Samsung Committing to Give Devices 3 Generations of Android Updates - But There's a Catch...

[mr moose]

3 minutes ago, Belgarathian said:

Agreed, but equally if someone was going to offer me the indestructible crappy touch screens from 2003 or a modern phone that I need to spend $20 on a protector for, I'd take today's phones all-day every-day. 

No, I expect modern tech with last decades quality.  I don't like that people are accepting what is clearly a reduced quality in product across the industry while be asked to pay more.

[Kisai]

2 hours ago, mr moose said:

Does any modern phone even last 3 generations anymore? 

 

 

iPhone 6S still gets OS updates. So that's 5-6 years or 5 generations.

 

With that said, usually the oldest stuff is the weakest stuff, and if the battery is still working by that time, nice. However in practice (see the enterprise laptop upgrade cycle of 3 years) people don't like to spend money on new hardware if they don't need to, and I've yet to upgrade the iPad from 2012 and it had the second shortest support cycle of the iPad's. If most of these smartphones/tablets had user-replaceable batteries, they would last a lot longer, but also a lot more would burn people's homes down from people buying "cheaper" counterfeit batteries online from chinese-sourced fly-by-night drop-shippers.

 

Good on Samsung for actually trying to make their product appealing. Guess they had to have an answer to the Google Pixel which IS 3 years.

 

[Belgarathian]

7 minutes ago, mr moose said:

No, I expect modern tech with last decades quality.  I don't like that people are accepting what is clearly a reduced quality in product across the industry while be asked to pay more.

Quality is not the word you want to use, quality to you means reliability and durability. To me it means higher resolution, better contrast ratios, peak brightness, darker blacks, full array back lighting, and refresh rates. 

 

So I would argue that quality has improved over the years even though the durability has decreased. Reliability IMO has also improved as early touch screens were finicky and had a tendency to work intermittently.

[mr moose]

2 minutes ago, Belgarathian said:

Quality is not the word you want to use, quality to you means reliability and durability. To me it means higher resolution, better contrast ratios, peak brightness, darker blacks, full array back lighting, and refresh rates. 

 

So I would argue that quality has improved over the years even though the durability has decreased. Reliability IMO has also improved as early touch screens were finicky and had a tendency to work intermittently.

 

Are we going to argue the definition of quality?

 

To be clear, specs have improved no end, durability (quality of build) has fallen to the shit house.

 

 

[Zodiark1593]

46 minutes ago, mr moose said:

lucky is all i can say.  I've seen more broken screens in the last 5 years than I have over the entirety of smart phone history (2003).

I only ever had three broken screens on any device I’ve ever used. Those being my Game Boy Color (occurred in 2002) when a drop killed half the screen. (I challenge anyone to go through Seafoam Islands in Pokemon with the right half of the screen gone.) The other was my Kyocera FineCam l3v that broke in my school backpack (occurrence in 2007). The third was my BlackBerry Pearl Flip (occurred in 2010). 
 

As far as smartphone history goes, I used a hand me down LG Optimus 2X (the T-Mobile version) from 2012-2015 with Cyanogenmod and a 50% overclock. Gave it to my sister afterward. My next one was a used LG G2 I used from 2015-2017, when I passed that to my Dad, where he broke the display literally two weeks later. After that was my LeEco Le Pro 3 from 2017-2020. Now I’m using an iPhone 11. None of these had a broken screen in my possession as of now, though I’ve had to glue the display back in on the G2 as it was peeling up pretty badly. 
 

If it cements my track record any further, I’ve some handheld game systems that are still intact. My GBA SP (2004-current) got a new battery last year and it still gets regular use. 

 

As best as I can, I treat my stuff with respect. Given I was living in a relatively low income household growing up, I certainly couldn’t expect fast replacement of broken or lost stuff. I won’t even casually toss my phone onto the bed, opting instead to more gently set it down. Even when plugging into a charger, I take a couple extra seconds to make sure I’m dead on. Naturally, modern devices are/should be made a little more rugged, but old habits and all. 
 

So from my perspective, while accidents can and do eventually happen to even the most meticulous of users, I have to wonder how people break screens or otherwise kill their devices on a seemingly regular basis. 

[mr moose]

10 minutes ago, Zodiark1593 said:

So from my perspective, while accidents can and do eventually happen to even the most meticulous of users, I have to wonder how people break screens or otherwise kill their devices on a seemingly regular basis. 

it's because those devices aren't as strong as they used to be.  Literally half the people I know have had broken screens or dying batteries and that never used to be the case. As I said before, you can tell they re weaker and break more often by the increase in repair shops everywhere.   

 

 

[Zodiark1593]

1 minute ago, mr moose said:

it's because those devices aren't as strong as they used to be.  Literally half the people I know have had broken screens or dying batteries and that never used to be the case. As I said before, you can tell they re weaker and break more often by the increase in repair shops everywhere.   

 

 

For that matter, I’m a sample size of only one as well, and quite possibly an outlier at that. 
 

Don’t think fragile devices are anything new though. My Dad and younger sister have broken plenty of devices over the past decade, even some of the older/lower end, supposedly more durable devices. (My sister going through two LG K10s and a cheap CoolPad phone in a couple years). Again, small sample size. 
 

I think proper testing should be done (where’s Jerryrigeverything when you need it), but I’m of the hypothesis that there’s never really been a truly durable smartphone (outside Cat phones, Galaxy Active, etc) especially as we’ve pushed to glass display coverings more screen estate (the latter we’d been doing since 2013). An edge collision will break a screen on a modern flagship S20 just as well as it would an old Galaxy S2 I suspect. 

[mr moose]

4 minutes ago, Zodiark1593 said:

For that matter, I’m a sample size of only one as well, and quite possibly an outlier at that. 
 

Don’t think fragile devices are anything new though. My Dad and younger sister have broken plenty of devices over the past decade, even some of the older/lower end, supposedly more durable devices. (My sister going through two LG K10s and a cheap CoolPad phone in a couple years). Again, small sample size. 
 

I think proper testing should be done (where’s Jerryrigeverything when you need it), but I’m of the hypothesis that there’s never really been a truly durable smartphone (outside Cat phones, Galaxy Active, etc) especially as we’ve pushed to glass display coverings more screen estate (the latter we’d been doing since 2013). An edge collision will break a screen on a modern flagship S20 just as well as it would an old Galaxy S2 I suspect. 

When I say older I mean 2003/6 vintage.  when windows was last successful in the smart phone/pda business.

[Zodiark1593]

8 minutes ago, mr moose said:

When I say older I mean 2003/6 vintage.  when windows was last successful in the smart phone/pda business.

My old Samsung Gravity was quite the roach, though viewing angles were quite worse than the 3D mode on the original 3DS. Holding at 2 feet, each eye got slightly different flavors of color shifting. Actually gave me headaches to use it. It was probably fortunate it was build line a tank, as I’d imagine many people would delight in chucking it at a wall. 

[RedRound2]

5 hours ago, mr moose said:

Does any modern phone even last 3 generations anymore? 

The phones produed by the company you've swore against easily lasts for more than 3 years, averaging about 4-5 years with up to date software

 

Of course you knew this 

[mr moose]

18 minutes ago, RedRound2 said:

The phones produed by the company you've swore against easily lasts for more than 3 years, averaging about 4-5 years with up to date software

 

Of course you knew this 

I've seen just as many iphones with broken screens and batteries needing replacement within 2 years as any other brand.  Hell Apple (in a rare state of being)  even accepted there was a problem and had a program for those batteries they were so bad.

 

The original iphone easily was a high quality device (I would even say up to the 4 was good quality), but by the time they got to the 6 though they had started cutting corners.  But that fits with my previous statement that the previous decade of phones was easily much higher quality than this decades offerings (given the iphone 4 was released 2010).

 

BTW I haven't sworn against them, I just call a spade a spade, I do it with all companies when the evidence is there.

 

[LAwLz]

6 hours ago, WelshDdraig said:

But here is that catch I mentioned in the title - That's 3 generations of updates and not 3 years - which is what most people would assume. An example is the current flagship, the Note 20 Ultra. It comes pre-loaded with Android 10, so we should see it get updates to at the minimum Android 13 (when ever that gets announced in the future).

This is not a "catch". This is a good thing.

Google does not release Android the same time every year. If Samsung had said "3 years" instead of "3 generations" it would have meant that your phone might have gotten two Android updates but the third one was released 1 month after your 3 year support ended, and thus you would not get any updates.

I seriously doubt there will ever be a time where Google pushed out 4 major Android generations in 3 years, so we consumers only stand to gain from having it "3 generations" rather than "3 years".

 

 

Anyway, super cool of Samsung to do this. On top of 3 major Android generations, they also provide about 4 years of security updates to certain devices. So it is possible that Samsung is now the Android vendor that has the longest update support, even longer than Google.

[TempestCatto]

6 hours ago, mr moose said:

Does any modern phone even last 3 generations anymore? 

 

 

Only if you don't use it. Even still, it's mostly just the battery that needs to be replaced.

[starry]

Still using my S4 note as a secondary device. Dont need updates if I flash lineage onto every phone I get.

[RedRound2]

1 hour ago, mr moose said:

I've seen just as many iphones with broken screens and batteries needing replacement within 2 years as any other brand.  Hell Apple (in a rare state of being)  even accepted there was a problem and had a program for those batteries they were so bad.

 

The original iphone easily was a high quality device (I would even say up to the 4 was good quality), but by the time they got to the 6 though they had started cutting corners.  But that fits with my previous statement that the previous decade of phones was easily much higher quality than this decades offerings (given the iphone 4 was released 2010).

 

BTW I haven't sworn against them, I just call a spade a spade, I do it with all companies when the evidence is there.

 

How is a broken screen indicator of longevity? Apple uses the same glass as others. Because more people have iPhones than any other flagship android, you will see more broken screens.

 

Second, with regards to battery, what you said is a straight up false claim. No iPhone batteries die in 2 years. My 6S is still at 82% health despite getting it replaced in 2016 with the free battery replacement program they had. All my Apple devices have aged very well, including iPhone (I still have a 4S that works perfectly fine from 2011, apart from the fact that its slow), iPads (iPad 3 and iPad Pro 9.7) and unibody plastic MacBook from 2010 (it's keyboard stopped working before the battery became crap)

[mr moose]

5 minutes ago, RedRound2 said:

How is a broken screen indicator of longevity? Apple uses the same glass as others. Because more people have iPhones than any other flagship android, you will see more broken screens.

 

Second, with regards to battery, what you said is a straight up false claim. No iPhone batteries die in 2 years. My 6S is still at 82% health despite getting it replaced in 2016 with the free battery replacement program they had. All my Apple devices have aged very well, including iPhone (I still have a 4S that works perfectly fine from 2011, apart from the fact that its slow), iPads (iPad 3 and iPad Pro 9.7) and unibody plastic MacBook from 2010 (it's keyboard stopped working before the battery became crap)

You take these things too personally.  I said all phones, not just iphones.  and the battery issue is well documented.

[RedRound2]

7 minutes ago, mr moose said:

You take these things too personally.  I said all phones, not just iphones.  and the battery issue is well documented.

You said all phones generally. When I pointed out Apple, the screen and the battery are the justifictions you provided, the former one having no relevance whatsoever (fyi glass can remain in form for decade or more if taken care properly) and the battery usually gives out after it's rated cycles. And this is applicable to any phones.

 

In android phones the outdated software, features and performance degradation is what makes it last very little (flashing your phone with another OS doesn't count). Pixel, Samsungs, and most chinese phones are notorious for the latter

[mr moose]

2 minutes ago, RedRound2 said:

You said all phones generally. When I pointed out Apple, the screen and the battery are the justifictions you provided, the former one having no relevance whatsoever (fyi glass can remain in form for decade or more if taken care properly) and the battery usually gives out after it's rated cycles. And this is applicable to any phones.

 

In android phones the outdated software, features and performance degradation is what makes it last very little (flashing your phone with another OS doesn't count). Pixel, Samsungs, and most chinese phones are notorious for the latter

Just examples of why they are not any different to any other phone.

 

But sure, lets turn this into an apple is oh so good while android is sooooo shit pissing contest.

 

 

[Sauron]

8 hours ago, mr moose said:

Does any modern phone even last 3 generations anymore?

Dunno, mine has Android 6 and it works fine

[mr moose]

2 minutes ago, Sauron said:

Dunno, mine has Android 6 and it works fine

5 years is pretty good.

[Doobeedoo]

Seriously I hope even longer updates become the norm in Android space. Fragmentation aside. Todays expensive flagships should offer more Android version updates, it should be the minimum. I mean Google should be the first one of all to offer long as Apple tough. All Android flagship chipsets and possibly mid-range phone with such chipsets should all get more updates. 

[RedRound2]

5 hours ago, mr moose said:

Just examples of why they are not any different to any other phone.

And i precisely said how that isn't even a relevant metric because the screen varys from person to person and battery gives out usually after 4-5 years of normal use

5 hours ago, mr moose said:

But sure, lets turn this into an apple is oh so good while android is sooooo shit pissing contest.

It's no secret that iPhones last longer. Failing to acknowledge that fact with some dumb passive-agressive tactic by means of a broad general conclusion as to a justification applause Samsung's 3 year commitment (cuz which phones last more than 3 years).

[DrMacintosh]

16 hours ago, mr moose said:

Does any modern phone even last 3 generations anymore? 

 

 

Define modern? My iPhone 8 Plus is going nowhere anytime soon. I could still be using my 6s Plus from 2015 tbh. Nothing was wrong with it and I had just replaced the battery. 

[Kisai]

2 hours ago, RedRound2 said:

And i precisely said how that isn't even a relevant metric because the screen varys from person to person and battery gives out usually after 4-5 years of normal use

Screen's depend more on how careless the person is. I've never broken a screen on anything in 30 years. However I got to see the "bin" of returned cell phones from staff and there are quite a few broken screens, regardless of model. Some people just keep using them, even though they really should not. You crack a screen, you risk getting slivers of glass in your finger tips.

 

2 hours ago, RedRound2 said:

It's no secret that iPhones last longer. Failing to acknowledge that fact with some dumb passive-agressive tactic by means of a broad general conclusion as to a justification applause Samsung's 3 year commitment (cuz which phones last more than 3 years).

iPhones last longer if they're taken care of. No device is immune from battery wear, and no device is immune from user abuse.

 

And if we want a better metric, someone who works at a retail wireless store that takes trade-ins would have to count how many times they refused a trade in due to damage, even though all these devices ultimately end up getting recycled/landfilled depending on state recycling laws. I'm sure the much worse devices break more often and we just don't hear about it because certain devices are more popular in different countries:

https://deviceatlas.com/blog/chinese-smartphones-in-the-usa

Quote

Combined, these Chinese-made smartphones accounted for only 3.64% of US traffic in our data. That points to something else being the cause.

 

Like I mentioned before, when I worked for AT&T Wireless, the Warranty exchange queue was almost exclusively LG and Samsung devices, because those devices were utter garbage and were sold as the "free phone" for most people. So you could be excused for thinking that all Korean brand phones were garbage based on just exposure to the Warranty queue, when really, the company made a decision to subsidize those cheap flip phones to $0, and they were entirely unsuitable for the US market. The only other phone to be exchanged that often was the Motorola flip phones because people would break the screen by having it in their back pocket and sitting on it.

 

 

[RedRound2]

2 minutes ago, Kisai said:

Screen's depend more on how careless the person is. I've never broken a screen on anything in 30 years. However I got to see the "bin" of returned cell phones from staff and there are quite a few broken screens, regardless of model. Some people just keep using them, even though they really should not. You crack a screen, you risk getting slivers of glass in your finger tips.

Exactly. It depends on person. Some are really careless. While others, including me have never broken a screen so far in the past 10-12 years. Mr.moose, in some random delusion thought that all iPhone screens break within 3 years

2 minutes ago, Kisai said:

iPhones last longer if they're taken care of. No device is immune from battery wear, and no device is immune from user abuse.

Yes, I agree. But we're talking about general population and average use where most people do tend to moderately take care of their phones. 

2 minutes ago, Kisai said:

 

And if we want a better metric, someone who works at a retail wireless store that takes trade-ins would have to count how many times they refused a trade in due to damage, even though all these devices ultimately end up getting recycled/landfilled depending on state recycling laws. I'm sure the much worse devices break more often and we just don't hear about it because certain devices are more popular in different countries:

https://deviceatlas.com/blog/chinese-smartphones-in-the-usa

 

Like I mentioned before, when I worked for AT&T Wireless, the Warranty exchange queue was almost exclusively LG and Samsung devices, because those devices were utter garbage and were sold as the "free phone" for most people. So you could be excused for thinking that all Korean brand phones were garbage based on just exposure to the Warranty queue, when really, the company made a decision to subsidize those cheap flip phones to $0, and they were entirely unsuitable for the US market. The only other phone to be exchanged that often was the Motorola flip phones because people would break the screen by having it in their back pocket and sitting on it.

My comment was solely focused on features, support, performance, security and usability of a phone after 4-5 years. Sure you can probably revive an android phone by flashing custom rom, but that's a very niche thing to do. Basically an indirect comment on how bad android phones are in terms of longevity