Pixel 8 to have seven years of Android updates
theverge.com
theverge.com
My frustrating experience with lots of older tech like cameras and laptops is that the battery formats are constantly changing, and none are being manufactured in the required format 5+ years later, when I'd really want a fresh battery.
So even though it is designed for easy field replacement, it is effectively obsolete because the only product available is some dodgy counterfeit part. You never know if it even meets the specs, avoids being a fire hazard, and isn't an outright fraud like relabeled old batteries...
For contrast, it took me 10 minutes to change the battery in my car.
Also, it really doesn't take three hours to swap a phone battery, even in our sad state of planned-obsolescence affairs. That's pretty extreme. As I wrote elsewhere in the thread, I did an iPhone and an Android last year and each took less than a half hour. The iPhone was fiddlier, but it was also the first I'd done. The Motorola was surprisingly forgiving. But I agree, gluing mass-market devices together is bonkers and only benefits the manufacturers.
The replacement guide suggests about an hour to complete the task. https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/Google+Pixel+6+Battery+Replacem...
For contrast, some people need YouTube videos with step-by-step instructions to even open the hood of their car. They will take far longer to replace a car battery than it took you. Likely they'll also need to purchase a screwdriver.
Apple fixed that glitch: https://www.ifixit.com/Answers/View/802054/Unable+to+verify+....
You are correct that it's still technically possible to replace a battery yourself, if you don't mind the Shareware-style nagging.
Interesting product, thanks for mentioning it, you can limit how much you charge your phone battery the same way as a Tesla.
Phones these days take good care of their own batteries, 100% doesn't actually mean 100%, same with 0% since both are extremely bad for Li-ion batteries.
Just use it like normal and budget in a ~$100 battery swap every 3 years or so.
Also by looking at metrics of my wife phone you are basically even after about 1.5y - 2y (gets to 80%), so you loose battery life first but after that time you are net positive.
If you plan sticking to your phone for longer time, then it's good investment.
I'd love a return to the old snap-fit plastic cases. Besides the ease of battery replacement, those phones seemed much more durable. Maybe because there was something that gave way on impact? I remember watching in horror as the plastic cover of an old LG shot under the display shelving at Home Depot at approximately the same speed the phone hit the concrete floor. I never used a case with one of those phones, nor did I ever crack a screen. It was tricky digging that cover out from under the shelving, however.
You can't have the thinnest/sleekest possible phone and an easily removable battery. Have to choose.
Frustrating thing is, mainstream phone manufacturers don't give you a choice. There's no option to buy e.g. an a slightly more ruggedized iPhone that is 15% bulkier but gives you easy battery access. That's a thing I'd buy, even if it cost a bit more.
The quest for "sleekness at all costs" made more sense 15-20 years ago, when full-spec smartphones and laptops were clunkier.
Hopefully the tide is turning. Apple is offering beefier and thicker laptops (M1/M2 Macbook Pros) and likewise now gives buyers an option for a beefier "Explorer Edition" watch. No battery access sadly. But hopefully the pendulum might swing the other way a little now.
https://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/phones/galaxy-xcover/galax...
Edit: This is getting downvoted, but it's a regularly-updated phone line from a mainstream manufacturer with decent specs. You can absolutely vote with your wallet here as OP laid out.
Is this true? Plastic covers seemed thinner than the glass/metal shells that have replaced them. Also, from my limited experience, the batteries in the glued-together phones have adhesive strips that secure them inside the case, which again add a little extra thickness.
I could be wrong about those things, but I stand by my assertion that the plastic snap-fit phones were more durable. Durable enough that they didn't need cases for protection, which above all else rob a phone of its thinness/sleekness.
The first time I dropped a glued-together phone, I cracked the screen. I thought it must have been a fluke, since I'd dropped plastic phones tons and they'd always been fine. I was so sure it was a weird one-off I refused to get a case after having the screen replaced. My girlfriend called me an idiot. Two months later, I dropped the phone again. Now I have a case.
Why not buy a $100 rugged waterproof case and an external battery?
A 25% bulkier "rugged" iPhone 15 Pro would still fit nicely in most people's pockets. Unlike an encased iPhone plus external battery pack.
Like a lot of men, I carry a phone and wallet in one pocket and my keys in another. I don't typically carry a bag. Not gonna carry a battery pack too.
Also, an external battery pack achieves one thing (extended battery life) but not the other -- still wouldn't be able to easily replace the internal battery once it has aged out.
I'm not sure dust was ever really a problem for most people. Although, for those in sandy/dusty environments (deserts, some industrial situations, etc) I bet it was a problem.
More to the point, though: I don't think it has to be an either/or choice. Casio makes a crapload of 200M water-resistant watches that sell for $50 or less. This includes both plastic (G-Shock, mostly) and full-metal models (MDV-106/107). The secret is (gasp)... a frigging thin rubber gasket. I frankly don't see any reason why we can't have this level of water resistance in a phone.
We would have to sacrifice thinness and lightness, but not by much. I think a lot of people would happily make that trade.
On a larger object, this level of precision is harder to maintain. Due to spacing between fasteners or other flexing/distortion of the body, the gasket could be overly compressed in some places and loose in others...
Similar thing with dust. Even though a lot of my phones in my teenage years lasted under a year, they always died with dust in their screens. Camping and riding bikes around dirt trails and what not can push a lot of gunk in those things.
I'm happy phones are a lot better sealed. It's a bit of a pain making it harder to swap the battery, but paying a shop $50 parts included to swap it and keep it sealed well is worth it to me. A replacement battery back then would have been like >$30 anyways, going by inflation that's not too much increase in cost.
Phones currently can be dropped in the toilet with zero damage. It is a real benefit to have waterproofing. I would prefer waterproofing over easily replacing battery that happens rarely.
Unless I forgot one, I think I'm on my 10th mobile phone in total since the late 1990s, so averaging just under 3 years per phone. And I think the interval was shorter in the feature phone days and longer in the last 12 years or so where I'm now on my 4th smartphone.
Maybe it's because I learned to be careful with my phones before smartphones existed, back when dropping it might mean the back cover, battery, and main body flying in different directions. As a result, I'm also the kind of person who might drop his phone/wallet/passport into ziplock bags if I was heading outside with a chance of significant rain...
Same here, but I don't pretend that my experience is typical.
Even if it is, and, say, only 20% of people end up dropping a phone in a toilet or cracking the screen, it seems worth it to build in water and crack resistance.
Second, it's possible to make the battery connections water resistant, so yes, you can have a water resistant phone AND have a replaceable battery in it's own compartment.
Metal cases give way, too— permanently. When they give way, they dent, shrinking the space available for the glass screen and, inevitably, cracking it.
Glass cases/backs obviously easily crack themselves.
Making phone housings out of something other than plastic is an obviously stupid kind of fetishism for certain materials as hallmarks of a vague 'quality' regardless of context.
Idk about the screens. Do we need glass for touchscreens as we know them to work really well? Can they be brighter or something? Or are they largely unnecessary, too?
I wish OEMs would do this as well. Polycarb is strong. Safety glasses are made out of it for a reason. Sure, it scratches, but so does glass.
When you dropped one, you had to dig at least 4 parts from around the room. Front & back covers, the battery and the rest of the phone all flew in different directions =)
Fairphone is worth a look for this: https://shop.fairphone.com/fairphone-5
For my phone a battery replacement from the manufacturer is right at 10% the price of what's probably the equivalent new phone. (Not that I'm having battery issues yet for my ~2yr old phone.)
To me that's well within the range of being worth it vs. a new phone.
I don't have a Pixel, though, so maybe it's different.
The sweet spot would be putting a new battery into a 3 year old phone to get another 3 years out of it.
Not that 1000$ are a bad deal for an iPhone that will easily last you 4+ years.
versus
$69 to keep a premium-at-the-time iPhone 6S alive.
So 7 years of updates would be fine, maybe with one battery swap in the middle, as long as Google starts paying a bit of attention to their phones' quality assurance and control.
I'd personally like to see swappable storage and mandatory external SD card support.
We could probably get to 15 years with current phone tech, unless they invent something really revolutionary that makes everyone want to upgrade.
Quick reminder what we had 15 years ago: a single camera on the back, 128 MB ram and samsung processors in the iphone.
I know people who are still perfectly happy with 7+-year-old iPhones. The limiting factor for many people is not processor speed or RAM or storage space, but the lack of OS updates (especially security updates).
(Certainly those other things are limiting factors for some people, but I don't think it's anywhere near as common as it is for the HN crowd. And the storage space issue can be solved with a microSD card slot, which, sadly, few phones include these days.)
It's usually $69 from an Apple authorized repair shop which uses the same parts.
Another nice thing about the replaceable battery is being able to keep a spare around for quick recharge.
> A portable battery shall be considered readily removable by the end-user where it can be removed from a product with the use of commercially available tools, without requiring the use of specialised tools, unless provided free of charge with the product, proprietary tools, thermal energy, or solvents to disassemble the product.[0]
So, for example, Apple's chunky multi step DIY battery swap kit is perfectly allowable if it's provided for free.
"Commercially available tools" also includes stuff like Torx screws. So, again, the current system by most manufacturers is doable with very minor modifications. Open a few Torx screws, slowly pull off the command strip sticker under the battery, replace new battery, done.
The HN/Reddit crowd's minds went right back to the 90s and 00s where you could (and had to) carry 3 separate batteries and could swap them on the go, which isn't the goal of this regulation at all.
[0] https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/PE-2-2023-INIT... - article 11
"A portable battery should be considered to be removable by the end-user when it can be removed with the use of commercially available tools and without requiring the use of specialised tools, unless they are provided free of charge, or proprietary tools, thermal energy or solvents to disassemble it. Commercially available tools are considered to be tools available on the market to all end-users without the need for them to provide evidence of any proprietary rights and that can be used with no restriction, except health and safety-related restrictions."
I think a deposit for specialised tools is fair to ensure a return of the tools, other than that, there is nothing controversial here.
People who want to do some work themselves can buy replacement kits from reputable part suppliers for $29-59.
Your problem only occurs if somebody wants to do the work themselves _and_ they think they can source the parts without assistance from a reputable part supplier.
But say they do. You now need to find a 289-389$ phone (which will cost you 89$ out of pocket) that gives you the same experience.
nobody's going to say that, for example, this isn't at least as good as a pixel 3: https://www.amazon.ca/OnePlus-Android-Display-Unlocked-Charg...
In terms of Camera, Haptics, Construction material it probably isn't
From a users perspective the question would seem to be whether they want to spend $89 for a battery or $890 (maybe minus that re-sale value of 200-300, so still around $600) on a new phone.
No, they can pay less than $120 on a new phone in the budget tier which will be at least comparable in capabilities to a 5 year old phone in any tier and also have about 2 years of life.
That works out to around fifty bucks per supported year, and you aren't creating a mountain of e-waste by throwing away a perfectly good phone every other year.
I think its great that phones are being supported for 7 years but in a way it is a marketing chip based on consumer's using unrealistic linear depreciation.
Some consumers can pass down, repurpose, or only need very basic things, but most consumers need much of the relative performance they first bought, break screens, can't handle embedded battery replacement logistics, etc, so most probably have replaced something like the iPhone SE before 4 years is up and are paying more than they would have expected.
The single core performance of the current Samsung A14 is about a third of the currently sold iPhone SE.
If you're going to keep the same device many years, don't buy something with slow performance right out of the gate.
A refurbished iPhone SE 2023 that has a new battery and working screen is probabilistically worth more than the iPhone 2023 you buy today, and will be less than $200 unless there's a serious shortage because they have a high failure rate?
In my thinking the cost of similar products in an industry like tech is the best available estimate of how much environmental damage is involved (I.e. upgrading tooling is itself likely to produce waste) so planning to buy a $400 phone once every 7 years and actually buying one every 2 is much worse than trying to get 3-4 years out of what people have tried to make with popular runs of somewhat outdated commodity parts.
Granted it might be faster (though looking at Geekbench scores between budget Android phones [0] and the 5-year-old iPhone XS [1] I’m not overly convinced of that either), but the price of manufacturing “nice” doesn’t drop nearly as fast as silicon.
Budget phones often compromise on build and camera and screen quality (even though the latter two often look great on spec sheets) and I think the average person would notice that far more than raw performance.
https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/2900039
Aside from all the other problems a genuine pixel 3 (or iPhone XS) battery is bellow 3000 mah, so like replacing your redmi battery with a defective one.
My current phone is an S21 that's facing a plethora of failures (screen damage, flaky USB-C connector, weak battery, back cover delaminating) that are all individually fixable, but altogether I also find it hard to resist the pull of getting a new phone at that stage when I add up the numbers.
But I feel increasingly really bad about not trying harder to go repair-first. Also because there's otherwise virtually no tech/feature reason to "upgrade" from something as recent as an S21 these days.
But, let's go with this. After ~5 years, phones will sell for $990 (up from 5 years ago @ $890). 990 - 250 (splitting the difference) is what ... 740? That's a LOT more than $89 (or even 99 in 5 years).
If my phone is still up to date and performant enough for my tasks, I would be stupid not to pay 99 vs 740.
If we assume the user wants to buy a new phone in the same tier as the one they have now.
beat that big corpo licker.
I hate this. Why do I have to relogin to every app on a new phone? Why are some apps missing after every migration? Why do some apps just randomly lose all config and settings and force you to set them up again?
I want Google/Apple to force app devs to make backup and restore seamless. Like, if I am halfway through typing this comment on HN and then lightning fries my phone, when I restore to a new phone I want the exact same chrome tabs open with the same half-written comment. I don't want to have to battle to re-pair my printer or watch. I don't want stupid cookie warnings on every website again. I don't want to have to retrain every single fingerprint. I don't want to yet again opt out of data collection. I don't want to re-accept the same T&C's for photo backup I already agreed to last year, and the year before, and 10 years before that.
Please... just make migration work the way it should have always worked.
While engineers refuse to do that, the process is still too cumbersome.
Google already does this optionally for Chrome synced data.
Why indeed.
A major part of the problem is instead of charting a coherent strategy for backups from the beginning, Google constantly changes their minds as to how it should work and what behavior is expected from users and app developers.
Once upon a time a simple pair of adb backup and restore commands did the trick.
Then they introduced the android:allowBackup="false" app manifest flag[1], which silently breaks adb backup. (Yes, this got me once, resulting in lost data). That effectively wrenched sovereignty over your data out of your hands and shifted its control into the hands of app publishers, many of whom couldn't be bothered to change defaults. There are also limits (e.g. even when enabled, I gather Google's cloud only allows 25MB of data per app). I think more recently it's been enhanced with a flag that allows backups only if encrypted.
All this degraded the user experience upgrading phones, so they carved out a Google-only exception in the form of a Device-to-Device (D2D) transfer process which has the privilege of totally ignoring the flag (so it can capture apps that advertise themselves as do-not-backup). But I've never seen a means of triggering that process without first being forced to turn on backups to Google servers[2], and allowing Google Play services to collect data like your email address.
It's a horrible state of affairs that makes it impossible for third-party solutions like SeedVault to work reliably (to the point where users have suggested bastardizing/impersonating D2D to bypass the restrictions[3][4]).
I don't understand why anti-trust efforts aren't examining lock-in like this, which forces you to use Google's cloud instead of your own, and intentionally creates an unequal playing field for competitors whose clouds you might trust more. It causes real harm to users like me.
The only reliable method is rooting your phone, which recovers your sovereignty and allows apps like Titanium to bypass all this nonsense. I suspect that's a major reason some people still choose to root, despite all the security warnings against it. Of course depending on what exactly you're backing up you can still run into issues if restoring to a different model phone or version of the OS (although in the past I've had some success surgically extracting the desired records via a sqlite explorer).
I wish someone would compile a flavour of Android with a Developer Option that undoes or ignores the effects of android:allowBackup. Depending on your viewpoint that would "break the Android security model", or fix it.
Some users have even resorted to decompiling their app's stock APK, patching android:allowBackup to true, self-signing and recompiling [5], which I presume would have to be done after every app update (maybe there's a niche market opportunity for a service that automates this).
If I created a mobile device platform I'd make darn sure critical functions like backup, restore, migration, maintaining "hot standby" devices, etc. just work(tm), seamlessly and reliably, out of the box. The architecture would make it easy and simple (instead of difficult and convoluted) for developers to ensure user data is captured (incidentally the normalized Palm pdb system didn't do a bad job of that), provide tools and examples of how to maintain forward compatibility, and generally funnel developers into good habits. It's not an easy problem to solve but I'm convinced it can be done with 100X more elegance. And users would have the power to backup to wherever they choose, with an easy way to custody their own encryption keys (with peer-to-peer recovery models e.g. X of Y friends or commercial-designates).
[1] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/12648373/what-is-android...
[2] https://support.google.com/android/answer/6193424?hl=en
[3] https://github.com/seedvault-app/seedvault/issues/165
[4] https://github.com/seedvault-app/seedvault/pull/562
[5] https://stackpointer.io/mobile/android-enable-adb-backup-for...
So battery if handled properly will last a very long time. So while battery issues can't be dismissed, at least it often can be replaced or otherwise worked around. The bigger issue is storage errors and being permanently locked out.
The Google Pixel 3 phone he bought died after 2 years due to the operating system not properly handling errors in the non-volatile storage, which is a very common error in Pixel 3/3XL/4 and maybe future ones as well. Google doesn't offer the firehose so owners are out of luck not able to reformat or recover the phones at all and completely locked out by the qualcomm bootloader with phones stuck in EDL mode.
Google Pixel 3 EDL to see how prevalent the problem is, and google just doesn't care to help people fix the issue.
I absolutely despise that Apple made non-replaceable batteries the norm, and most of us have begun to accept this as "the way things have always been". Every cell phone I had before the iPhone came out had an easily replaceable battery before we all became a slave to Ives' "Preciousssss" demands for minimalism.
Edit: Folks seem to be misunderstanding why I brought up Apple. I in no way think they are now worse than any other phone manufacturer when it comes to irreplaceable batteries. But AFAIK the iPhone was the first phone to have a glued-in battery, and that has since become the norm. They have essentially helped lead the way in convincing consumers that replacing the battery shouldn't be an easy, user-accessible operation.
It's just the easiest way to construct a "modern" phone. Stick the battery in with a 3M Command Strip style sticker and it won't move, construct phone around it.
Having to add toolless latches while keeping some kind of IP rating AND not looking like a rugged phone is a whole different thing.
I'm in no way saying Google or Samsung is better in any way here, and in many ways Apple has improved their repairability scores over the past few years. The reason I highlighted Apple was because they really led the way in gluing down batteries everywhere, but the problem is definitely industry-wide now.
How quickly we forget history. I'm not going to say they were the absolute first to do this as I'm not doing a full survey of 2007 phones, but before that (a) there was not a single phone I or my friends had that didn't have a simply replaceable battery and (b) there was a ton of conversation and press when the iPhone was first released about how unique the decision was to have a glued-in battery here.
For contrast, here are instructions for replacing the battery on the famous Nokia 3310 https://devices.vodafone.com.au/nokia/3310-2017-proprietary-....
Let's be real here: if having difficult-to-replace batteries was a money loser for Apple and other manufacturers, they would fix the situation in a heartbeat - it's not like this is a hard problem. The only reason they do this is because of desired planned obsolescence - tons of people will think "Oh, getting the battery changed is such a hassle, might as well get a new phone."
Again, essentially every consumer electronic device pre-2007 (except maybe some Mac laptops?) had easily-replaceable batteries. Convincing people that using glued-in batteries was a necessary design change, instead of a corporate decision to make more money, was a real coup for corporate marketing.
Compared to a modern iPhone you can throw in a pool and dig out safely a few minutes later.
Batteries post 2007 have gotten REALLY good, the capacity/weight ratio has gone up so much that swapping batteries mid-day isn't a thing people do. Drones weren't a big thing in those times because you couldn't get enough power to lift one up. Now a 249 gram DJI drone can fly ~45 minutes on a single battery that's about the size of 2-3 matchboxes.
I still remember the laptop I had around that time that had two batteries so that I could swap one and still keep it running with the other.
On the other hand my current M2 MacBook lasts for two full workdays without charging easily, even more if I just sit in meetings and don't do anything CPU/GPU intensive.
Also who in the world needs all this replacement batteries anyway? I'm still rocking a 13 Pro purchased when new, I have no plans to upgrade and my battery is bloody fine. I still end every day with a good 40% charge at minimum and I'm an app developer, so I'm on my phone for a good solid portion of every day. And prior to this one I had an X which not only didn't have any major battery issues but my wife still used it for another year after I bought my 13, and then, near the tail end of her ownership, STARTED having some battery problems. At the end of year 4 of service as a daily driver.
Really?? I get that you personally may not see a need for this, but it takes special kind of blinders to pretend that your experience is universal. Tons of people want replaceable batteries. You're welcome to talk to the iFixit folks if you need more evidence.
I'm not opposed on principle to people having the option of repairability vs the sleek lines and watertightedness glue assemblies offer, that's completely fine. I just feel the need to push back on this narrative that's gotten so much traction here. There are a LOT of advantages to how newer phones are built that have nothing to do with forcing you over a barrel for maintenance costs, though I'm sure the suits are just fine with it if they do.
>who in the world needs all this replacement batteries anyway
>I'm still rocking a 13 Pro purchased when new
Congratulations, your phone with a whopping 2-years of age still has a good battery. (Though I'm not sure losing 60% a day is really great imo...)
Try living in a world where a $300 phone is a big expense, and now it barely lasts a day when it used to last a week.
1: Some people have phones that are just fine, but have a dying battery. Replacing an otherwise perfectly functional phone just because the battery is going is massive e-waste.
2: Not everyone can afford constantly replacing their ever-more-expensive phones just because the battery died. Even if they can, it's a really wasteful use of money.
Consumers should have the choice. They can get a product with some compromises, but a replaceable battery - or a potentially more durable, more waterproof phone without one.
Of course they don't bother because the demand is a vocal minority. Most people don't care. But the e-waste effects everyone so something does need to be done.
Those same users don’t have to buy a $300 phone - which by the way is more than the average selling price of an Android phone - there are plenty of unsubsidized Android phones for less than $100.
Well again, I spend a lot of my day with my phone on and being used to do my job. And I also use it plenty for bathroom breaks, screwing around between tasks, the usual stuff. In my mind, running like that for 16 hours per day and still having 2/5th's in the tank is pretty good.
> Try living in a world where a $300 phone is a big expense, and now it barely lasts a day when it used to last a week.
I have never owned any smartphone that lasted even close to a week. When I was younger, my droid would occasionally go a couple of days between charges, if I was particularly busy and therefore not using it. I don't think I've owned a phone I haven't charged overnight since... gotta be like 2011?
> 1: Some people have phones that are just fine, but have a dying battery. Replacing an otherwise perfectly functional phone just because the battery is going is massive e-waste.
But again that's what my question is getting at and what I'm trying to understand: how are people frying out their batteries like they are?
Your assumption that phones would only be used for 2 years is pretty weird on an article about using phones for 8 years.
Snark aside and how most phones/etc are put together these days, I see issues in the general population of replacing the battery if it requires opening the case.
Every phone (before the advent of eSims) used to come with a simple sim-opening tool that made it trivial to open the sim tray. I find it baffling to think that phone manufacturers would find it so difficult to add some teeny screws or other fasteners that could be easily opened with a 2 cent tool that would come with the phone.
And I kind of care about waterproof phones. Before you bring up the old Samsungs, if you didn’t put the battery on just right (and Samsung warned you about it), you would lose water resistance.
I would imagine nonreplacable batteries would happen without them, but it does seem like every other brand copies whatever crap Apple decides to put out, especially the aesthetics. There are so many very obvious apple clone products.
It really seems to infuriate geeks that normal people don’t have their same priorities.
Out of the literally dozens of Android manufacturers, if that was something people wanted, wouldn’t someone make it?
I’m not sure how important it is. My first phones with replaceable batteries sucked, the plastic cover would always pop out and was generally a point of failure. And it never did me any good, as most phones died before the battery became an issue.
Today I’ve had an iPhone for 3 years and the battery is still going strong. If I need to replace it… I’ll just find someone who can replace it, easy enough. Sure it would be more convenient to be able to do it myself, but if it happens once every 4-5 years I honestly don’t care, and will take the daily convenience of no plastic cover instead.
I am writing this on a six-year-old Android phone. Still same battery. It lasts me through the day of light usage, including about three hours of podcasts/youtube playback during commute.
software doesn't necessarily have a finite lifespan, so it shouldn't be the thing that causes the end of your hardware. providing seven years of updates is long enough that it probably means the software EOL won't have to be the reason to stop using your phone. that's how it should be.
My mother has zero desire to upgrade. I told her in another year her phone may no longer be supported by the latest iOS, in which case she was getting a forced upgrade (by me). Because everyone's phone has becomes the center of their lives and security of that device is of the utmost importance.
I bought a pixel just recently because Slack told me my phone is too old for them to support, and I need it for work. The camera is messed up on this phone, but otherwise, I would happily keep it another few years.
And yes, I've told them they need to replace it -- for security, if no other reason. But, they are a teacher (a very good and dedicated one, I'll add), and money's tight.
For iPhones, authorized battery repairs around usually around $70 which is about 6-10% of the price of a new iPhone.
Is $70 really so much to pay for a battery that should easily last you 3 years or so?
Nobody should buy this marketing line unless they have a contract guaranteeing some penalty for Google for failing to uphold this.
Yes, we absolutely need to be in a place where DIY battery replacements are reliable and cheap. But using a local repair shop seems to be a perfectly fine alternative for now.
On the other hand, the iPod touch battery that I got off eBay only lasted about 6 months before refused to charge.
I definitely replaced batteries on my family's iPhones when they ran the discounted battery replacement special. My phone is at 85% health and still manages to get through the day but paying $90 instead of buying another phone is a good deal for me for say, 2-3 years of additional use.
Do people have any faith in the these sorts of notices, when nothing ever produced by the company has yet been supported that long?
Google has supported all of its Nexus/Pixel devices for as long as they have claimed to in the past.
The difference now is that the claimed period is longer than before.
The claims form part of the advertising and sales material for the product - this is legally binding in many countries.
When a chip is supplied by a vendor and needs to be supported in the kernel, the whole thing can be EoLed by one stubborn vendor. That's one of the promises of Fuchsia - decoupling hardware support from the rest of the system, so you can keep everything else up-to-date even if Qualcomm tells you to kick rocks.
Absolutely. If they decided to make this announcement, I have faith that they'll stick with it. Whether Pixel 9, 10, 11 etc. will have similar pledges, we'll have to wait and see.
But that phone would've been paid for by your payments for months 25-48 so that seems fair.
It is suggestive of Google's usual approach to supporting their projects though. I'll believe seven years of updates when I see it.
They're still honoring it - they're just not continuing the program after all current subscriptions expire. People who paid for it are still getting what they paid for through the end of their subscription, although because the program is not continuing, your subscription will end at the end of two years. In other words, the Pixel Pass was more or less equivalent to Google's existing 0% APR financing (which is still offered, including on the Pixel 8!). The only difference is that the Pixel Pass autorenewed at the end of 24 months, whereas otherwise you have to manually reorder the next phone with the financing offer[0].
That's different from not delivering the product/service that customers have paid for.
The promise of 7 years of updates is legally binding. If Google promises 7 years of updates, and then doesn't deliver those, that will be a violation of both state and federal law (California is now requiring 7 years of updates, and it is additionally a violation of federal law to advertise a product with a service, sell that product, and then fail to deliver that service).
[0] The 0% APR financing offer is actually now slightly better than the Pixel Pass, because on the Pixel 8 it's now amortized over 3 years instead of two (which is new - previously it was amortized over 2 years).
Why just announce it for new devices, why not announce existing devices will also get updates
Says someone with a perfectly good Pixel 4a that isn’t guaranteed updated after it’s three years old (which happened in Aug ‘23)
I bought a Pixel 5 less than 2.5 years ago, I didn't even consider the possibility that it could be EOL so early so I never sought out that page. I've never had another phone or laptop last such a short time.
With this said, updates on Android are different from iOS updates. Things like the browser, camera, gallery, etc, are updated via the app store, so your Pixel 5 still runs the latest Chrome and will continue to do so for years. They can also update system components (media engine, bluetooth, etc) via Play Store updates. Many new features (covid app support, earthquake alerts, etc) are backported via the Play services. On iOS all this requires a system update, on Android it doesn't.
This new Pixel 8 has 7 years of support, which is in line with the 6 or 7 years iPhones get. At least from now on Pixels should be as good as iPhones.
Google itself used to offer 3 years of support. The last 2 generations of Pixels have 5 years. This new phone is 7 years, which is in line with Apple's 6-7 years.
Parts of the system are also kept up-to-date via the app store. Apple released a system update not long ago for older iPhones just to fix a WebKit exploit... Google would release that as an app update, you wouldn't even have to restart the phone. Any Android running a 7 year old OS (Android 7) is still running the latest version of Chrome. On newer Android versions, parts of the system - from the media engine to the bluetooth stack - can also be updated via the store.
Are Android updates messier than iOS? Yes they are. But a lot of what's considered to be "system updates" on iOS are just app/module updates on Android. They happen in the background are keep on going for years after you get a full system update. They don't get any headlines though.
Edit: Remember, we are only a few iterations in on the Tensor.
However, Google has repeatedly demonstrated that they'll sell you something only to kill it off very quickly. They're great at innovating cool new ideas and absolutely terrible at getting anyone to maintain those ideas. And you can see that based on their hiring. They want the best of the best, people who want to do nothing but blaze new trails. Maintenance? Techdebt? No... not for these esteemed engineers. Which leaves... basically no one at Google to mop up after.
With the Chromebook obsolescence fallout and the decision to extend software and security support for those recently, one would assume that the Pixel may be subject to similar thinking within Google. But the sales volumes of Pixel phones are a lot lower than Chromebooks. Google doesn’t seem to generally handle hardware quite well.
You can see the full OTA history for every device going all the way back to the Nexus S:
https://developers.google.com/android/images
Note that there's no weird gap around the transition from Nexus to Pixel, both were supported concurrently during the overlap.
I would like to see Apple respond by committing to their timeframe but they won't.
edit: iPhone 5s from 2013 received an update this year
They only do it when there's clear evidence of in-the-wild exploitation or it's a big compatibility bug that would prevent you from migrating to a newer device.
Google's announcement was for full OS support for 7 years, not just security fixes. Comparing it to Apple's ~6 years of OS support is fair.
Quoting from Apple’s page [2]
> “Note: Because of dependency on architecture and system changes to any current version of Apple operating systems (for example, macOS 13, iOS 16 and so on), not all known security issues are addressed in previous versions (for example, macOS 12, iOS 15 and so on).”
[1]: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/10/apple-clarifies-secu...
[2]: https://support.apple.com/en-us/guide/deployment/depc4c80847...
Some of the models in the range have had relatively longer or shorter periods of support.
An iPhone 5 got less than a 5S. An iPhone 6 got less than a 6S.
On the other hand Google put out a press release!
Come on, this seems unnecessarily harsh given Apple has been the industry leader in how long they provide software and security updates for their phones.
Apple has had a great record of support, and I’m a huge fan of their products. A commitment to continue their great support would be a nice step.
As a consumer, I'd prefer that Apple was honest about its intent up front.
I'd rather have a definite 7 years than a possible 8.
That's maybe the worst example but it illustrates the difference between "typical" and a guarantee.
Apple isn't perfect, but they have a good track record of providing updates/security patches and in general supporting the hardware they put into the world. On the other hand Android updates have been a mess forever, and Google have a reputation of pulling the rug from under customers that adopt their products.
I have more faith in Apple delivering six years of updates for my iPhone without a formal commitment, than I do in Google delivering seven years even with this statement. I wonder how many other people feel the same.
Even Samsung's huge announcement was like 1-2 OS updates and 7 years of security patches or something similar.
I'll be giddy with joy if Google will actually honor the 7 year full OS update promise.
Any way you look at it, this is great news, and it sets a wonderful precedent for other manufacturers of all sorts of electronic devices.
Lots of people are happy to be able to keep using a phone even if the battery is a bit degraded, and the fact that Google plastered this all over their marketing material means they have some legal obligation to follow through on this promise (or compensate their customers if they don't).
I am in awe at all the "I gave to my 8 years old daughter my original iPhone 1 and she's still delighted by it every day, it's stille great" folks.
You could put out a free device with a battery that lasts forever, fast and it fits in every pocket and some crowd woud still make comparisons and have some brand win them.
I was thinking about upgrading this year but I am now thinking of waiting another year since there are no immediate problems.
[1]: https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2023/03/multiple-inte...
I have a Pixel 5 that does everything I want. Google will stop supporting it within the next year. It doesn't make sense to me that this device already needs to be recycled. Yes, I know about custom ROMs, but even those end support for perfectly OK phones (GrapheneOS for example no longer supports Pixel 3a).
> monthly security updates to every supported device
There are enough zero-day RCE exploits on both Android and iOS devices at this point that, if you're running phones that are that far out of date from security updates, you should basically just assume your device is fully compromised.
As stated above, many of the RCE exploits don't even involve any user interaction, so it's not like you can argue "well, I don't visit sketchy websites so I'm fine".
I mean, you're literally posting this complaint on a thread about a phone that is now legally bound to receive seven years of updates.
It feels very misplaced to complain about obsolescence on a thread in that context.
But yeah, this is a good news thread, thank you Google.
For a Pixel 6a, Pixel 7, or Pixel 7 Pro purchase they will give a $30 trade-in credit for the same Pixel 3 (64GB) phone.
Why not actually link to the page?
https://store.google.com/magazine/trade_in?hl=en-US#trade-in...
> Why not actually link to the page?
Habit of other sites where you post a link and your post doesn't happen.
Here in Italy we never have any decent deal in the Goole Store.
https://www.androidpolice.com/2021/08/31/pixel-3-and-3-xl-ph...
I'm honestly confused about the lack of updates (I really only care about security updates). I run Xubuntu on a 13 year old computer, and I get updates. Is this just a cash grab from Google, or is there more to it?
Google updates as much of the Android ecosystem as it can. First-party Play Store apps, system webview... if you look at the normally hidden system apps on your phone you'll see that the Android team has "unbundled" many parts of the formerly monolithic system to allow updates to as much of it as possible even if the kernel is marooned at an older version.
Unfortunately, some bugs are in the kernel or drivers, so there's nothing any Android OEM (including Google) can do if their chipset vendor won't do the (admittedly non-revenue-generating) engineering to update that firmware. And eventually the system itself requires newer kernel features, so there's a limit to how far back Google or other OEMs can reasonably backport a newer version of Android.
This is part of why Google's recent phones are based on Google-designed, non-Qualcomm chipsets. It was a truly Herculean effort to scrub the Pixel line of Qualcomm, and especially of Qualcomm's incentives to abandon still-good phone hardware in order to sell more chipsets.
Your PC's OS distribution is nearly totally open-source, and the economic incentives for the Linux ecosystem are completely different from Qualcomm's. That contributes to any given general-purpose computer's longevity if it runs Linux.
> Today we announced our commitment to providing seven years of software support for Pixel 8 and Pixel 8 Pro, including Android OS upgrades, security updates and regular Feature Drops.
So is it seven years of full feature OS updates, or the usual ~3 years plus only security updates after that?
Site says 7 years of OS versions.
I wonder if Fairphone has something to do with this, having announced 8 years updates for their latest model.
I don't care how long the support is. It's useless.
So if I get an update 6 years in that renders my phone unusable, I haven't gained anything.
I would prefer 7 years of sec updates in that case.
I think that’s one of the main reasons why Google decided to make this commitment.
Microsoft can figure out how to enforce hardware standards on new systems via partnership with vendors while maintaining an independent hardware ecosystem for users. Google doesn’t want to, but it shouldn’t be their choice anyway.
What I'd like is an exit route for my hardware aka LineageOS. But of course the core of Android is Google Play Services, not the OS so that's a painful situation if you want to retain some apps when you switch over.
I used a Pixel 6A for 3 months while I was travelling internationally and I liked most of it.
I'm not following; it's easy to install Google Play Services on lineage
The recent watchOS update from Apple is incredibly disappointing https://furbo.org/2023/09/28/the-timer-in-watchos-10/
I was thinking of getting a 7a for graphene, but I think I'll wait for the 8 to get graphene support and spring for that.
From what I can tell graphene really is a much more secure OS from an encryption and tracking perspective. Its multi-profile configuration and Google play sandboxing alone would be worth it.
OTOH, I have used it twice in two models of car, and in both instances it would stop working until I unplugged and replugged the phone. I just keep the phone visible in the cup holder now.
They cancel new services left right and centre, but a promise I would trust
The regulation mandates 5 years of updates after the end of commercialization. That usually makes it 7 years after launch date. And the Pixel 8 is water-resistant (IP68), so it doesn't need a user replaceable battery according to the regulation (but a repair shop shall be able to).
https://www.reddit.com/r/GooglePixel/comments/y039zn/i_compi...
Nest Secure - 4 years Chromebook Pixel - 3 years Nexus Phones - 7 years Google TV - 4 years OnHub Routers - 7 years
Pixel 8 Pro - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37766446 - Oct 2023 (142 comments)
... it's going to be one of those threads.
Stadia, Pixelbook, Pixel pass, Jamboard, etc.
On a serious note, it is possible to sue if google suddenly decided, after 3 years, that they don't want to provide updates for the remaninig 4 years?
With phone prices being what they are, it makes more and more sense to actually take legal action. Google would be foolish not to meet their promises.
It helps that they haven't come back on their promises before. The Pixels have always received the years of support ad promised at launch. In some cases that was a mere three years, but customers knew (or could easily have known) that was a possibility when they bought their phone.
Hell, I don't even trust that they'll still own/maintain _Android_ in 7 years.