Hacker News Reader

Comment by loeg | Hacker News Reader

The relevant question isn't what Samsung has promised, but what they will actually deliver. I think we should be pretty skeptical of that promise based on Android's track record.

View on HN

Samsung announced that their mainline phones and tablets from 2019 onwards would receive at least four years of security updates. We are now entering the fifth year of the life for the oldest of those devices, so we can already see what they actually delivered. No need to cast aspersions.

So they only need another 5+ years to catch up? I doubt we'll actually see that.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fanboy and immensely dislike how iOS users are restricted in other ways, but updates and longevity are unparalleled in the smartphone world.

You are saying it as 10 years of updates is a norm with Apple phones, but it's not. If you read the article, it says that they believe their security issue might have been 'actively exploited'. Companies do release security updates in these exceptional cases to old phones. They don't give a 10 years 'guarantee', yet.

The Android phones I had so far never got anything beyond 3 or 4 years. I have an Apple 7plus that's turning 7 this year and pretty sure that won't be the end of it. It still gets regular security updates. As in every other week.

When iPhone started, it only got two years of updates. Then some got 2, 3, 4 or 5 years of updates. Android is fundamentally different and has to support thousands of devices, if a manufacturer is still giving 5 years of guaranteed updates, it's great, and this will only get better with time.

"Android's" track record? Are you sure you don't mean a particular manufacturer or OEM's track record? Because every company that makes Android phones does it differently. Here, Samsung delivered more than they promised:

https://www.aninews.in/news/tech/mobile/samsungs-55-years-ol...

It's not like Apple is delivering all security updates to these old phones either. This one looked pretty critical to them, as the article says it “may have been actively exploited”.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com