[ionyun]

Apple still sells previous phones as lesser, but still not very affordable, models. The iPhone 7 was released in September 2016 and discontinued in September 2019. It is also on iOS 15.8 so presumably also vulnerable to this. That would be about 4 years of security updates. Not the worst but not beating what e.g. Google promises for Pixel phones now.

[albntomat0]

I looked it up, and the extended security updates for Google Pixel is only a recent change:

Pixel 8: released in 2023, updates through 2030 Pixel 5: released in 2020, stopped getting updates in October 2023.

https://support.google.com/pixelphone/answer/4457705?hl=en

[jvdvegt]

Looks like I hit a 'sweet spot' with my Pixel 4a (released in August 2020, guaranteed updates until November 2023)

[youngtaff]

I use a Pixel 4a as a second phone and consider Google’s approach to be rubbish…

3 years worth of updates is pretty shit… my son’s iPhone 5c got updates for over 5 years (and I think there were some security issues they patched after that even)

At the moment I’ve got a perfectly usable Pixel 4a that I’m going to have to replace as it’s not secure enough for work related stuff anymore

[mrcarruthers]

You can't seriously give Apple shit for this and at the same time praise Google. iPhones have, pretty consistently since the 5 or so, received 5 or 6 years worth of OS updates since the phone's release whereas with Android phones you'll receive 2. Only after years of complaining is Google finally promising to support it for longer. And that doesn't cover Samsung, etc...

[Dylan16807]

We can and should praise Google for improving things, and use their new strong points to push Apple into improving too.

This isn't a debate about what company is better. The word "now" is used for Google's promises for a reason.

[lloeki]

> We can and should praise Google for improving things, and use their new strong points to push Apple into improving too.

Over a decade of Nexus then Pixel devices being flashable has not moved any needle of Apple doing the same. Google promising 7 years is in line with Apple's 10 year track record of providing 6-8 years of updates, so it's more like Google aligning with Apple, not Google pushing Apple.

Still, a vague† promise in a blog post or keynote address is not going to fit the bill, at the very least it should be in the EULA or other contractually enforceable document, otherwise the promise is worth nothing.

Ideally I wish software would be treated as with e.g automotive or washing machine manufacturers, who in the EU have a legal requirement to provide parts for 10 years.

† I mean the promise is clearly worded but bears no weight, especially when pitted against Google's track record over the last decade of making grand announcements then puling the rug down the road.

[WA]

> We can and should praise Google for improving things

Let’s talk again in 5 years, once they had the opportunity to prove their plans. So far, it’s all just talk.

[kaba0]

Especially that a 10 years old phone was very weak in terms of hardware, we haven’t reached a more plateaus era back then. It’s much easier to update a phone in the last 5 years for 10 years, than doing the same in a 5 years earlier window frame.

[beebmam]

Never forget the Pixel Pass rug pull. I'll never buy another Google product.

[jeswin]

But Android also lets you run custom builds, and my 2016 phone runs the latest OS. Sure not everyone does this, but unlike iOS I can take care of it myself.

[lloeki]

> my 2016 phone runs the latest OS. Sure not everyone does this, but unlike iOS I can take care of it myself.

"not everyone" is an understatement.

That's a solution for you (and the dozens - dozens! - of people doing the same), in practice it is not for 99% of Android users, therefore, again in practice, there's a huge fleet of devices with out-of-date software out there.

> But Android also lets you run custom builds

That's not even counting that:

- many Android manufacturers make it non-trivial† to root/unlock/flash a build and/or make it blow a warranty fuse, and that's if it's even possible at all.

- usually the camera goes ape shit, and often loudspeaker audio quality too.

- unless you relock the bootloader it immediately compromises security and makes bootloader updates nontrivial as unlocking again clears the device.

Mind you, this is a fine, intellectually satisfying strategy for you and me to be able to flash open builds, but it's by and large an extremely fringe strategy, and it's been shown over a decade that it's staying that way.

† Often involving downloading random flashing tools from obscure forums, that run only on Windows, some of these being one shot and requiring to plug in magic numbers corresponding to your exact device, and if you screw it up the device is bricked (e.g Samsung). Or the unlocking is on a low-write-count chip and once you exceed that limit the device is bricked (e.g OnePlus). I know, I've been there, bricked a few, recovered only one through JTAG.

[kaba0]

Does it really let you run custom builds when it zeroes out proprietary firmware blobs on many models, turning your fancy camera into a shitty basic one? Or what about the million proprietary blobs you would need for full functionality — will those also get patched?

[parker_mountain]

> But Android also lets you run custom builds

Yes, but that is only one component of a modern phone. Basebands and system bootloaders, among other firmwares, don't receive updates. Those are regularly attacked.

It's good that they do but it's not enough.

[0xFF0123]

I feel like the security update period should really be measured from the date of last "as new" sale, not date of original release.

[dangus]

Personally I don’t think Apple’s level of support is incredibly bad when you take a look at the used device market. Even with Apple’s famously high resale values, depreciation on smartphones is huge.

Don’t buy brand new old phones new from Apple, they’re a ripoff. If you buy either an iPhone 12 or 13 used for $250-350 you can basically plan on a $50 a year budget to have a smartphone that always has the latest OS judging by their expected remaining lifespans.

I think the big flaw with the status quo is e-waste more than cost to the consumer. I think an iPhone 6S or 7 are incredibly slow and outdated devices for today’s usage but in 5 years I don’t think we will be able to say the same thing about an iPhone 12 or 13. Smartphone hardware is far more mature now than it was even 6 generations deep into the iPhone product line.

We should be able to replace batteries for $20 and replace things like broken screens for not much more, and Apple should be enthusiastic about it considering how services are their bread and butter moving forward. Apple should be happy to produce fewer phones and keep more consumer dollars allocated toward the purchase of high margin digital goods.

[chatmasta]

> I don’t think we will be able to say the same thing about an iPhone 12 or 13

The wildcard here is local LLM use cases and any new hardware that increases their speed by orders of magnitude.

[dangus]

That’s not really a need for smartphone users. I can access an LLM on a website for free right now.

I also don’t see any indication that there will be impactful local LLM silicon at the smartphone scale anytime soon.

[calgoo]

You can yes, but the rumor is that Apple is focusing on adding them directly to your device, and if they integrate it deeply in the OS, then it will require the chips to run it. I’m sure you will be able to run old devices but without the latest Siri for example.

[paulryanrogers]

Can I get a user replaceable battery instead?

[butlike]

I just want a glorified iPod from my old phone that won't get pwned at the airport.

[walteweiss]

I still use a 6s and a fist Gen. se, I won’t say they’re terribly slow. It’s the apps, the modern apps, that make the device too slow. If you use not so many, it works quite very well. The only downside that the OS is not updated any longer. Although I got a security update recently, weeks ago.

[davnn]

Not yet, I believe. Revenue from iPhone sales is still quite fundamental to Apple‘s success, it‘s more than triple the revenue from all services combined (not including Google‘s search engine deal).

[qball]

>but still not very affordable, models

The 2020 SE is available from a wide variety of sources for 200USD (still new in box); it'll be supported until 2027. The 2022 SE is 400USD, supported until 2029.

By comparison the Android phones at this price point functionally went out of support 2 years before they even existed- not only is there zero support for them, but they ship with outdated OS versions to begin with. And no, "but I can go to XDA and get a shitty ROM at the cost of my camera" doesn't count as support.

[Dylan16807]

You had a strong first paragraph, but your second is going too far. A Pixel 6a is $349 and supported until 2027. A galaxy A15 is $175 and supported until the end of 2028 or early 2029. The full feature updates don't go quite as far, but they're still offered for multiple years into the future.

[fouc]

Isn't pixel 6 when google stopped using qualcomm modems and now has terrible signal reception?

[nindalf]

> Google promises

While Google promises, Apple actually has a decade long track record of updating older phones for 5 or more years. We don’t know if Google will actually follow through on their promises or the execs in charge in 5 years will feel differently. But I personally bet $1000 that the iPhone 13 will get 5 years of OS updates minimum.

[kaba0]

Promising is easy - google can’t keep maintaining successful apps of theirs, let alone a whole phone.

I’ll believe it at 6 years in, maybe.

[walteweiss]

Google promises. I don’t believe their promises after what happened to Google Reader.

[Almondsetat]

Apple: proven track record

Google: promises

you're being disingenuous

[SirMittens]

> Google: promises

Google is not promising this out of the goodness of their heart. They're just getting ahead of what the EU is planning to mandate [0], and doing that to get some good marketing while they're at it.

So, while Google's track record leaves a lot to be desired, in this, I think they'll keep their promise, either because they actually care, or because the EU will force them to. Either way, we, the end users, will benefit from it.

And this will apply to all electronic device makers. That's probably why Samsung also increased their updates policy to five years as well.

[0]: https://www.insideprivacy.com/cybersecurity-2/eu-publishes-d...

> "The requirements apply for the lifetime of a product or five years from its placement on the market, whichever is shorter."

[kernal]

>Google is not promising this out of the goodness of their heart. They're just getting ahead of what the EU is planning to mandate

If that was the case then why did Google exceed the requirement by 2 years? Additionally, Google is providing 7 years of OS upgrades and 7 years of security updates. Google could have easily just do what they did with the Pixel 7 and offer 3 years of OS upgrades and 5 years of security updates, thus, meeting these EU requirement of 5 years of updates. So to claim that Google offering an industry leading 7 years of OS upgrades and 7 years of security updates is not out of the "goodness of their heart" is being disingenuous IMO.

[kernal]

>Apple: proven track record >Google: promises

Do you really think the cost of the class action lawsuit and settlement and the bad publicity for not adhering to their 7 years of support would not exponentially exceed the cost of a team of engineers tasked with supporting updates for their Pixel phones?

As for "promises" - why hasn't any other OEM matched or exceeded Google? Apple should have been the first one to step up the very next day.

[code_duck]

It was difficult to locate but I found a new iPhone 7 for sale for $92. Seems affordable.

[polyomino]

Google doesn’t have enough e-fuses to update the pixel phones for seven years, the marketing department is incompetent and didn’t talk to literally the only engineers they should have.

[Dylan16807]

Is there a reason you think most updates would even want to blow e-fuses, let alone need to?

And how many are there, then?

[kernal]

Does the Pixel 8 use e-fuses? I was under the impression that it used a stored rollback index to prevent OS rollbacks.