android 11 Google forcing Seamless Update in Android 11

[cydog]

Do you remember the days when your android had to shut down for almost half an hour to update? If you do, rejoice! Those days are finally over (for good this time). Google is going to be forcing the remaining vendors (namely Samsung) who have not switched over to the Seamless Update system to start using it for Android R (11). What does this mean? Well, basically it means that your phone will not be forced to shut down to update. All it will require is a quick reboot when one partition is updated. From Android Nougat (7.0) and onward, this system has been in place and used by most phone companies using the android operating system. The seamless update was originally found in Chrome OS. This feature creates two versions of the system files each stored in separate partitions. This is done so that the phone can still be in use on one partition can be updated during use, then seamlessly switch over to that updated version of the system files (hence the name). Android has taken another step towards being an even better operating system! 

 

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2020/04/google-makes-seamless-update-support-mandatory-in-android-11/

[TempestCatto]

Why can't Windows do this?

[Sauron]

5 minutes ago, TempestCatto said:

Why can't Windows do this?

Because Windows is a mess. And also because it's not divided in individually updatable packages which means that whenever you do update you need to update everything at the same time and empty the working memory or you risk calling an updated version of a system component from an outdated component that doesn't work with it.

[LAwLz]

9 minutes ago, Sauron said:

Because Windows is a mess. And also because it's not divided in individually updatable packages which means that whenever you do update you need to update everything at the same time and empty the working memory or you risk calling an updated version of a system component from an outdated component that doesn't work with it.

All that, and on top of that Windows is massive. On Android this feature might eat up like 1GB of memory, probably even less. On Windows it would probably eat up like 15-20GB.

[DildorTheDecent]

53 minutes ago, TempestCatto said:

Why can't Windows do this?

Winblows is too thicc.

[TempestCatto]

1 hour ago, Sauron said:

Because Windows is a mess. And also because it's not divided in individually updatable packages which means that whenever you do update you need to update everything at the same time and empty the working memory or you risk calling an updated version of a system component from an outdated component that doesn't work with it.

42 minutes ago, DildorTheDecent said:

Winblows is too thicc.

 

I more or less say that out of frustration. I hate having to restart for updates, or even when I uninstall a damn program. One of the many reasons why I disabled Windows Update.

 

[EL02]

I dont think it is half an hour. I just updated to android 10 and the installation process didnt take more than 10 minutes.

Google should focus more on forcing companies to release system updates sooner.

[Salv8 (sam)]

1 hour ago, DildorTheDecent said:

Winblows is too thicc.

you misspelt

T H I C C

[kelvinhall05]

1 hour ago, LAwLz said:

All that, and on top of that Windows is massive. On Android this feature might eat up like 1GB of memory, probably even less. On Windows it would probably eat up like 15-20GB.

Linux can update by itself and it's also a full desktop OS.

 

Windows is way behind the times. Imagine having to restart your PC to update it.

[TechyBen]

2 hours ago, TempestCatto said:

Why can't Windows do this?

Laughs in Linux.

[DrMacintosh]

2 hours ago, cydog said:

What does this mean? Well, basically it means that your phone will not be forced to shut down to update. All it will require is a quick reboot when one partition is updated

Wait, what? I'm confused as to how the existing system works? 

 

You request/receive an update->phone downloads update in the background->preps for install->user reboots the device->update installs. Is this not how Android works? 

[suicidalfranco]

20 minutes ago, DrMacintosh said:

Wait, what? I'm confused as to how the existing system works? 

 

You request/receive an update->phone downloads update in the background->preps for install->user reboots the device->update installs. Is this not how Android works? 

nope

You request/receive an update->phone downloads update in the background->installs in secondary redundant partition->user reboots the device->load updated partition -> done

[DrMacintosh]

3 minutes ago, suicidalfranco said:

nope

You request/receive an update->phone downloads update in the background->installs in secondary redundant partition->user reboots the device->load updated partition -> done

Sounds jank. Thanks for the info!

[mr moose]

Windows is a victim of it's own success, kinda wrong to claim it is behind the times when the times of old won't let it go. 

[SpaceGhostC2C]

1 hour ago, kelvinhall05 said:

Linux can update by itself and it's also a full desktop OS.

 

1 hour ago, TechyBen said:

Laughs in Linux.

 

And every now and then it requires a restart after updates too.

 

Of course, it doesn't just go ahead and do it on its own, but still a restart is required after some updates, same as Windows.

[Arika]

19 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

 

 

And every now and then it requires a restart after updates too.

 

Of course, it doesn't just go ahead and do it on its own, but still a restart is required after some updates, same as Windows.

I will never understand this forums obsession for never shutting down their computer ever, like it's some cardinal sin for the screen to not receive a signal 25/8 and their processor to not have power running through it at all times. 

[GoodBytes]

On 4/9/2020 at 3:38 PM, TempestCatto said:

Why can't Windows do this?

Windows 10X does this. Windows 10 can't do this because mass number of systems sold by OEMs and many motherboard manufacturers, where for the longest time, despite having UEFI fully supported, disabled it for legacy support. In case of Gigabyte, ASUS and so on, they set legacy mode by default, and most builders don't change any settings in the UEFI and just proceed with the OS install ( heck, most guides on building computers and YouTubers didn't even cover this part) As for OEMs, either it was for legacy support for ITs in companies who didn't want to start going to each system and disable it, to install Windows XP or 7.  Also, some disabled it as their UEFI was buggy with hardware sold with it, and the OEM was too cheap to spending money to fix, opting more for "it will be fixed on our next gen PC model if you are interested and can't live without, lolz!"

 

Having UEFI mode set to legacy BIOS emulation mode, this made Windows 10 be stuck on MBR. MBR is limited to 4 non logical partitions.

 

Considering that Windows takes 3 partitions (Typically: OS, boot, Windows recovery tools) plus you have the backup OEM partition, you are out of partitions to enjoy this feature.

 

So now you have a bit of history onto why Microsoft is yet interested in making the jump on Win10.

 

[mr moose]

5 minutes ago, huilun02 said:

This "seamless updates" is inconsequential. It only applies to devices that use an A/B partition like the Pixels and phones that run Android One.

 

Why is this even news?

They are forcing A/B partitions on all phones according to the article.  

 

 

Quote

Google is putting new rules in place for Android 11: it's going to make support for Android's "seamless update" feature mandatory for devices launching with the new OS. The news comes to us via an Android source code commit first spotted by XDA Developers, which reads, "Require Virtual A/B on R launches." In English, this means the seamless update system, which requires two partitions (labeled "A" and "B"), will be required on Android R, aka Android 11.

 

 

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, huilun02 said:

And they will fail unless it takes little to no effort on the manufacturer's part to implement.

 

Remember all the supposed hardware requirements to run Android 10? Yeah no one gave a fk. Android 10 runs on 2013 and entry level devices just fine.

Well I guess if android 11 requires A/B partitions to work then manufacturers will either do it or will not ship wiith 11.   

[LAwLz]

6 hours ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

And every now and then it requires a restart after updates too.

 

Of course, it doesn't just go ahead and do it on its own, but still a restart is required after some updates, same as Windows.

There is a very large difference between the number of times they do require a restart though, and it is possible to make it so that you never have to reboot GNU/Linux.

For example out of the box HREL requires a reboot for kernel updates. But if you configure something like Ksplice it's possible to install the updates without reboots.

 

6 hours ago, Arika S said:

I will never understand this forums obsession for never shutting down their computer ever, like it's some cardinal sin for the screen to not receive a signal 25/8 and their processor to not have power running through it at all times. 

It's just that there is no technical reason for why it's necessary, and it's a minor annoyance.

Imagine if the government told you that from now on you need to sit quiet in a corner of a room for 3 minutes once every week. Why? No reason, you just have to. Would you really go "well it's not a big deal to just wait 3 minutes. I don't get why people are so pissed at this change".

Installing updates on Windows is one of those annoyances which steals time from you on a regular occasion, and it doesn't have to if Microsoft fixed it, which they should.

Microsoft has already spent quite a lot of time reducing the number of times updates requires reboots if we look back to Windows XP. From XP to Windows 7 the amount of reboots were reduced. Then from 7 to 8 they were reduced again.

Microsoft's own numbers states that they have reduced the time it takes for updates to install from around 45 minutes to around 5 minutes. That means 40 minutes saved for every update. We're talking thousands of hours saved when you look at a larger organizations over let's say a year.

 

 

 

4 hours ago, GoodBytes said:

Windows 10 can't do this because mass number of systems sold by OEM and many motherboard manufacturers, for the longest time, despite having UEFI fully supported, disabled it for legacy support.

I would like to add that:

1) UEFI is completely unrelated to why Windows have to reboot to install a wide variety of updates (unlike for example GNU/Linux). The reason for the (relatively) large number of reboots necessary is because of outdated and poor design of Windows, not OEMs.

2) Being stuck with MBR and the 4 partition limit is a reason why this particular way of handling updates would be an issue for Windows. But realistically, Microsoft could just force OEMs to default to GPT (like they have forced OEMs to ship with secure boot enabled by default in order to get a Windows 10 compatible certification).

3) There are ways around the 4 partition limit which Microsoft could implement if they wanted to make this possible. For example they could make extended partitions with logical drives inside a primary partitions and boot from that. You can do this with Ubuntu and GRUB already. I just think Microsoft don't care enough to enable this.

 

 

 

2 hours ago, mr moose said:

Well I guess if android 11 requires A/B partitions to work then manufacturers will either do it or will not ship wiith 11.   

Yeah, I haven't read the specifics yet but a lot of "Android requirements" which have to do with lower level stuff is mandatory if you want your device to SHIP with a specific version, but not to previously released devices which has then been updated to it. It was the same with Treble. All certified devices which ships with Android 8.0 has to support Treble, but devices which launched with Android 7.0 or earlier, who then were updated to 8.0, do not need to support it.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

3 hours ago, huilun02 said:

It only applies to devices that use an A/B partition like the Pixels and phones that run Android One.

It only applies to devices that will indeed get any form of Android update to begin with... 

[Arika]

26 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Imagine if the government told you that from now on you need to sit quiet in a corner of a room for 3 minutes once every week. Why? No reason, you just have to. Would you really go "well it's not a big deal to just wait 3 minutes. I don't get why people are so pissed at this change".

 

My "3 minutes" would be when i go to sleep

 

26 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Installing updates on Windows is one of those annoyances which steals time from you on a regular occasion,

which is why they get installed when i'm about to go to sleep

 

26 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Microsoft's own numbers states that they have reduced the time it takes for updates to install from around 45 minutes to around 5 minutes.

doesn't matter how long it takes if it installs while i'm sleeping

 

see the pattern? Unless there are people on this forum that don't even sleep? and i don't buy that everyone has a video render or some other project that must run all day every day and all night every night.

 

Need to go make dinner? just hit restart on your computer

Need to leave the house? just hit restart on your computer

Going to sleep? just hit restart, or hell, even shutdown, on your computer

 

 

26 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

and it's a minor annoyance.

and yet it's been the main topic of discussion in a thread about Android updates. And it's brought up in every other Microsoft update news thread.

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, Arika S said:

and yet it's been the main topic of discussion in a thread about Android updates. And it's brought up in every other Microsoft update news thread.

It's amazing how some people will take any opportunity to have a pointless shit on windows.  

 

We get it people you don't like windows and you think Linux is better,  just go use it already and stop complaining.

[LAwLz]

1 hour ago, Arika S said:

My "3 minutes" would be when i go to sleep

What if you didn't get to choose when it was?

 

1 hour ago, Arika S said:

which is why they get installed when i'm about to go to sleep

That's fine if you only have a desktop PC at home for example, but that's not how it looks for a lot of people, especially with businesses. For example even if you turn the PC off when you leave work for the day, you will still have to wait for it to apply the updates once you start it up in the morning the next day. Or if you're like me and need to shut your PC off and turn it on every once in a while in the middle of the day (if I move from one client to another).

 

 

1 hour ago, Arika S said:

see the pattern? Unless there are people on this forum that don't even sleep? and i don't buy that everyone has a video render or some other project that must run all day every day and all night every night.

 

Need to go make dinner? just hit restart on your computer

Need to leave the house? just hit restart on your computer

Going to sleep? just hit restart, or hell, even shutdown, on your computer

Only works in your particular use-case and not the ones I described. You have to remember that not everyone uses their computer exactly like you do. But even if they did IT'S A MINOR ANNOYANCE THAT IS NOT NECESSARY.

Again, it does not matter how small the annoyance is. If it's unnecessary (which it is) then why not ask for the issue to be fixed? Why are you trying to argue that we should not make Windows better? Why settle for "it works well enough for me"?

 

 

1 hour ago, Arika S said:

and yet it's been the main topic of discussion in a thread about Android updates. And it's brought up in every other Microsoft update news thread.

Because there isn't much to discuss about this for Android. It's a cool feature. If you go to a thread about how Firefox adds a new feature that Chrome doesn't have you will probably find a bunch of people talking about how Chrome lacks it and should implement it too.

If you go to a thread about a new Android device with some unique feature you will find people in the comments talking about how the iPhone doesn't have it and how Apple is behind, or vice versa. If AMD releases a new processor you will have people mentioning Intel, or vice versa.

It's how discussions work. One product is compared to another product. This forum would be very dead if we weren't allowed to make comparisons between products.

 

 

1 hour ago, mr moose said:

It's amazing how some people will take any opportunity to have a pointless shit on windows.  

 

We get it people you don't like windows and you think Linux is better,  just go use it already and stop complaining.

I think you're looking at this the wrong way.

Saying "I wish Windows could do this" or "this is a problem I have with Windows" is not "pointlessly shitting on Windows". It's pointing out ways Windows could be better.

I am sure you think I love shitting on Windows, right? Wanna know why I do it? Because I use Windows and because I want it to improve. Just because I point out that GNU/Linux is better at some things does not mean I don't like Windows or that I should stop using it. I am using Windows instead of GNU/Linux for a reason.

 

People on this forum seriously need to stop defending companies when people come with constructive criticism, and stop with the "if X is so good and Y is so bad why do you use Y?".

I use Android, and I have no problem pointing out that Android devices has a lot of issues. Being slow at getting updates (and very few major updates) is one of them. The camera architecture is horrible too, to the point where a lot of apps doesn't even bother using the actual camera and instead opt to take a screenshot of the camera viewfinder. Does these complains mean I should just use an iPhone instead? No, because it is possible to not have black and white thinking where something has to be perfect or terrible. It is possible to use a product and still think it needs improvements in some areas.

 

When I shit on Windows it's because it deserves being shit on, and I believe it would be better if Microsoft did the things I asked for, which in turn would make me enjoy using it a lot more.

Why do you think I ask for seamless updates on Windows? I ask for it because I think it would make Windows better, and I would enjoy it more. If I was only interested in using GNU/Linux then I would not give a damn about the feature missing in Windows, and I certainly wouldn't ask Microsoft for it.

[mr moose]

26 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

I think you're looking at this the wrong way.

Saying "I wish Windows could do this" or "this is a problem I have with Windows" is not "pointlessly shitting on Windows". It's pointing out ways Windows could be better.

I am sure you think I love shitting on Windows, right? Wanna know why I do it? Because I use Windows and because I want it to improve. Just because I point out that GNU/Linux is better at some things does not mean I don't like Windows or that I should stop using it. I am using Windows instead of GNU/Linux for a reason.

 

People on this forum seriously need to stop defending companies when people come with constructive criticism, and stop with the "if X is so good and Y is so bad why do you use Y?".

I use Android, and I have no problem pointing out that Android devices has a lot of issues. Being slow at getting updates (and very few major updates) is one of them. The camera architecture is horrible too, to the point where a lot of apps doesn't even bother using the actual camera and instead opt to take a screenshot of the camera viewfinder. Does these complains mean I should just use an iPhone instead? No, because it is possible to not have black and white thinking where something has to be perfect or terrible. It is possible to use a product and still think it needs improvements in some areas.

 

When I shit on Windows it's because it deserves being shit on, and I believe it would be better if Microsoft did the things I asked for, which in turn would make me enjoy using it a lot more.

Why do you think I ask for seamless updates on Windows? I ask for it because I think it would make Windows better, and I would enjoy it more. If I was only interested in using GNU/Linux then I would not give a damn about the feature missing in Windows, and I certainly wouldn't ask Microsoft for it.

I wasn't talking about the one person who merely said they wished windows could do this,  I was talking about all the unnecessary commentary that has nothing to do with the topic and appears in just about every thread even remotely related.  Comments like:

 

Quote

Because Windows is a mess.

 

Quote

Winblows is too thicc.

 

Quote

I hate having to restart for updates, or even when I uninstall a damn program. One of the many reasons why I disabled Windows Update.

 

Quote

Windows is way behind the times. Imagine having to restart your PC to update it.

 

Quote

Laughs in Linux.

 

One person made a legitimate wish,  the other 5 comments here are either pointless,  childish, wrong or just plain  unnecessary.  And now you are saying you choose to shit on windows and are accusing people of defending it because they are sick of the shit dribbling and the stupid lengths people go to to tell everyone they don't like it.  No one is defending windows, we just don't want to be inundated with inane reasoning for why something most people don't seem to have a problem with is supposedly so evil.  If people feel that way about windows and prefer Linux then that is fine, but we don't need to hear about it in every thread,  especially when it isn't even a desktop OS thread. 

 

The last thing we need is people choosing to shit on any product and then asking for their opinions not to be questioned less they be labeled as defending something.