I’m not arguing performance for performance sake. I’m arguing that a four year phone is still performant compared to many newer Android phones and it is getting both* security updates and os upgrades 24 months and 12 months longer than the tiny percentage of Android phones that get either. It also doesn’t have to wait for a third party OEM to decide to push updates.
I’m also criticizing Google for not knowing how to push updates to phones running its operating system without OEM intervention - something Microsoft figured out 30 years ago with PCs.
But you don’t need to speculate how fast iOS users update their phones.
There are plenty of sites showing how many iOS users have updated operating systems compared to Android users:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/ianmorris/2018/04/13/android-is...
So do have a cite showing that a larger percentage of Android users are running an up to date OS?
You keep coming back to this irrelevant point. Many Android phones are insecure, just as all iPhones are. Don't buy them.
> I’m also criticizing Google for not knowing how to push updates to phones running its operating system without OEM intervention - something Microsoft figured out 30 years ago with PCs.
Who cares? Don't buy them. Besides, I already pointed out in my previous post that Microsoft didn't solve this problem. Do you blame Linus for all the routers that don't get updated, or do you just not buy them?
> I’m arguing that a four year phone is still performant compared to many newer Android phones and it is getting both*
So is a five year old midrange Android phone, which is also as insecure as any iPhone. Don't buy them.
Seeing that the latest iPhones you can get that hasn’t received a recent patch is the iPhone 4 from 2010, where are “all of the insecure iPhones” - especially seeing that both Google and Apple routinely publish the percentage of devices running older OS’s, there is no conjecture needed on which one is running a greater percentage of OS’s with unpatched vulnerabilities - we have numbers straight from the source.
Who cares? Don't buy them. Besides, I already pointed out in my previous post that Microsoft didn't solve this problem.
Seeing that I have a Mac Mini from 2006 running Windows 7 that is still getting security updates and a Dell from 2009 running Windows 10, I think Microsoft solved the problem a lot better than Google. The other 2.7 billion Android users probably would care if they knew any better.
you blame Linus for all the routers that don't get updated, or do you just not buy them?
Linux is free open source software that anyone can use, no one pays Linus for using it, and Linus doesn’t have much of any criteria about how it’s used. None of that is true about Android. What makes Android Android is Google Play Services that is licensed by a commercial entity.
So is a five year old midrange Android phone, which is also as insecure as any iPhone. Don't buy them
There is no five year old iPhone that isn’t supported and receiving security patches. Right now, there isn’t any 8 year iPhone that hasn’t received a security patch recently.
We already discussed this. iOS has a huge attack surface that can only be patched via system updates, which is horribly bad design and terrible for security.
> The other 2.7 billion Android users probably would care if they knew any better.
If those billions knew better, they would get an Android One or Pixel instead of an instead of an iOS or other Android device. We already established that there is only one set of devices that is good for security, and the vast majority of people, including you it seems, do not have them. It's not my problem to fix their security. I don't buy them myself.
> I have a Mac Mini from 2006 running Windows 7 that is still getting security updates and a Dell
In exactly the same way, updates work fine for those of us on properly updated Android devices, and Windows updates don't work for people with hardware that has poorly supported drivers. You didn't address my point. Also, you still haven't addressed why this matters.
> Linux is free open source software that anyone can use, no one pays Linus for using it, and Linus doesn’t have much of any criteria about how it’s used.
So exactly the same as Android.
> There is no five year old iPhone that isn’t supported and receiving security patches.
And all of them have poorly updated userspace. There is no five year old Android phone that has poorly updated userspace. All of those are insecure except for the subset of Android devices that have properly updated base system.
And your theory isn’t supported by facts on the ground - we have statistics about the percentage of iOS devices running the latest version of iOS versus the number of Android devices.
Since iOS annoying asks you to upgrade when there is one available and you are given a choice to automatically update when you’re not using, do you have a reliable citation showing the number of iOS devices without the latest version compared to the number of Android devices? Or do you just have a hunch?
I already explained the choices. For us, the obvious choice is a properly updating Android device. Any user who chose an iPhone or non-updating Android phone made a poor security choice. Any user who has a longer than three year upgrade cycle has no good options unless they use a community-maintained Android build.
> Android One phones still have to wait on the manufacturer to update their phones. Yes, but they pinky promise they will.
They are guaranteed monthly security updates. If you have an example of one that hasn't had monthly security updates, that would be a breach of contract with at least the user and possibly with Google who certified the device as Android One.
Windows updates aren't guaranteed to work with arbitrary device manufacturers' custom drivers.
> [Irrelevant stuff about how long iOS devices are updated]
The comment you replied to was a correction to your claim about how long Android One devices are updated. That is the maximum period a user can get a secure device for because we have already established that all alternatives have non-working security update systems.
>The 6s (2015) is still a more performant phone than any midrange Android phone released this year and can hold its own against high end Android phones that are two years newer.
You have conceded that iOS is worse for security, so now you want to argue about performance. Android has iOS beat there, too. Here is a midrange Android phone one generation older than the iPhone 6 beating it at the most common task for phone users — opening apps: https://youtu.be/hPhkPXVxISY
Here is a midrange Android phone of the same generation as the iPhone 6s beating it in the same test: https://youtu.be/B5ZT9z9Bt4M
Of course if you want to get off topic, a more interesting discussion than performance is usability, and Android is multiple generations ahead of iOS for what you can do with it and has been since at least the Verizon Droid, which came with driving navigation and voice control.