Some Android phones “lied” about the security patch they are on

[DocSwag]

1 hour ago, DrMacintosh said:

 

But how many of those get any real meaningful support time? What a year after launch? Maybe 2?

I recently actually found out Samsung phones actually get really long support. Usually they get three full OS updates (S6 I believe got Marshmallow and Nougat and Oreo is planned). The problem is the delay is huge. I believe the S7 still hasn't gotten Oreo and the Note 8 just got it recently. Delays are over 6 months, which is ridiculous.

[DrMacintosh]

4 minutes ago, Blebekblebek said:

the major apps usually cover that anyway, and if the os is outdated then the apps simply refuse or can't be installed.

I seriously doubt this is how Android function. Then again it would explain why Android malware is a thing. Apps getting too much control over the system. 

 

Also that says is the system is weak. (imo)

[DrMacintosh]

2 minutes ago, hey_yo_ said:

I hope Google finally ditches Qualcomm in favor of their in-house SoCs. 

Certainly possible. Though do we know if Google is in a position to start something like that? 

 

I guess they could always outsource like what Apple does with their custom chips since they do not own any FABs (yet)

[D13H4RD]

45 minutes ago, DrMacintosh said:

Android culture pitfall I guess. I hate to bring up Apple again but they have managed to keep the vast majority of people running the latest version of iOS since, well iOS 5 I think. 

 

Google should really look into what causes people on iOS to be so eager to update to the new version to see how they can improve themselves and emulate that drive to update without forcing updates on the end user. 

It’s on iOS to an extent as well.

 

My brother-in-law’s iPhone 6+ is still on iOS 9 and he has no plans to update it.

 

Reason? He doesn’t want the extra stuff in the new OS to potentially make it bite off more than it could possibly chew.

 

Is it potentially unwise? Yeah, but I doubt that stigma will change anytime soon, not until manufacturers can find a way to basically install patches in the background sight-unseen, although the iPhone battery fiasco kinda showed what could happen if you try to do things behind-the-scenes.

 

I think the whole “open-source” thing is both a blessing and also a curse to Android, and we’ve been seeing Google exert more and more control over the platform, such as requiring OEMs to conform to specific guidelines in order to be certified.

[DrMacintosh]

2 minutes ago, D13H4RD2L1V3 said:

It’s on iOS to an extent as well.

Hardly

2 minutes ago, D13H4RD2L1V3 said:

My brother-in-law’s iPhone 6+ is still on iOS 9 and he has no plans to update it.

You're brother is the 7% on something lower than iOS 10 

[D13H4RD]

11 minutes ago, DrMacintosh said:

Hardly

You're brother is the 7% on something lower than iOS 10 

Hence why to an extent.

 

There will still be people who choose to hold off on upgrading their OS. There’s just more of it on Android, especially when their phones barely get upgrades.

 

(On a side note, it’s brother-in-law. Not exactly the same as a brother in my books but I digress)

[captain_to_fire]

39 minutes ago, DrMacintosh said:

Certainly possible. Though do we know if Google is in a position to start something like that? 

 

I guess they could always outsource like what Apple does with their custom chips since they do not own any FABs (yet)

They are already in the position to put their own chips in the Pixel. Google is already using the custom Pixel core chip for the Pixel 2’s local camera machine learning. Google hired Apple’s former chip engineer to design chips. All they need is to outsource manufacturing to Samsung or TSMC. 

 

[Dabombinable]

My tablets custom 7.1.1 is still getting security updates as of this month (backported ones that is), so top kek.

[Qwertious]

Surely would’ve been better not updating the security patches than actually lying about it

[Nowak]

3 hours ago, DrMacintosh said:

Mobile security on Android devices other than Googles seems to be pretty sketch man. 

tbh the only fully trustworthy android OEMs when it comes to updates are google, hmd/nokia and essential

[8uhbbhu8]

Well... Fuck these OEMs.... I'd rather have late updates then be lied about what i'm getting in patches! 

[mr moose]

2 hours ago, DrMacintosh said:

No, but you are saying that this is what iOS updates set out to do, which there is simply no basis for since the inception of iOS in 2007. 

Slowing the phones and bricking due to 3rd party screens was the intentional outcome with the updates.   Please don't pretend that never happened.

 

Quote

Ironic

 

It is about Android, but you don't get to say that while you attack Apple and then turn around and say that I am making this into a Apple thread. You just don't. You're instigating. 

No, I was responding to you who was already talking about how awesome apple is in a thread about android.  Just bringing some balance to the unnecessary rhetoric.

[DrMacintosh]

7 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Slowing the phones and bricking due to 3rd party screens was the intentional outcome with the updates.   Please don't pretend that never happened.

Apple does not intentionally slow down phones with software updates for the purposed of making people upgrade. There is no evidence for that and their business model does not reflect this being a practice. If their goal is to slow down iPhones so people upgrade, supporting phones for 5 years is not the way to do that. 

 

Bricking due to unofficially replaces screens is a thing yes. It happens on 2 iPhone skews, the iPhone 8 and 8 Plus. That is completely unrelated to software updates making phones slower and is not a characteristic of planned obsolescence. Just being dicks to see how far they can push the law and their customers. 

[mr moose]

7 minutes ago, DrMacintosh said:

Apple does not intentionally slow down phones with software updates for the purposed of making people upgrade. There is no evidence for that and their business model does not reflect this being a practice. If their goal is to slow down iPhones so people upgrade, supporting phones for 5 years is not the way to do that. 

 

Bricking due to unofficially replaces screens is a thing yes. It happens on 2 iPhone skews, the iPhone 8 and 8 Plus. That is completely unrelated to software updates making phones slower and is not a characteristic of planned obsolescence. Just being dicks to see how far they can push the law and their customers. 

No, they just failed to inform any of their customers what they did.  It was as dodgy a move as any and it was incredibly intentional.

[D13H4RD]

32 minutes ago, VegetableStu said:

wait, is this "security parts not included in software update" or "updates to security found out to be placebo"? o_o

A mix of both 

[Curufinwe_wins]

I've said this before, but I'd rather have no updates than updates that make the phone perform worse, or effectively forced updates where apps are unusable even in their current version once a new OS update comes out. And we can circle around this all day long, but it is something that had, has, and will continue to happened in the alternative.

 

And when the first companies are saying "on average between 0 and 1 update missed"... everyone does realize that that means nothing right?

 

This just in! The 1000 dollar iPhone X has 0-1 updates missing vital for security of their devices! Stop the presses!

 

Also this isn't really lying [not a defense, just a note]... It's misleading in that they have INCOMPLETE patches going out. If the phone says it's most recent update is from March 8, and it is, but that update didn't include the sub-patches, it isn't lying about when it was updated... Obviously.

[DrMacintosh]

19 minutes ago, mr moose said:

No, they just failed to inform any of their customers what they did.  It was as dodgy a move as any and it was incredibly intentional.

If you are only going to respond to a section of my reply only quote the part you are focusing on. No point in quoting the whole thing when you are only focusing on 1 sentence. 

[D13H4RD]

7 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

And when the first companies are saying "on average between 0 and 1 update missed"... everyone does realize that that means nothing right?

 

This just in! The 1000 dollar iPhone X has 0-1 updates missing vital for security of their devices! Stop the presses!

That's on an average out of their lineup, though

[Curufinwe_wins]

Just now, D13H4RD2L1V3 said:

That's on an average out of their lineup, though

Ok. This just in! Apple Phones on average are missing 0-1 vital security updates! Still see the issue with the statement?

[D13H4RD]

39 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

Ok. This just in! Apple Phones on average are missing 0-1 vital security updates! Still see the issue with the statement?

No, not entirely anyway. 

 

The iPhone, Pixel and others count because they only have a few in their lineup. But if you have a diverse lineup by Samsung, it becomes a little awkward.

 

Because it means that some of their phones get timely patches but others don't. Take the J5 and J3. The former was on-point with updates and implemented them (almost) in-full. But the J3, despite saying that it has the patch installed, doesn't exactly have it.

 

 Unless that's what you mean, of which I apologize for the misunderstanding. As a side note, on the XDA source, one guy was questioning how Samsung even got "0-1 updates missed" when some of their phones were missing more than 1.

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, DrMacintosh said:

If you are only going to respond to a section of my reply only quote the part you are focusing on. No point in quoting the whole thing when you are only focusing on 1 sentence. 

I was replying to the whole thing.   Everything you said was just trying to deflect from very poor behaviour on apples part.

 

 

 

[DrMacintosh]

Just now, mr moose said:

I was replying to the whole thing.   Everything you said was just trying to deflect from very poor behaviour on apples part.

 

 

 

It acknowledged it entirely in the second body of text. Your reply had nothing to do with the entire first body. 

[D13H4RD]

1 minute ago, DrMacintosh said:

It acknowledged it entirely in the second body of text. Your reply had nothing to do with the entire first body. 

Just stop.

 

That's all. I'm getting tired of every damn article being turned into an absolute cuckshow about Apple between both sides.

[DrMacintosh]

1 minute ago, D13H4RD2L1V3 said:

Just stop.

 

That's all. I'm getting tired of every damn article being turned into an absolute cuckshow about Apple between both sides.

I'd love to, but I'm just not going to sit and be lambasted. 

[mr moose]

 

2 minutes ago, DrMacintosh said:

It acknowledged it entirely in the second body of text. Your reply had nothing to do with the entire first body. 

Fine, I'll respond again.

 

 

39 minutes ago, DrMacintosh said:

Apple does not intentionally slow down phones with software updates for the purposed of making people upgrade. There is no evidence for that and their business model does not reflect this being a practice. If their goal is to slow down iPhones so people upgrade, supporting phones for 5 years is not the way to do that. 

 

Bricking due to unofficially replaces screens is a thing yes. It happens on 2 iPhone skews, the iPhone 8 and 8 Plus. That is completely unrelated to software updates making phones slower and is not a characteristic of planned obsolescence. Just being dicks to see how far they can push the law and their customers. 

 

In response to all of that message, please note that I find it to be completely irrelevant to the thread and rather dismissive of very intentional behaviour from apple.  This is behaviour which I would very much appreciate google not following suit with especially when it comes to security updates on the worlds most used mobile OS.