or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by auxio

 Sure, for major OS updates it's fine that some phones just simply don't get them (and Google doesn't force OEMs to provide them).  However, major security bugfixes should be back ported and provided to the majority of Android users (and Google does force OEMs to provide them).
 Sure there is: millions of people are walking around with phones that have well known security problems and no way to fix that aside from getting a new phone. This could lead to all sorts of fraud being committed against those people, and the subsequence expense of investigating and stopping that fraud. Real-world/practical loss. Obviously there are people walking around with very old iPhones that have similar problems, but the number of such people is nowhere near as large.
And so we arrive back at the main point, which is that Google could force OEMs to provide updates if they wanted to because most OEMs have no alternative but Android.
 And the alternative is what?  License an OS (thus increasing the cost of their handset) or create/support their own OS?  Aside from Samsung and Sony, no OEMs would have the resources to do the latter and hope to succeed.  So Google knows most OEMs are painted into a corner they've created by making Android free.
 The device compatibility approval process (as I just stated).  The whole point of this discussion was about Android updates, so why would we think that you were talking about other OSes?
 Sure anyone can, but there is an approval process if you want to market your device as an official Android device.  This is what Crowley is referring to. Here's a good example of when they've used that approval process to stop Motorola from shipping a phone which used a competing positioning service.
I personally had my phone waterproofed so that I could shower with it. /s I've seen a few people with gold iPhones and no case.  But they tend to carry the phone in a (luxury) handbag or similar.  And there are some cases designed to show the color of the phone.  So I do understand the choice of color, and it's fine if you simply prefer gold.  However, the marketing for this particular phone (the gem image) is definitely targeted at the precious material coveting crowd....
I'm surprised they didn't make it gold as well, just to cover all bases with those who care more about showing off the precious materials they own than actually having things that are useful.       Not saying that Sapphire isn't useful if it does indeed make the display harder to break (still yet to be proven), but if it's on a phone that's of poor quality otherwise, what difference does it make?
 All one needs to do is take a look at how most OEMs handled phone software updates prior to Android and you can get a clear picture of the lack of in-house software expertise and/or willingness to provide legacy phone support these companies have.  For the vast majority of those phones, to get a software update, you had to buy a new phone -- there simply was no way to update the software.  This was their business model, and it was a profitable one, so where's the...
Also, rechargeable batteries hold less and less charge over time.  For those of us who aren't rough on our headphones, it means we'll be throwing away a perfectly good set of headphones in 3-5 years.  These ones would last much longer.
New Posts  All Forums: