helenslunch ,

AFAIK it's just Samsung and Google. No one else cares.

Stitch0815 ,

Fairphone

gamermanh ,
@gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

prominent

Fairphone isn't known about by your average person, they're definitely not a "prominent" android manufacturer

Stitch0815 ,

TruebI read over that

j4k3 ,
@j4k3@lemmy.world avatar

It should be a commitment to complete register level public documentation.

That is the benchmark of true ownership.

Android is a Linux kernel google prepares so that the kernel modules (drivers) for the device hardware can be added at the last possible moment. These kernel modules are added as binaries directly on the device. This is called an orphaned kernel. The source code for these binary modules is not publicly available, and the devices hardware is not publicly documented. This is how they steal ownership of the device.

The alternative is either to merge the original source code into the kernel, which the community can then maintain for decades, or simply make the documentation public and we will write our own kernel modules to support the device.

There is no reason to obfuscate this information except for theft of ownership. There is no security in obscurity, and hiding this information makes the hardware far less safe for the end user.

No one can ever update the Linux kernel for security or their own use case. Without the ability to recompile the kernel modules for the hardware, it is impossible to completely own the device. You can never trust the hardware, because those binaries are not verified.

The modem on the device is the same. There is no documentation. Between the processor and modem, there is no way to determine what or who is connected to your device at any time. Every interface on the device is untrusted.

Fixing all of this is simple; require full register level and API documentation of all digital devices. Anything less than this simple standard is ultimately giving up democracy for neo feudalism and authoritarianism. You have a right to own your tools as a citizen; a right to autonomy. A serf does not have a right of ownership or full autonomy. Citizens are a fundamental requirement for democracy, as serfs are to feudalism. Not caring about this fundamental issue is ultimately selling your autonomy. It is a regression of a thousand years of human sociopolitical progress.

dillekant ,

Yeah same. I would much prefer they mainline the code as opposed to "supporting" it themselves.

LainTrain ,

How relevant to it is this though? Like never - not once - have I ever heard of someone upgrading their phone because their version of Android was too old.

It's far more likely they'll upgrade due to degraded performance and/or battery life packed into these updates with either new features (or more like, anti-features if we're being cynical). Want to use a smartphone for its lifespan? Don't upgrade software unless you absolutely need to. This actually applies to any computers really.

If anything, thanks to manufacturers like Samsung slowly overwriting android with their bloatware crap most people aren't even aware of what version of android they run because it doesn't even look anything like any other version of android on any other phone, unfortunately brands like Samsung succeeded in creating a soft walled garden for users by obscuring the fact they're using anything but 'A Samsung'.

Ask a non-tech savvy user for a USB-C charger, and they'll not know what you mean, but ask them for a Samsung charger and they'll hand you USB-C.

mosiacmango ,

My phone pushes over the air updates every couple of months. These have included android 13 and 14, and various patches.

Android updates aren't something you have to go and get, they come to you. Having the long term support means your phone will always have the latest user features and security improvements, even for non technical users. People can and do install these all the time.

LainTrain ,

Yes but that doesn't address the fact that people won't throw away their phone just because it doesn't have an update.

Plus user features for most people will be independent of the Android version since not many android features actually make it to Samsung's touchwiz/oneui/whatever-this-month for example

oldfart ,

Eventually apps people care about stop supporting the old OS. I liked Android 4 so much and held to it for very long, but fewer and fewer apps were working with it

ScreaminOctopus ,

This will have an impact on companies issuing Android phones to employees, which may be required to use an actively supported device for security reasons.

neutronicturtle ,
@neutronicturtle@lemmy.world avatar

I have. I would probably use my last phone for at least another year if it didn't loose system updates. There's too much important personal data (bank, photos, messages including medical info...) on the phone to risk using it unsupported. At least to me it is not worth it so I try to buy a phone with reasonably long support and buy a new one soon after the old one looses support.

RobotToaster ,
@RobotToaster@mander.xyz avatar

Why are we still relying on manufacturers for software updates?

I know there's driver issues, but I'm pretty sure google could engineer android to at least allow direct security updates within the same android version. Google play services still provides updates for android 5. Even Yocto linux has opkg for updates.

steal_your_face ,
@steal_your_face@lemmy.ml avatar

It’s all based on Qualcomm drivers if I remember correctly. If Qualcomm doesn’t update the drivers then they can’t update the phones to the newest version. Maybe since Samsung and google make their own processors now they can guarantee longer updates? Also for Linux PCs it all uses x86 so maybe that’s why it can be supported longer without the need for manufacturers’ drivers updates?

TWeaK ,

You can provide software updates while still having planned obsolescence.

ThePantser ,
@ThePantser@lemmy.world avatar

Yup look at apple, they gimped their devices because the battery was shit.

helenslunch , (edited )

People think Apple is some sort of bastion of longevity because they have software support, but it's completely meaningless when they have almost zero hardware support.

Bookmeat ,

Commitment against planned obsolescence would be 20 years minimum.

KISSmyOSFeddit , (edited )

20 years ago, no one owned a smart phone. And most people still didn't have cell phones or a laptop.

RobotToaster ,
@RobotToaster@mander.xyz avatar

20 years ago, no one owned a smart phone.

The handspring visor, one of the first smartphones, was released in 2000. I owned one, although a few years later and second hand.

It still works too, except the phone part is 1g only, so there's no network for it any more.

KISSmyOSFeddit ,

OK, almost no one owned a smart phone.

hemko ,

Nah that doesn't make sense, but 7 years and open-sourcing drivers would cut it

kassuro ,

Well, long before that the device would stop working.
More important would be improved repairability. My current phone is in year 4 and the hardware is starting to die. But I can't replace the battery or other parts that start breaking. 20 year software support means nothing without that hardware lasting that long.

In that regard I think 7 years is already plenty. If they pair that with easy to replace batteries and screens that would go a long way.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • solarpunk@slrpnk.net
  • test
  • worldmews
  • mews
  • All magazines
    •