Do vendors actually want to let users update the software on their devices though?
I would have thought new shiny software was a nice incentive to get customers to upgrade to a new phone?
I would have thought new shiny software was a nice incentive to get customers to upgrade to a new phone?
Treble fixes the problem of "manufacturer who didn't do any customization can't update because Qualcomm never updated their drivers & friends" by ensuring that the level that the Qualcomms, Nvidias, etc... build against is forwards-compatible. So small manufacturer can just take a new android source drop from google and plop it on top of the binaries they originally got from qualcomm or whoever and tada! done.
It doesn't help with the "OEM injected so much 'customization' that it's a disaster to move forward and will forever be abandonware"
Oh yeah, Lineage.
If only the company that made the OS actually supported the effort to perpetually support devices with a single OS the way Android should have been from day 1.
At this point I'm not so sure what's better: an updated OS or one full of known exploits.
It's a trade-off. I'm installing custom software to improve security, but at the same time, can I trust that this solution won't be a source of malware?
I hope this didn't came out as accusatory, I was just trying to show another aspect of using custom ROMs.
For what its worth, the mirror selection software we're using [1] won't send you to a mirror that has a modified file. If a mirror is doing something malicious (and that doesn't catch it), builds are signed and can be verified [2]. Obviously there's some level of trust involved (build infrastructure isn't auditable, android builds aren't reproducible).
[1] https://github.com/etix/mirrorbits [2] https://wiki.lineageos.org/verifying-builds
A lot of people want longer Android support -- especially enterprise installations, which want to pay for software on 4-8 year hardware cycles, but the short length of Android's current support prevents them from doing this.
There are lots of Qualcomm / Freescale chips running Android inside Airplane Seatbacks, and Hotel Kiosks, and Business Wall Signage, and more that simply will not be replaced for many many years. Today, Board OEMs are essentially forbidden from updating these, even if they want to (since Qualcomm / Freescale won't release the tools they need). After Treble, OEM Vendors will at least have the option of updating these devices, even without Qualcomm / Freescale / etc's permission.
Now, with the prices of these devices they are not exactly what I would call 'disposable', but (for Samsung at least, I can't say for Apple) update availability is highly dependant on the network carrier.
I think Google needs to somehow force the availability of updates, regardless of whether the vendor wants to use updated software as a selling point for their latest phone - maybe Treble is a step towards that.
That's not really what I'm talking about. I'm not talking about corporate issued Samsung Galaxy Tablets. I'm talking about Android embedded into other products. Companies, of any size, don't buy Samsung or Apple for this because neither of those companies really exist in those markets at all.
I'm talking about devices like the Delta Kiosk you use to print your Airline tickets. The self-service checkout machine you use at WalMart. The LCD panel in the wall of an corporate HQ that shows all Outlook meetings scheduled in that room. The newer Smart TVs in Hotel Rooms that let you order pay-per-view and food to your room's bill.
Many of those devices also run Android, and have no upgrade path even though their OEMs desperately want one. Project Treble helps them out, even more so than it might for smaller phone companies (like say HTC).
Phone hardware upgrades will become boring like PCs at some point.
I'm not sure that's true. Portable computing can differentiate in many different ways. Consider how broad wearables could be, and that each of these could replace your phone, in principle.
I believe you mean "differentiated" :)
That said, Treble looks like a good step in the right direction. Maybe things will improve in the future.
Smartphone usage must be pretty close to saturation point, in the developed world at least. Samsung, Apple etc release a new, expensive device every year, and it's natural that they are going to want existing customers to upgrade.
I think the only way Android users (of non-Google devices, that is) are going to get software upgrades is if Google somehow forces vendors to do it.
They are a little more aggressive with iPad and iPod touch deprecation, but I think that’s because some of those devices were built underpowered anyway.
i don't think this is necessarily true.
Apple does because they can still generate revenue off old devices via AppStore sales and services. Also used / hand-me-down iPhones expand their user base by serving the low-end of the market.
Android OEM's on the other hand get basically nothing from Google and don't want desirable used / hand-me-down devices devaluing their own low-end models. They can't even try to negotiate a more sustainable arrangement with Google because there's no viable alternatives to Android.
We can only hope that phones follow this trajectory. And maybe more quickly, as they can learn from the past.
Sure, computer manufacturers liked new versions of Windows pushing computer purchases, but now we're at a point where Windows 10 exists, and updates are something not even the consumer can block.
In other words, there wasn't enough people that cared about this stuff to be viable.
The Rogers where I got my last phone, for example, had a dedicated display in the middle of the store for the Pixel phones.
Apple is obviously an exception to this due to their own advertising and stores.
Most countries have more pre-paid users than on contracts, so we get our phones from computer or phone stores instead of carrier stores.
A huge percent of people with Android phones think they're Google phones (not Motorola or Huawei or Acer or whatever), so if they decide to avoid their old 'brand' wouldn't they try to avoid Android?
Of course if they know they have a Samsung they can avoid that, but...
This is what, the third or fourth try at fixing this problem? It needs fixing, but I'm rather skeptical at this point. Just because the hardware interface doesn't need to be re-created doesn't mean the vendors will ship updates. It will just be waiting on something else like vendor/carrier software customization that they're not going to bother with because they'd rather work on the new model.
Good luck Google. This would be a great thing for everyone. I just don't hold much hope.