Hacker News Reader

Comment by dannysu | Hacker News Reader

Nobody looks at a top of the line PC with the best graphics card(s) and say it's crossing a threshold. Everybody understands it's for a certain demographic.

According to rumors, they're still going to have various models and price points.

Also, iPhones are extremely economical because no other phones receive OS updates for as long. My iPhone 6, which cost $749 at the time, is coming up to 3 years old. It's still flawless, no speed issues or any issues. The only thing bad is that the battery isn't as good as before, but I still get through the day just fine.

I might upgrade this year just because "new & shiny", but I'll probably pass the iPhone 6 to family. And because it's still very good and receive updates, that means if I get 4 years of life out of it, its cost is actually only $375 when compared to other phones that stop getting updates 2 years in. That's really good!

View on HN

> Also, iPhones are extremely economical. My iPhone 6, which cost $749 at the time, is coming up to 3 years old.

Uh, what? I'm on my second ~$70 Android smart phone in eight years. It's a tad slow, but we're talking about literally a few seconds of waiting, nothing truly inconvenient. I have honestly never been impressed by anything a $600+ iPhone can do beyond what my phone can. The only drawback is that it isn't compatible with Apple group texts, but that is more than made up for by the fact that I truly don't care if my phone gets lost or breaks (I back up my files, so I'm only out 70 bucks). I have no idea why people spend so much money on phones.

> It's a tad slow, but weren't talking about literally a few seconds of waiting, nothing truly inconvenient.

A few seconds of waiting is not "truly inconvenient"? I suppose you're either a zen master, or not doing much with the phone (possibly because it's "a tad slow").

For me, the phone is something I use constantly during the day, in lots of brief bursts. Few seconds of lag may be the difference between me staying in or leaving the flow. It would often make a significant fraction of the length of a single interaction with a phone. Those kinds of frustrations add up for me over time. Avoiding all of that is worth the $700, if I can afford it.

If two to three seconds of waiting (that's on the high end, and only for certain apps) is breaking your flow, you need to work on your attention span. That's ADHD territory.

Edit: For that matter, interacting with your phone for a few seconds at a time is probably an attention deficit issue in and of itself. I admit that it's common, but that doesn't mean it isn't a problem.

Or, you're using snapchat, or instagram, or signal.

Or, any other IM program (including text messages). Or getting directions. Or checking departure time of a bus. Or switching a song that's playing. Or turning my Hue lights on/off. Or checking my account balance. Or paying with the phone.

Each of those actions should take no more than couple of seconds (occasionally, a couple dozen). And it can, if your phone is not lagging out after lockscreen or when trying to load an on-screen keyboard.

All these things work just fine on these older devices. The pauses the original message mentioned are mostly encountered when starting or switching between applications. Once the application is running things work as intended. I use Telegram on that Motorola Defy I mentioned, no problems. It runs navigation apps (Navigon, OsmAnd~) without problems. It takes photo's of reasonable quality, those photo's can be edited on the device. I use it to play music on the device itself using Dsub (a Subsonic client) or Apollo, to control remote players using MPDroid (which controls mpd (music player daemon) on remote devices). It plays video from the likes of Youtube and Vimeo just fine. I use it to read books and publications, no problems. I even use it as a telephone every now and then...

It can take a few seconds to switch between any of these apps, especially when there are several of them running in the background. Would a new device be faster? Sure it would. Will I buy a new device sometime in the future? Sure, when this device kicks the bucket or another device shows up which offers the same feature set (good performance (compared to current devices), good battery, waterproof and sorta-shockproof yet still looks like a normal device instead of some prop from a B-movie). Do I feel like I'm missing out on something by using a 6 year old phone? No, I do not.

Well, if you use a 6-years-old phone and it works for you, then by all means, stick to it. I would, too.

In my case it's not about chasing the newest features and highest resolutions - it's about certainty of getting a quality product. I no longer want to risk getting a shitty, laggy phone, or a phone that turns into one after few months. I consider it not worth the frustration it causes in daily usage.

That can be a choice. If you know every interaction with your phone is going to be an exercise in patience, you'll be less likely to whip it out for every random thought or notification you get.

You remind me of a friend who, as an excuse for having bought a mobile with shit battery, used to say: "well this way I don't look at it that much!!!". Bollocks.

"A few seconds of waiting is not "truly inconvenient"? I suppose you're either a zen master, or not doing much with the phone (possibly because it's "a tad slow")."

No, he just isn't possessed by the ridiculous "must go faster, must go faster" mindset that plagues most people today.

A website takes more than a second to load? ARGH it must be down, now my day is ruined!

Just relax, if a small delay is enough to make you "leave the flow", maybe you need to reevaluate your priorities. If your "flow" is interrupted that easily, maybe it wasn't particularly important, anyway.

I would rather use a feature phone than a "slow" smartphone. Responsiveness shouldn't really be a extra feature, at least not for the basic apps(contacts, notes etc).

> A website takes more than a second to load? ARGH it must be down, now my day is ruined!

Delays when fetching data on-line are understandable. Delays for simple off-line stuff are not. Especially unexpected delays - as in, the stuff used to work fast (in the past, or on my previous phone), but now it lags. Hell, I had a crap smartphone that liked to hang for 30+ seconds when trying to answer a phone call.

> No, he just isn't possessed by the ridiculous "must go faster, must go faster" mindset that plagues most people today.

You see, time, not money, is the most valuable thing a human being has - because it's hard-capped. Each of us has a choice on how to spend it; I choose not to let crappy consumer hardware waste mine when I can afford it.

You've made a bad choice in selecting which phone to buy, then.

My Moto X Play is still as fast as ever, the only app I ever experience any slowdown in is Google Maps, and it's always been like that.

Everything else is latency from logging in, fetching resources and so on.

Yes, I did. But then I also saw similar issues on other people's phones (both crappy ones and good, but _old_ ones - the latter probably can be blamed on flash degradation).

The entire computing world revolves around "must go faster, must go faster". How likely are you to stay on a website that takes a few seconds for each action? You're not. EVERYONE optimizes for it. Every 100MS of latency, Amazon loses 1% of revenue, and that's only ONE TENTH of a second. http://radar.oreilly.com/2008/08/radar-theme-web-ops.html

You may have the patience of a saint, but the majority of the world does not.

Well, there majority of the world consists of idiots, so there's that.

I mean my wife is still using my iPhone 3Gs (8 years old), so I get there are different needs. That's exactly my point.

Would you make the argument that everyone should be using $200 chromebooks?

If not, then why would one make the argument that anything more expensive than a chromebook is crossing some kind of threshold?

> "I get there are different needs."

What are those different needs? What do the top end phones do that the mid range phones do not, other than take better photos? Battery life is comparable, screen size is comparable, they run the same apps. I'm struggling to think of a single reason (other than the camera) why people buy high end phones anymore. There used to be a big difference in quality, but that gap has pretty much evaporated.

Go to an Apple Store and see them all side-by-side. What makes those devices what they are are the high end devices on the next table over.

The advances very much do trickle down. Whether you would personally buy it or not.

That's a non-answer. I'm asking people who buy high end phones why they pay extra. A phone with faster processor and more memory can't be the only reason people pay extra for these devices, which is all I'd get from comparing specs.

When was the last time that phone got a security patch?

I don't mean to sound utterly petty, but most security threats these days seem to be external to the device you are using.

Yes it sucks when a windows xp machine catches a massive virus from a random website.

But here I am with an iphone 5 that cost me $xxx, it gets updates that slow the phone down and break a lot of functionality, and my ssn isn't keylogged from my device, it's just leaked by someone else!

Now luckily my passwords aren't being keylogged but- wait! damnit!

> most security threats these days seem to be external to the device you are using.

It depends. From the top of my head, the smartphone is the most common second factor, so an attacker that's on your smartphone may be able to log onto most services that have 2FA. Or alternatively, they can DoS your own attempts to log into these services by deleting SMS, or just sending the phone into a reboot loop. (Of course, "targeted DoS" is not in everyone's threat model. But still, I have more peace of mind using a dedicated TAN generator device instead of my phone.)

> It's a tad slow, but we're talking about literally a few seconds of waiting, nothing truly inconvenient.

Few seconds waiting for what? There's a big difference between a few seconds waiting for an app to load and, say, for it to register that you've tapped a key on its on-screen keyboard.

There's not much to understand why people spend a fortune on phones every few years. These days it's more because of the status of owning the latest and greatest device (nothing wrong with that as people are entitled to do whatever they tf they want to do). Like everything else really.

Diminishing returns kick in at a remarkably low price point, especially outside the US.

$250 gets you a Xiaomi Mi A1 - a phone with a 1080p display, a full metal body, 4GB of RAM, 64GB of flash, a fast 8-core processor and guaranteed software updates directly from Google.

http://www.mi.com/in/mi-a1/

Is a $750 iPhone really three times better than that phone? Is it even 5% better? If I were an Apple shareholder, I'd be giving some serious thought to Apple's future in the growing middle-income economies. Apple are clearly going gangbusters right now, but I'm highly sceptical about their continued relevance.

It is better. The MacOS/iMessage/Facetime/Time machine ecosystem is is pretty awesome, and if you don't want to spend your time and effort trying to fix Windows BS and removing their malware, then an extra thousand or two is worth it. Plus, if something goes wrong, you get great customer service at the Apple Store.

I've done the Windows/Android thing, it's a pain in the ass to keep up with all the stuff. As I get older, I just need my things to work (especially smartphone and computer) and I'm willing to pay a premium. I don't even want to have to research what I'm buying, and Apple has been executing on that for quite a few years now.

I'm in exactly the same boat. I've done IT for enough years, I do it as a job, when I come home I don't want to do it anymore. I refuse to fix the computer problems of anyone outside of my immediate family unless I'm getting paid, and no one pays me to do my own computer maintenance.

I switched from a custom-built desktop PC to a laptop then to a Macbook a while back. I switched from an Android phone with super heavy customization and a flashed ROM to a Windows Phone (and after that platform died, an iPhone). Did I give up some flexibility? Yes. Did I spend more money? Yes. But I made a conscious choice to do so because I hate to be my own IT guy.

If I need a new computer, I don't comparison shop to see if Lenovo or Asus or Acer or HP has the best features for the price or reliability scores or any of that. I buy the latest Macbook. If I need a new cell phone, I don't look up who the best is. I buy an iPhone. I pay a little bit more for peace of mind. It makes me happy.

> Is a $750 iPhone really three times better than that phone? Is it even 5% better?

Yes, it is. Three times better might be an exaggeration, but it has unique features that basically no other phone has currently, and that's worth different things to different people.

> Also, iPhones are extremely economical because no other phones receive OS updates for as long.

Good point. Also they sell extremely well on the second-hand market.

This is how I roll. Buy iPhone. Get AppleCare. When the AppleCare is done, sell it and buy a new one. Resale covers the AppleCare. If I break it, I pay the excess and walk away with a new handset the same day.

This feeds the scond hand market.

If I bust an android phone I lose it for three to four weeks, have to buy a stopgap phone and tend to end up with a botched repair from a 3rd party repairer the vendor have hired. On top of that the OS updates usually stop after a year and roll out about a month after they are announced unless I buy a Nexus which is completely non repairable anyway.

I see your 3 year young iPhone and raise my 6 year old Motorola Defy. I bought it new in 2011 for about 1/4 of what the then-current iPhone would have cost. It still works flawlessly, the battery is fine as well (~5 days of normal use on a single charge or ~7 hours of screen time). If the battery were to fail I could just replace it, no tools required.

Oh, the thing is waterproof and 'shock-proof' (although the latter is to be taken with a grain of salt, my wife managed to break the glass on hers after about three years).

In other words, it does not take an expensive iPhone to last longer than a contract period. Well-built phones can last a long time, much longer than the 2 years which most people seem to consider as normal.

I'd be with you, except for Android's planned obsolescence. The reliance on third-parties to provide at most ~2/3 year security update paired with a dated and forked version of the Linux kernel gives me pause.

That is what AOSP and its derivatives are for, to pick up development when the manufacturer gives up. The Defy did not get updated past 2.3.6 by Motorola, anything after that (currently running 4.4.4 which is as far as this device will go) comes from there. Since Android apps are generally backward compatible for a long time, older Android devices can still run current apps. This is actually one of the advantages Android has over iOS, older iDevices are generally stuck at older apps as soon as Apple stops supporting the device.

First, you aren't talking about the average consumer anymore. If we're talking flashing operating systems, sideloading kernel updates and boot loaders in order to feel secure about your mobile device, then an older, vertically supported iOS device is probably a better bet.

Secondly, AOSP isn't forever. After your carrier/device-manufacturer drops support, Google isn't that far behind. If you're not getting AOSP drops for your device that work with device drivers then it's probably dead. There are a few brave souls willing to port modern Android to no-longer-google supported devices, but I wouldn't call that sure-fire security.

Thirdly, many AOSP derivatives and communities have niche motives that don't really align with the average user. New OS features, experimental "battery saving" kernel hacks and user-space root are commonplace where they really shouldn't be for the average, or arguably any, mobile user. Often devs get a new device and the community quietly moves on, dies, stops providing.

Mobile software is really in a sore place right now overall and neither duopoly is 100%. The incentives aren't aligned to the consumer.

Lineage OS is pretty easy on my nexus 6. Unlocking the bootloader was the hardest part, which is literally "fastboot OEM unlock"

So yeah its hard. YMMV.

I agree, it's not hard. However, I know some people who just can't grasp how to set up a mail account or even use Dropbox. For them, unlocking a bootloader is nigh on impossible.

I have gone down this path and then realised that a. I hate having to flash my phone every so often to keep it updated and b. the time I would have to spend flashing phones is more expensive than the price different between an android phone and an iPhone.

That's all set to change in Android Oreo.

https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2017/05/here-comes...

Oreo will make it easier for maintainers to keep maintaining, but definitely won't guarantee they do so. Just because device drivers are now easier to keep up to date doesn't remove the huge monetary incentive to push users onto the next phone.

That misses a key point I was making: OS updates.

Yes, I too have a Nexus 4 (bought in 2012) and it still works fine. But no more updates. I don't consider that on par with say my previous work laptop, which was also 3 years before I upgraded.

I also own a Moto E (2nd Gen, $60-ish) and bought a Moto G+ for my brother this year, but I can't count on them to receive OS updates for as long.

Well I would like to see version 1.0 sofware that receives only security updates than the current status quo that we update a huge amount of your apps every week to change a button a bit. Every update there is a risk that something is going to be broken, even at the OS level. This is pathetic that we are going this direction.

As it stands I think that Nexus 5 is getting neither - no functionality or security updates

This is partly because of hardware manfacturers not supporting the latest version of Android. I think Google latest attempt to separate hardware drivers from Android itself should help a lot though the advantage will really be seen 2 years from now. If what Google is attempting works just like iOS and iPhone you will get the latest version of the OS barring a few hardware based features that your phone hardware doesn't support.

The Motos are well supported by aftermarket ROMs if you want updates. They might be among the cheapest with this.

Except you are comparing a 749$ phone with a 220$ and 60$ ones.

You could buy a new Moto G every 2 years and you would still have an up-to-date phone that is more economical than an iPhone, if OS-updates are your main worry (on average, I believe Apple supports devices up to 5 years, which objectively is a lot).

That without considering how well old phones work with newer OSs, my iPhone 4 did technically work with the last supported update, but the performance hit was so big it made it a pain to use.

Are you saying there are no flagship android phones or the flagship phones get longer official support? In the past I don't think the Samsung Galaxies got more than 2 years support. And they weren't exactly cheap.

So why buy the expensive Android phone when the low cost ones are really good for that price point and you can just buy another one with the money you save?

Okay, but why do we need "software updates"? If the phone still works and is able to do the job what difference does it make?

I had a Moto G for over 3 years that cost $150 in 2014 and which continued to work perfectly with zero updates (Android 4.4) during that period.

It finally died last month when I tried to recharge it on an USB cable that I wired backwards (on a motorcycle). Replaced it with a $120 Lenovo that's fantastic, does everything I could think of and more.

I think people who are ready to buy an iPhone for over $1000 would in fact pay any price; Apple should try to sell those for $2500 and see what happens.

For the rest of us, a $120 Android phone is more than enough.

> Okay, but why do we need "software updates"? If the phone still works and is able to do the job what difference does it make?

Yes, maybe not updates as such but we certainly need security patches. Any network connected device does and phones are more connected than most, frequently sharing networks with strangers or friends that aren't tech savy enough to keep their environment secure..

Most of my family members (ie. >70yo. non tech folks) skip all update altogether, security or not. The argument is that updates introduce features changes which bother their experience and force them to figure out where everything is.

In layman terms, security updates are seen as trojan horse for larger updates they don't want.

> If the phone still works and is able to do the job what difference does it make?

Windows XP still works, but that doesn't mean I would accept my computer being locked to that version of Windows.

Security updates are important, but so is the fact that you might want to run software on it that doesn't work with an older Android version.

AFAIK the Nexus 6P is still receiving updates.

I have one of those and an iPhone 7.

You can install LineageOS and get some updates , don't know how long but you get to extend the life of both phones.

I have Nexus 4, too, and changed stock OS to LineageOS (previosly I've used cyanogenmod) and it works great, and now I have Android 7.1.2. and I receive weekly updates...

I realize that "flashing" the ROM is not what normal user would do, but it has become very easy to do, and it does extend the (usable) life of the phone..

I see your 6 year young iPhone and raise my 14 year old Nokia 1100. I bought it new in 2003 80~ dolla. It still works flawlessly, the battery is fine as well (~31 days of normal use on a single charge or ~16 hours of screen time). If the battery were to fail I could just replace it, no tools required.

Oh, the thing is bulletproof (although it must be taken with a grain of salt, chuck norrys managed to break the glass on his after about three years).

In other words, it does not take an expensive iPhone to last longer than a contract period. Well-built phones can last a long time, much longer than the 10 years which most people seem to consider as normal.

I get that this might be a great "call other people with voice" phone, but most people use their phones as web browsers or, in the simplest case, as a chat application runner. This comparison doesn't add much to the spectrum of discussion here

Perhaps if the 1100 had WhatsApp we can talk about this comparison, but otherwise this is like comparing your phone battery life to a flashlight's. Sure, a flashlight will last longer for the light, but I still like use the light on my phone because it's a thing I use for other things as well.

Well, guess what, my elderly Nokia actually has a browser, no whatsapp but then again I wouldn't use that even if my phone supported it.

How well can you access HN on it?

My Nokia from 2009 can handle it just fine. I still use it whenever i break yet another smartphone (written from Nokia 6303i).

Works like a charm, better than most other sites (it uses an older version of Opera mini).

> chuck norrys

If you’re going to try to capitalize on an internet meme, at least try to do the job properly.

Alas, if I still had my Nokia 1100 from a decade ago, it would now be useless to me - not because the device has failed, but because Australia no longer has GSM/2G phone networks as of this year...

...actually, it wouldn't quite be useless - I could still play Snake!

Does it still get updates though?

In 2011 I bought a Motorola Droid 2 and I it's been one of the best phones I've used, but I don't think I've ever got any system update. It's been stuck on 2.1 forever.

The original iPhone which I bought 10 years ago is still in daily use (by a person who only needs voice & sms).

My daughter was still using my 2010 iPhone 3GS until last December. It even still worked with the App Store. I'd dig it out and fire it up again but I'm not sure where it is.

All my iPhones get handed down. The only one out of (er, 5 devices I think?) that's properly busted is my other daughter's 4s. It started falling apart at the seams this summer and is currently held together with sliced strips of sticky tape. Still, it's lasted 5 years and was still getting OS updates last year!

My daughter was still using my 2010 iPhone 3GS until last December. It even still worked with the App Store. I'd dig it out and fire it up again but I'm not sure where it is.

The ting with OS updates is, it was supposed to be the other way around. We were told that being open source meant Android phones could never be abandoned like this. Owners would have the freedom to update the OS themselves and would truly own their device and it's software. There's no way a proprietary OS vendor would provide long terms support because it would be uneconomical and deter upgrades to new devices. What an utter crock of shit! What went wrong?

My daughter was still using my 2010 iPhone 3GS until last December. It even still worked with the App Store. I'd dig it out and fire it up again but I'm not sure where it is. I ran out of family members to had it down to.

The thing with OS updates is, it was supposed to be the other way around. We were told that being open source meant Android phones could never be abandoned like this. Owners would have the freedom to update the OS themselves and would truly own their device and it's software. There's no way a proprietary OS vendor would provide long terms support because it would be uneconomical and deter upgrades to new devices, but with Android that wouldn't matter.

What an utter crock of shit that turned out to be! What went wrong? How can Android fans that bought that line not be storming the gates of the vendors and Google that sold them these lies for being deceived and betrayed? But no, it's all about the new Samsung (factory worker poisoning, embezzling CEO, explodaphone coverup) shiny. Just roll over and be grateful for your new dose of utopian Android open source goodness, the best possible phones in the best of all possible open source worlds.

Un-effing-believable.

If you install a more recent version of Android (such as 4.4) on the Defy (it shipped with Android 2.3 or so), it will be too slow for use (for my taste,anyway). I tried it with a faster Defy+.

Even with Android 4.4 it will be a very insecure phone. With Android 2.3 it will be laughably insecure. Visit one wrong webpage and your phone is owned. No thanks.

In what way would this be "a very insecure phone"? It runs Android 4.4.4 just fine. I patched the one glaring bug ('Stagefright'), it runs the latest browsers (Firefox/Fennec, Lightning, PB) without problems.

While there is lots of talk about 'Android being insecure' it is hard to find actual examples of Android devices which are used in a sensible way (i.e. which do not get fed whatever APK just downloaded from getfreestuff.cooldoodz.biz) being exploited.

Well, if you haven't fixed CVE-2015-3864, CVE-2015-3876 and CVE-2015-6602 chances are you are still vulnerable by visiting a wrong web page.

Just look at the monthly security fix notes. There are critical vulnerabilities getting fixed every month.

Here are more critical ones: CVE-2017-0764, CVE-2017-0756 from the September patchlevel that also affects Android 4.4.4. See https://source.android.com/security/bulletin/2017-09-01

In August 2017, three more. In July one. In May another two. Still not convinced?

Seriously, I actually consider iPhones to be some of the most cost-effective purchases I make. My mom is still happily using my old iPhone 5, and my iPhone 4 functions as a pretty nice media controller.

> It's still flawless, no speed issues or any issues. The only thing bad is that the battery isn't as good as before.

so, not flawless? i can replace the battery on my phone, which is very reassuring and also practical for times away from a charger.

How often are you away from a charger or a portable power bank, really?

We can all imagine theoretical situations where one would need to swap batteries, but they're just that - theoretical. In practice you can either find/borrow/buy/steal a charger or you carry an USB powerbank with you if running out of battery is an issue for you.

many times: hiking, on a boat, riding my motorcycle, on vacation in general. during these times i don't want to be unnecessarily tied to a portable charger. what's the point of having a portable phone at that point. simply changing out a battery is far more convenient.

so it's not theoretical at all. the person i replied to literally listed a reason why it's nice to be able to swap out a battery: their battery no longer works correctly.

You must be from the valley if you think that a 1000 phone is economical. That is laughable.

It's a defensible position, I live in the EU so proximity to heaps of expendable income is not as abundant than in the US middle-class. In the UK we had a saying "the poor man pays twice", meaning that if you buy a shitty rake and it breaks you have to go buy a new one.

This is kinda the case with phones too, you can buy a $450 phone with 2 years of updates, or a $700 with 5 years.

Which one is more economical over time?

> you can buy a $450 phone with 2 years of updates, or a $700 with 5 years.

> Which one is more economical over time?

My sub-100USD android apparently. What the heck kind of math do you have going on for "economical?"

Talking in terms of years of support.

$450 / 2 = $225/y of support.

$700 / 5 = $140/y of support.

Plenty of cheap but great Androids in the $200-300 range, just take a look at the Moto G5 Plus, for example.

Which, in the absolute best of cases, get security updates for one or two years, while the equivalent iPhone does for 4 or more. That's what he means by paying twice.

False dichotomy. I just bought an Android phone over the weekend for $35 (on sale from $50) -- the LG K3. It has an older Android OS (Marshmellow) a little slow, the screen resolution isn't great, and the keyboard input is a little more fiddly than my Nexus 5X (which bricked, which is why I needed to get a new temp phone), but otherwise it works just fine.

Six years ago I paid $170 for an equivalent phone (older version of android than current, slower, less ram, space, etc). On sale. And used it for almost a year and a half. So the low-end has really gone down in price.

OK, but how long did you receive patches after the purchase?

I'm talking mainly about phone support not whether it continues to function on a basic level or not.

I mean I just bought the new one last weekend so it's too soon to tell. Google Play Services got updated again this morning, though.

The previous phone I think it was most of the time I owned it, but I didn't get any major OS upgrades (nor did I expect to), just minor updates.

It got slower over time but it never bricked, unlike my fancy new Nexus 5X, which completely bricked after I owned it for a year and a few months. Who cares about security updates and software patches when your phone completely breaks in less than the average upgrade cycle (obviously I don't mean all of these phones do, but apparently it was a common problem with Nexus 5X, I found out after the fact. I have a coworker on his 3rd one in two years).

So your last generation iPhone still gets updates? I would not call that a excellent benchmark in my book.

The trouble with iOS devices is that they stop being usable the moment you can no longer update the OS in the way that most applications only support the newest OS (happened to several iPads here with e.g. Amazon app, Twitter, Youtube) - because updates roll out to the majority of users so fast compared to Android.

"stop getting updates 2 years in."

With Android most applications still support 4.X when Oreo comes out.

6 is almost 3 generations ago. The 7S/8 (we're not sure) comes out tomorrow. You can buy a 7 now. The 6S was released 2 years ago. The 6 was released 3 years ago.

I have a 5S and it still gets updates and works the same as the other poster described. I haven't even replaced the battery and still get a days usage.

I have an iPhone 6 (not 6s) and can still use pretty much "most applications that only support the newest OS".

The only things I can't do involve hardware-based features for things I don't have in my phone.

It takes only one slip up to screw your security. One targeted attack that you don't notice because you're in a rush.

I love my MotoX 2013, but it never got updates (Sprint model, Sprint blamed Motorola, Motorola blamed Sprint); it's succeptible to Stagefright so I can't use it anymore. And it will never receive an update for it.

As much as we use our phones and as much personal information is on them, security updates should be first and foremost.

Yes, AOSP exists for some devices, but 9 times out of 10, something breaks when using it.

When Android moves to a new way of doing audio or video, drivers stop working, and some people try to come up with shims, but as others point out. The developer of it gets a new phone and the project dies.

My Nexus 5 (November 2013) hasn't gotten a security update since October 2016. My iPhone 5 (September 2012) just got an update to 10.3.3 in July.

Android devices are notorious for being slow to get updates, if you ever get them at all.

Yeah it can be cheaper to get an Android device, and I have quite a few, but they simply aren't up to the same standards that iPhones are.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com