|
|
|
|
|
|
by scarface_74
1136 days ago
|
|
|
How is this moving the goalposts? We are comparing phones. Unless you have a phone from 20 years ago running the latest version of Linux. > Google is also much more serious about backward compatibility than Apple, and How is Google “better” at backwards compatibility when they don’t support devices as long? The iPhone 5s which was introduced in 2013 got a security update earlier this year. Is the same true for Android phones that are almost 10 years old? The iPhone 8/X that was introduced in 2017 still is running the latest OS. Is that true for Android devices? Seeing that Apple didn’t even create phones 20 years ago, and that you can’t even connect a phone older than the iPhone 5s to a modern network, I fail to see how that is relevant. Or do you expect Apple to support the original iPhone that 128MB of RAM, 4GB/8GB of storage, 2G networking (which isn’t supported by carriers anymore) and a 320x480 screen? |
|
|
No the conversation is not comparing phones in general. They're discussing specifically when the Pixel (from 2016) stopped being supported. Your comment is the first one that expanded/changed the subject from when one specific phone lost support to all phones/Apple/Google in general, and it was in a reply/rebuttal to a defense of when the Pixel 2016 stopped receiving updates. Classic definition of the fallacy of moving the goalposts.
If you want to debate all phones in general, you should clearly bring that up rather than sneak it in as a rebuttal to a different subject.
For the record, I'm not disagreeing that in general Apple > Android on updates. It clearly is IMHO and this is a major thing Goolge needs to improve on (and I say that as someone who will never buy an Apple product again).