Bought a Motorola G6 in 2018 for €199. It takes "fantastic" photos, and came in a "stunning new" (!?) color of black(ish). It's pretty much indestructible, runs Firefox with uBlock Origin, and it's "better for the environment" because every year you don't buy a new phone, the environment is happy.
It also has USB-C, and a 3.5 jack.
This seems wrong. I am still on an iPhone Xs Max from 2018 and it still gets software updates. It looks like the last software update on the G6 was in 2020. The lack of even security patches limits the life of the phone for many people.
The primary reason I'll eventually need to upgrade is because of 5G support. Coverage is getting worse as 3G has been shutdown and all new towers are focusing on 5G. My battery life sucks now too, but that can solved easily.
Works perfectly, and I didn't really care when I smacked a ratchet into it and cracked the screen a month ago.
The problem with tech is nothing is ever "good enough." Sure, you could make a phone that is durable for 10 years... but someone will invent new battery chemistry, CPUs will get considerably more powerful/efficient, and Sony will come along with even better camera sensors.
So it's really not possible for that high-end "old" phone to keep up after a few years. That's true for most consumer tech, even if the pace is slowing down somewhat. An expensive LED TV from 2013 will not compare favorably with a good value mid-range one today.
We can either stop innovating, which is also bad for the environment (technology improvements allow for vast efficiency and energy-use improvements in a huge range of products), or we can make sure things have a lot of re-use value. That can be done through the used market with good repairability and software support, and by making sure phones can be recycled and also use a lot of recycled materials.
Maybe. (I'm not one of them, but ok.) But that doesn't have much to do with the environmental impact? It's still greener to keep phones longer, even if they don't get updates.
It seems the only progress is the camera and the CPU, but for what more CPU speed? The camera?
We don’t have to limit it to people you know
People upgrade their phones about once every 2.5 years
https://www.refurb.me/blog/how-long-does-a-smartphone-last-r...
But, go figure, the sticker price is like 10-15% higher than on the Apple site.
They just hid the interest in the price.
Same, on Apple’s site: $699
IDK, maybe apple price-dropped today and T-Mobile hasn’t caught up, but that’s similar to what I’ve seen in the past when I’ve looked at buying through them.
But even that do they don’t value phone upgrades. When I see their ancient phones I sometimes remark they can get a phone with monthly terms and they just shrug and say the sad device with cracked screens and ancient cameras and crap display resolution and brightness is good enough for them. It baffles me, but most people just use their phone for texting, occasionally a map, and a crappy camera. Only in my tech friend circle do people keep up.
You can easily look up the average time between phone upgrades is between 2-3 years.
64% are living paycheck to paycheck, now whether they opt to get a new smartphone or not is not clear.
What is clear is the statistics you linked and I could find were polls of either people buying a new phone, which would be structurally biased towards people who are buying phones make frequently and are not buying used phones, or they were surveys of people with some relationship with a mobile or tech related site or product. These don’t seem like very unbiased surveys - but they do seem like sources apple or a phone maker would care about. “Of the people we care about in our marketing, they buy every 2-3 years.” I know in my family my wife’s family inherits our old phones and would ever show up in such a poll, nor do people buying off eBay, or even used from Amazon, etc.
Maybe a single mom working three jobs to raise their five children really does feel compelled to have the newest iPhones and puts her kids needs behind a high resolution screen, but I somehow believe she’s just not counted in market surveys of phone buyers.
Regardless the average isn’t 99%.
If given a choice between every single citation I could find on the internet and your anecdotes of what your family does, which one do you think is more reliable?
I’d not the median household income is 70k, which means half of all households make less than that. The median personal income is $40k.
Again, we aren’t getting remotely close to 99% of people are upgrading every 2-4 years.
On the entire internet every source cites 2-3 years but you choose not to believe it because it doesn’t support your worldview?
And in the US, even the MVNOs that are targeted toward lower income buyers subsidize phones where you get them for “free”.
But you’re telling me on the entire internet you can’t find one statistic that supports your claim?
It’s really not that hard to find statistics. It’s 2.5 - 3 years
https://www.refurb.me/blog/how-long-does-a-smartphone-last-r...
https://www.pcmag.com/news/the-2-year-mobile-phone-upgrade-c...
I know multiple people still using an iPhone X (2018), for whom cost is not an issue.
The main reason for the majority of the general population to upgrade is because the phone literally breaks (screen, stops charging, radio malfunctions, etc)
Plus, currently plenty of androids have 5-6 years of guaranteed security updates. To be honest I wouldnt ever want to use much older phones even if patched up to date, too clunky, making bad photos (I have kids so this is top priority), not up to most network standards and so on
I remember before I switched to iPhone I would wait and wait and wait and wait for the latest android and updates and a whole new version of android would roll out before I would even get the previous version.
For what is worth, I have a Galaxy Tab S6 from 2019 that is still getting security updates, although it wasn't updated to Android 13: https://doc.samsungmobile.com/SM-T865/ROM/doc.html
For reference, the latest version of iOS will run on 5 year old iPhones when it is released.
For operating system updates, Samsung pledged 4 years of updates for the flagships starting with S21.
The difference between Android versions isn't big. I also mentioned in another comment that on Android, to cope with phone makers not pushing for system updates, Google can update many system components via Google Play. And apps remain compatible. Being 2 versions behind the latest Android is OK.
But I agree, it's great how Apple supports devices for 6 years with major updates. It would also be possible for Android phones if SoC & phones manufacturer actually cared.
I also have a Pixel 5. It received Magic Eraser, which used to be a key feature of newer Pixels, as part of a regular Photos app update.
I'm still getting major updates too, but, tbh, they aren't that critical. Chrome, GMail, Maps, YouTube, Calendar, Messaging, the app store itself (including UI) and the core web browser will keep getting updates well beyond the end of life.
There really isn't a direct comparison here, but I wouldn't switch in either direction due to updates.
My S21 Ultra is in its 3rd year and regularly updated. Should get 5 years of updates, and I intend to keep it until then.
Also, the writing is on the wall that the EU will force phone makers to years of updates, changeable batteries and availability of spare parts.
It's also noteworthy that Google has the ability to update many system services via Google Play. The poor track record of updates from phone makers basically demanded it. In other words, an Android device that hasn't received any system updates in a year or two is still fairly usable.
https://doc.samsungmobile.com/sm-a705fn/sek/doc.html
Looking at this list of devices getting updates, it only lists A70s with "biannual" updates, so A70 may no longer be updated:
Ideally Google would mandate a minimum number of years for both feature and security updates that matches theirs of three and five, respectively. Having said that, these really are wasting assets thanks to storage wearing out, but that's true of all phones, regardless of manufacturer.
A complete reset solves it tho.
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/security/blog/2020/10/08/sop...
In the article it explains how Google and the ransomers are doing a cat and mouse thing. If your phone is not keeping up, that could definitely be an issue.
I use LineageOS and it is true that I have to use Magisk to have banking app working. And I understand that this is not for everyone.
I just wanted to mention that there is a way to use older phone and have security updates longer than vendor provides it. And even longer than Apple.
I get the argument about binary blob updates. Security is never 100%. And it also shows another reason why binary blobs make things worse.
It may even receive system web browser updates, as those tend to go on for much longer than OS updates with Android.
With a little care, it is likely to be fine.
My iPad 5 got an iOS update last month-ish? And a security patch last week. All of my kids run iPhone 8.
Those two are the apps that survived the longest (Try getting any matrix client to work on it). Others broke sooner, most of them because the app developer has to enable TLS1.2 to be able to use it for HTTP APIs and many web servers disabled responding to older versions a while ago. Firefox (the one which allowed all extensions) still works. Great! But I can't message anyone anymore. On a phone.
TBH I put most of the blame here on app developers (supporting older stuff is not that hard) and some of it on the device manufacturers.
Not every iPhone is over $800.
$500 in 2019 is $597 now.
450 Euro in 2019 is 533 Euro now.
That's enough to buy an iPhone 13 and skip the SE model entirely.
- Most people change phones every 2 to 3 years.
- iPhone SE/mini accounts for less than 25% of the units sold.
If you manage to make do with the cheaper version of iPhones, ok. But your case (and mine) are outliers, and even in that case Apple's products are not better from an ethical/environmental/fair trade point of view.
I don't know where I am losing you...
> How can one justify paying 3x the cost if not just to continue keeping myself tied into Apple?
It's not rocket science. The experience you get using an iPhone vs a cheap Android for 5 years is not even close to comparable, and while you do pay a ridiculous premium for an iPhone, there are obvious reasons why someone would want to.
And this is coming from a long time Pixel user.
I hate to see that I am starting to sound like an activist, but I also hate to see how even the supposedly smarter-than-average people in tech lose all sense of perspective when they see shiny overpriced trinkets.
Why should we care if "the experience is not even close to comparable", if it is brought by a trillion dollar corporation who denies people even the most basic rights and fights as dirty as it can to keep its unfair advantages?
(And please notice that the above paragraph also applies to Google and Samsung, so please don't make it sound that I am arguing for team Android here)
It cost me about €600, and I also enjoy knowing that I've generated that much less e-waste compared to my prior Android life, where I had to discard phones every 2 or 3 years.
Second, I'd love to be proven wrong, but I can bet good money that if we look at a distribution of activated iphones per model, we will see that most users probably stay a lot less than 6-7 years.
Third, it's not about iPhone vs Android. It's the fact that we are discussing things like "getting security updates" when in fact we should be asking ourselves "why aren't we free to install whatever system we want on our own device?" I don't really care so much about the fact your phone cost 600 or 6000€, what bugs me to no end is that we are effectively paying trillion-dollar corporations to let them remove our freedoms.
and you don't have to pay 3x the cost if you don't want, buy last year's model refurbished.
I have the Pixel 5a, it was released in August 2021 and Google only guarantees support for that model up to August 2024, that is for both full OS updates and just security patches. As of the Pixel 6 series and after, you get 3 years of full OS updates, and 5 years of security patches (that's 2 extra years after full OS updates stop).
To compare, the iPhone 13 series was released in September 2021 and will continue to get support up to 7 years after its release (Sept 2028).
So far my Pixel 5a has been the best (reliability-wise) phone I've ever hard and it sucks to know that after August 2024, I'll be vulnerable to future security vulnerabilities.
Samsung offer only slightly better support by increasing the full OS support to 4 years instead of Google's 3 for the Pixel. Same 5 year for security patch. That's not enough for me to go back to Samsung and deal with their OS bloated with apps I can't uninstall (it's been a while, maybe it's better?)
sources:
https://support.google.com/nexus/answer/4457705?hl=en
https://www.androidpolice.com/samsung-four-year-update-list-...
If it feels too slow, try disabling "Secure app spawning". It's a security improvement over Google's Android by GrapheneOS but increases app startup time. Especially on slower devices like the 4a.
In any case, I welcome USB-C to the iPhone world.
I have USB-C for virtually everything and have no interest in dealing with keeping a second set of cables for one device. It's an extra expense, headache, and environmental waste I don't want. The change to USB-C makes an iPhone a viable option for me. I look forward to a refreshed SE line with USB-C as well.
I'm not thrilled about all the cables and dongles/adapters eventually going to landfills, but believe the move will be better in the long-run. I wish Apple made the move earlier.
The point I was trying to make was that an android phone having USB-C isn't the most important factor for the person who posted. This is evidenced by the fact that they purchased the iPhone anyway even though USB-C options existed.
Should Apple have stuck with Lightning for an entire decade? No. But any switch away from Lightning was going to cause pain for customers already invested in the ecosystem, and there was a time when that ecosystem actually made the most sense.
Have you ever had to reflash yours or anything like that?
Still work like a charm
A Volkswagen is a better buy than a Porsche for most - pretty much a comparable market positioning