Hacker News Reader

Comment by Y-bar | Hacker News Reader

Wouldn't last official sale date be a better indicator of true device support? For example if someone bought it in an Apple store on the last day available, how long period would they have received updates for?

For example in mid 2017 it was still officially sold by Apple in India (source: https://www.iphonehacks.com/2017/05/apple-iphone-5s-iphone-s...).

View on HN

Comparatively, no. Android phones generally get a maximum of 3 years of security updates from launch, not from last device sale date. So, within mobile phones, it's more informative to compare it to their competition. It shows you just how much better Apple is at mobile device support compared to everyone else.

Well, you still get updates through the store way longer than 3 years. With more and more components (e.g. the browser) coming through the store, the picture is not as black and white anymore.

Are you talking about OS level updates or just updates for individual apps?

So use the last sale date for both. Your point makes no sense.

Galaxy S8 on sale at Walmart, Staples, and NewEgg. Likely falls off support in 3-4 months. So Android flagships are close to zero or even negative support time?

This is what got me to finally switch to Apple. Updates take forever. I bought a Samsung off Amazon for testing and for some reason I still have to wait on T-Mobile. And then after a year, maybe two, there just aren’t anymore updates.

Samsung makes superb hardware but they're clearly not at ease with software, it always feels like an afterthought.

If they were serious about competing with Apple software is where they should focus.

This is why I switched to Pixel. 3 years of full updates. And you can then switch to LineageOS if you'd like as well.

That sounds dangerous to me.

They have no legal requirement to update. Its also not a bait and switch, they have done this for a decade now. By an iphone if you want updates.

>Wouldn't last official sale date be a better indicator of true device support?

well in that case many cheap android phones/tablets would have negative support periods, considering they don't release any updates at all.

Yes? That sounds about right.

Which makes it kind of a pointlessly obtuse metric. To claim a device has negative months of support.

It's accurate, though. When I am evaluating devices to buy, a metric I care about is "after I buy this, how long will it remain up-to-date with security patches?" And the answer to that question is "on the day that you buy it, it is already several months behind on security patches and will not improve." That metric is not the be-all-end-all of support, but is meaningful, and low or negative values have the correct interpretation in that context.

It's not pointless at all. It accurately reflects the situation of buying a device off the shelf long after its official end of life.

Sorry, I don't follow.

Apple uses this metric as well[1]. If something hasn't been sold by Apple for 5 years (but less than 7 years), it's considered vintage and you can still get hardware service and certain critical software fixes, though not necessarily any new features.

The support for MacBooks is actually great. Certain Late 2013 and Mid 2014 Retina MacBook Pros, while considered vintage, will be receiving the Big Sur update[2].

1. https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201624 2. https://www.apple.com/macos/big-sur-preview/ (at the bottom of the page)

> The support for MacBooks is actually great. Certain Late 2013 and Mid 2014 Retina MacBook Pros, while considered vintage, will be receiving the Big Sur update.

I think it's more likely that Apple's new frameworks don't require any fancy hardware features that aren't available in the Late 2013 MacBook Pros.

It's true that laptop computers have not changed as much over the years. This in large part because Intel CPU's and architecture have not changed as much, while iPhone CPU's have improved by leaps and bounds.

I wonder how much this might change when Apple Silicon comes to the Mac.

It feels like smartphones are stabilizing as well. I don't see myself needing to replace my iPhone 8 for a while, even though there have been three more generations afterwards. An iPhone 5 felt much more outdated at the time of the 6s/SE.

Agreed - since 2017 the main improvements have been to the cameras, plus some improvements to efficiency, and (depending on your carrier) 5G.

I find 5G (coverage on mid-band, not the hyped speed on ultra-wideband) to be the most compelling reason to upgrade my phone this year.

Having owned a 5S, 6 plus, and now XR, the all screen design is a much bigger upgrade than iPhone 5 vs. 6S in my opinion.

> I think it's more likely that Apple's new frameworks don't require any fancy hardware features

Mojave and higher isn’t “supported” on the cheese grater Mac Pro’s despite it running more than fine, including with FileVault 2 enabled on the boot volume (which an Apple exec tried to claim was technically not possible).

> Mojave and higher isn’t “supported” on the cheese grater Mac Pro

The 2010 and 2012 Mac Pros officially support Mojave with a compatible video card:

Install macOS 10.14 Mojave on Mac Pro (Mid 2010) and Mac Pro (Mid 2012) https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208898

Yeah, my sentence structure leaves a bit to be desired. The key there is including FileVault being enabled.

I have a Mid-2014 RMBP, there's nothing wrong with it at all. It's sad to think OS support may be dropped in the next few years.

Yes, we're bombarded with guilt messages about us destroying the planet but even when we want to do the right thing there's no path available.

I have an old Samsung tablet that doesn't work anymore. I could try to change the battery for 20€ or buy the cheapest tablet on Amazon for 40€

Still rocking my maxxed-out 2012 mbp15r here.

Ahem, rocking my 2009 MBP running Catalina =D

Although this appears to be the end of the line as there is no graphic acceleration support in Big Sur

A range would be fair. For example "safe to use for 3-7 years" in the case of this phone by the sound of it.

No, because devices can be and sometimes are sold with software that is already out of date. The better indicator is how long software support is provided for a device from beginning to end.

Why is that a better indicator?

If I buy a new phone from the manufacturer and it's already unsupported, that's really bad. I don't care if it was supported for 8 years before I bought it.

Hah. This bit us when I got my mother an iPhone SE (2016) to replace her iPhone 4 a year or so ago. I tried to restore from iCloud backup and it kept failing, and finally it dawned on me that the OS may have been out of date. Skipped the restore, updated the OS, and wiped the phone. The restore worked correctly.

On the flip side, the Apple guys have a lot of patience to deal with my stubborn ass trying to activate an iPhone 4... the non-SIM servers were taken offline years ago so I popped in a SIM and off I went.

Sure but that doesn't change how long they supported after end of sale which wasn't in 2013 but at least until 2017. So ~3 years of software updates from end of sale. Still OK but not anything special.

To not be special, there must be many phones out there getting the same or better support. What are they? Who sells these many other smartphones that have had 3 or more years of updates from last sale?

Certainly not the Pixel phones, they get 3 years support from first launch only, and they're supposedly the gold standard for Android software support. It's pretty much the reason they exist. Yet after last sale support for the 5S matched the Pixel's from launch support, and we don't even know that this is the last update the 5S will get.

You decided to count the days of support in a completely uncommon way that no one usually discusses but decided that three years was ok based on the common way people count, which is since initial release.

You can’t have your cake and eat it as well.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com