Moto X 2014 (also pure) has Lollipop, but the bugfix releases (5.0.1 and 5.0.2) were never rolled out. The rumor is that 5.1 is now rolling out in Brazil (I am in the EU) and one US carrier. It's been 2.5 months since 5.1 was released.
No surprise that my next phone will either be a Nexus or an iPhone (I used an iPhone 3G and then 4 for years, and always had prompt updates).
The counterargument is always: the user does not care about updates. But I assume that people who drop 500 Euro on a smartphone care more than those who buy low-end.
- jdhawk 11y ago> the user does not care about updates. The Manufacturer does not care about updates. It nets them no cash flows. Delay the updates, force people to buy new phones for new (software) features.
- thedrbrian 11y agoNow if Apple did that it'd be called planned obsolescence and every tech blog would be breathlessly bleating about it.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- jdhawk 11y agoApple controls everything in their walled garden. Android controls next to nothing - so you can pass the buck pretty well.
- sliverstorm 11y agoSupposedly the problem with the Moto X is the specialty chip they use for gestures and such. Which is interesting and troubling, because that kind of specialty hardware seems like the #1 place an OEM can add real value & differentiation to their product line, but adds obvious obstacles to rapid OS updates.