Slashdot Mirror
Google Steps Up Pressure on Partners Tardy in Updating Android (bloomberg.com)
Google is actively tracking the time its partner OEMs take to release a new version of Android onto their devices. According to a Bloomberg report, the company is drawing up rankings that could shame some phone makers into better behavior. From the report: Google shared this list with Android partners earlier this year. It has discussed making it public to highlight proactive manufacturers and shame tardy vendors through omission from the list, two of the people said. [...] Google is making progress persuading phone makers and carriers to install security updates quicker "for the good of users," Android chief Hiroshi Lockheimer said. The same expedited process may then be used to send operating system updates to phones, he explained. The most challenging discussions are with carriers, which can be slow to approve updates because they test them thoroughly to avoid network disruption. The report adds that several OEMs are also stepping up their game to better comply with Google's new wishes. Motorola, for instance, is working on offering quarterly updates to its three years old devices.
For users with non-Nexus devices, it's really frustrating to wait for months, and in some cases, years, before their devices from Samsung, Xiaomi, Huawei, HTC and other manufacturers get upgraded to a newer version of Android. Another challenge for Google is to push its partners to actively release updates to affordable and mid-range smartphones. Many OEMs mostly worry about serving those users who have the flagship and high-end models.
For users with non-Nexus devices, it's really frustrating to wait for months, and in some cases, years, before their devices from Samsung, Xiaomi, Huawei, HTC and other manufacturers get upgraded to a newer version of Android. Another challenge for Google is to push its partners to actively release updates to affordable and mid-range smartphones. Many OEMs mostly worry about serving those users who have the flagship and high-end models.
Lock the device? Go and write your own OS, eco-system and create your own store. Google have this control, fscking use it. Apple have done so since day one, wisely so.
The carriers need to be careful - the FTC/FCC will probably order them to unlock bootloaders for any devices they refuse to update. They really won't want to do that. The FCC is regulatory-captured by the telcos, but the FTC isn't as much.
(of course *I* want that to be an option - I paid for the damn phone)
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
naming and shaming guys and girls, we need juice details
Google abandoned their own device.
The idea that such a list will somehow "shame tardy vendors" is laughable.
VP #1: Chairman! Terrible news! We're not on Google's list!
Chairman: Oh, no! I am ashamed! I must atone for this stain on my character by committing Seppuku!
VP #2: No, Chairman! That will leave your family dishonored!
Chairman: There is no other recourse - I must atone!
#DeleteChrome
To be honest, I've never had a problem with the device manufacturers, it's always been my network (carrier) that's been a pain up the ass with spending time adding their extra branding, crap apps, and the like. Even worse, mine has a blanket policy of "We'll tell you when there's new firmware, we aren;t going to give you any ETA's, status reports or anything. You have to wait until it appears (or not)
"How fine you look when dressed in rage."
- Stop certifying new devices unless they are on the most recent two releases as of the day the hardware first ships to customers. So, that would many any hardware that releases today would have to be running Lolipop or Marshmellow to ship with the Play Store.
- Require unlocked bootloaders and full AOSP releases with all necessary driver sources for the hardware to get certification and Play Store for manufactures with poor update performance, so that third parties get a crack at updating devices when manufactures and carriers lag behind.
- Restructure royalty payments so that app purchases on the play store pay carriers and handset manufactuers significantly more if they are on a current release, and significantly less the older the release is.
- Give strong financial incentives to manufactures to partner with google to offer the option of direct-from-google "pure" firmware that customers can elect to install AFTER purchasing the device. with all the manufacturer and carrier customization offered to said users as apps in a special section of the play store.
.
I've got an Android tablet that is running an ancient version of Android, and the vendor appears to have no intent to update it.
Google has been far too lax with this very significant problem for far too long.
Google could help their case if they were more careful about software quality. Marshmallow simply blows, and I'm doing my best to avoid letting it install on any other devices.
No, they can't tell them that.
First, it's already a done deal. Samsung Knox, TouchWiz, and on and on -- and different, incompatible versions from each IHV -- are considered by these companies' executives to be their "crown jewels". They're "distinguishing" factors that set them apart from other handset makers. You would actually break a fair number of Android apps by going back and retroactively removing these incompatible subsystems, since a number of apps actually use them.
Second, the partners have the source code. Almost all of it save for perhaps the Google-branded applications suite. The code is also liberally licensed. If Google tried to put their foot down, the manufacturers would just ignore them and fork Android. See: CyanogenMod, Amazon FireOS.
Third, Google has no direct relationship with carriers. Carriers interface with the IHVs, not with Google (except, perhaps, for Nexus devices). As long as the IHVs are okay with slow security updates and love to make money by dumping their own crapware on the phones (and letting the carriers do the same), they have no motivation to change their ways.
Naming and shaming won't do much to change this momentum. It's a very poorly engineered, overly bureaucratic process created by tight competition and a tendency (by both IHVs and Google) to want to continually tighten up the ecosystem and make things more proprietary and less open.
Apple has really cornered the market on rapid OTAs and addressing security issues quickly. Google has a chance of matching them with first-party phones and Nexus devices, but that's it. Outside Nexus, Android is the wild wild west, kinda like the old Windows 3.1 / 95 days, but even worse in some respects.
There is no happy medium that's both open and secure because the market doesn't demand it. People keep buying Android's mostly-closed, buggy, insecure crap and Apple's completely-closed, less buggy, probably-more-secure-but-we-don't-really-know walled garden crap.
When has a Android update ever caused an issue with a carriers network?
So Google has a list of vendors who provide timely OS releases and security updates. Question is, what is the ranking? I mean, a company like Samsung releases hundreds of new phones a year (in 2014, it's 3 phones a week), yet you only really expect updates on one of them (the flagship). So does Samsung get a poor ranking because of the 150 phones they released last year, only one gets security updates? Or out of those 150, only 50 shipped with the latest OS?
I pick Samsung because they're the ones making tons of money on Android, and who not only can ignore the listings, but can probably influence things so they don't have to maintain the hundreds of models they released...
Hell my Samsung Rugby is still sitting at 4.4.2. Samsung has 0 interest in updating anything. It's like tech companies forgot that still have to maintain previous models and not just shake/jingle the shiny new keys at customers
FIFYz! Lockz themz motherfuckerz!
Why, aren't you l33t?
Grow up.
First, it's already a done deal. Samsung Knox, TouchWiz, and on and on -- and different, incompatible versions from each IHV -- are considered by these companies' executives to be their "crown jewels". They're "distinguishing" factors that set them apart from other handset makers. You would actually break a fair number of Android apps by going back and retroactively removing these incompatible subsystems, since a number of apps actually use them.
So, what you are saying is that, as we all suspected all along, Android is nothing more than a hopelessly fragmented, hopelessly buggy, hopelessly LOST piece of unmitigated dogshit.
The best thing that Google could do for Android is SCRAP IT AND START OVER. Anything else will only prolong the cruel joke on its victims, er users...
Say what you will about Apple and its "Walled Garden" approach; but they figured out how to manage this a long time ago. They kept the Carriers out of their OS from the get-go, and they struck a pretty good balance overall between freedom and safety.
And now that you can, for free, no Dev. license required, upload anything you want to compile yourself onto your own iOS device, using their Free Dev. Toolchain and your choice of several Languages, there essentially aren't many restrictions left for the code-savvy iOS user. You can even use your own APIs if you aren't distributing through the App Store.
Disclaimer: I'm not a coder, I'm a user and a fixer at best.
I switched from Apple to Android in 2010 for many reasons. In that time Android quickly improved to a point and then seemed, in my eyes to stagnate. Apple very very slowly improved and continued to improve and hasn't stopped...
I am pretty frustrated that some of the older hardware I support, such as an iPad 3, iPhone 5s and 4s (!) are still being routinely updated by Apple, but Android based phones are being left in the dust.
What can be done to fundamentally fix this? It didn't bother me 2 years ago when I was in an overpaid job, valued my money differently and I simply /knew/ I would be getting a new phone within 24 months at most, likely as short as 12.
Part of the reason for allowing device manufacturer to highly customize the OS is for the purpose of innovation. Android as a whole has a shitton of "extras" it can do now, thanks to it. These may not be features that YOU are personally using, but others are!
Some examples include: NFC support. Triple cameras (each with a different viewing angle). Infrared transceiver. Heart rate monitor. Fingerprint reader. Multiple SIMs. The ability to access multiple different types of networks beyond just a single carrier's support (better international roaming)
I think a great measure would be the percent (or number) of days in the year where there were no publicly-known unfixed vulnerabilities. Many phones still have Stagefright vulnerabilities - there were changes that fixed some Stagefright vulnerabilities, but NOT all of them, and thus the phones are still vulnerable.
- David A. Wheeler (see my Secure Programming HOWTO)
as we all suspected all along,
Who is this 'we'? Do you have a hamster in your pocket or is that your iPhone buzzing?
My phone has an ARM processor, and until I can install iOS on it, that's an irrelevant spam topic to bring into this discussion.
So when is Apple going to start selling an iOS I can install? Or is their code so fragile it only runs on a precious few devices?
My security patch level is November 2015 on my 2 year old Moto X.
You can't install Google's Android on any phone you want either. You can install AOSP Android but most apps depend on Google's closed sourced services. Google is also moving more of Android from AOSP.
Despite a long history of sucking, I'm forced to admit that Samsung & AT&T have gotten a lot better about updates. I've been a Samsung customer since the pre-Android BlackJack Windows ME phone, and started cell carriers with Cingular.
My Samsung GS6 is currently on Android 5.1.1 ("security patch Feb 2016") and look, downloading a new update now.
- Necron69
Sure, Google. Why isn't my old Samsung i9520 updated? Hmmm? It's a Google store product...and only about five years old.
I've had a Sony Z3C for just over a year now, and in that time they have released upgrades from 4.4 all the way to 6.01, and I just received another security update two days ago. I've only had one 'bad' update in that time -- the original 5.0 release cut the battery life way down, and they fixed that reasonable quickly.
They don't get anywhere near the press of Samsung/HTC/LG, but I'd buy another one and have recommended them to others.
My phone is direct from B&H, not from a carrier, which certainly helps, but Sony has done the work to make the updates avaialble.
Wall Street and the News Media consider Apple a Gadget Company.
That has to hurt for any long term tech employees at Apple. Probably doesn't bug Tim.
Wall Street and the News Media consider Apple a Gadget Company.
That has to hurt for any long term tech employees at Apple. Probably doesn't bug Tim.
I hope you're wrong. Time will tell...