iPhone 6S getting iOS 14 is like the Galaxy S6 getting Android 11(androidauthority.com)
androidauthority.com
iPhone 6S getting iOS 14 is like the Galaxy S6 getting Android 11
https://www.androidauthority.com/ios-14-iphone-6s-android-1131739/
287 コメント
Mobile devices are typically underpowered compared to desktop systems. They've caught up to PCs in terms of power (as evidenced by the iPad Pro hardware being used as the basis for the new dev kit by Apple). But the early years, in particular, saw massive annual increases in performance, Moore's Law had stalled on PCs but was alive and well for mobile platforms at that time.
You have to track the actual hardware changes in that time and compare it more to the PC market.
PCs pre-2006 had almost universally 32-bit processors, fixed pipeline GPUs, and maybe 4GB of RAM, probably 2GB. Post 2006, more GPUs got hardware shaders, 4GB of RAM became the baseline, as did 64-bit CPUs (usually with 2 or more cores). Those have all aged reasonably well and can still run most modern software outside of the graphics intensive ones (and even those sometimes if you turn most of the settings down).
The iPhone 3GS (2009) was the first one to have hardware shaders. That right there knocks out the two prior generations from being able to keep up.
The iPhone 5S (2013) was the first 64-bit processor, creating another boundary line for long-term support.
The iPhone 6S (2015) was the first to have > 1GB of RAM (upped it to 2GB), which created another boundary line.
So it's not too surprising that the higher RAM, 64-bit processor, with hardware shader support is the oldest supported iPhone (from this year forward).
Post-2015, the iPhone has improved (obviously if you've switched from a 6S to the 11 like I did) in performance and capabilities, but it's also stabilized in many ways. I haven't dug into the post-2015 phones yet to see if there are any other natural boundaries that will show up as devices drop out over the next 2-3 years, but I'm sure they exist there somewhere. Eventually the OS and the applications will be dependent on specific hardware features that cannot be easily (or efficiently) recreated on old, lower clocked processors.
You have to track the actual hardware changes in that time and compare it more to the PC market.
PCs pre-2006 had almost universally 32-bit processors, fixed pipeline GPUs, and maybe 4GB of RAM, probably 2GB. Post 2006, more GPUs got hardware shaders, 4GB of RAM became the baseline, as did 64-bit CPUs (usually with 2 or more cores). Those have all aged reasonably well and can still run most modern software outside of the graphics intensive ones (and even those sometimes if you turn most of the settings down).
The iPhone 3GS (2009) was the first one to have hardware shaders. That right there knocks out the two prior generations from being able to keep up.
The iPhone 5S (2013) was the first 64-bit processor, creating another boundary line for long-term support.
The iPhone 6S (2015) was the first to have > 1GB of RAM (upped it to 2GB), which created another boundary line.
So it's not too surprising that the higher RAM, 64-bit processor, with hardware shader support is the oldest supported iPhone (from this year forward).
Post-2015, the iPhone has improved (obviously if you've switched from a 6S to the 11 like I did) in performance and capabilities, but it's also stabilized in many ways. I haven't dug into the post-2015 phones yet to see if there are any other natural boundaries that will show up as devices drop out over the next 2-3 years, but I'm sure they exist there somewhere. Eventually the OS and the applications will be dependent on specific hardware features that cannot be easily (or efficiently) recreated on old, lower clocked processors.
With most technologies, there's a saturation point after which improvements are mostly incremental. For iPhones the saturation point was the 6S. For iPads it was the iPad Air 2.
The 6S is the lowest model that contact tracing apps will run on, and of course the oldest phone the latest iOS will support.
I switched from the 6S to 11 last Christmas, and most of the improvements I noticed were largely incremental -- apart from a handful of things like FaceID and the camera which were significantly better. Ok, the battery is a lot better too. But the 6S didn't feel obsolete at all -- it felt like a current generation phone -- because it was running current generation software.
My iPad Air 2 runs the latest iPadOS and still works great -- not sure when I'll make the jump to a newer iPad.
p.s. the only thing the iPad Air 2 lacks support for is Apple Pencil. But now that I'm into fountain pens and high quality notepads, I don't really miss it. Also if I need to create Martin Kleppmann-esque hand-drawn architecture diagrams -- which I do occasionally -- I just use any number of rubber-tipped styluses (many inexpensive options on Amazon) with the Sketches app. Gets the job done.
Kleppmann himself uses Fifty Three and Maglus styluses I believe. I'm way cheaper -- I just use the styluses that I get as swag from tech conferences.
The 6S is the lowest model that contact tracing apps will run on, and of course the oldest phone the latest iOS will support.
I switched from the 6S to 11 last Christmas, and most of the improvements I noticed were largely incremental -- apart from a handful of things like FaceID and the camera which were significantly better. Ok, the battery is a lot better too. But the 6S didn't feel obsolete at all -- it felt like a current generation phone -- because it was running current generation software.
My iPad Air 2 runs the latest iPadOS and still works great -- not sure when I'll make the jump to a newer iPad.
p.s. the only thing the iPad Air 2 lacks support for is Apple Pencil. But now that I'm into fountain pens and high quality notepads, I don't really miss it. Also if I need to create Martin Kleppmann-esque hand-drawn architecture diagrams -- which I do occasionally -- I just use any number of rubber-tipped styluses (many inexpensive options on Amazon) with the Sketches app. Gets the job done.
Kleppmann himself uses Fifty Three and Maglus styluses I believe. I'm way cheaper -- I just use the styluses that I get as swag from tech conferences.
Right. Once you hit a certain feature set (certain clock speed, core count, hardware shaders, minimum RAM, RAM speed, storage speed and capacity) everything after that becomes much smaller improvements. You won't see doublings of the numbers anymore, instead you'll see much smaller percentage increases that, while important in the long run, aren't going to impact users significantly.
Let's just look at the CPUs:
(NB: I took these numbers from Wikipedia, I'm assuming I read them correctly as I just threw this together in a couple of minutes. There's probably a mistake or two, and I skipped some versions like 5C, XR, and 11.)
Let's just look at the CPUs:
1st gen: 412MHz, 1 core, 32-bit (under clocked)
3G : 412MHz, 1 core, 32-bit (under clocked)
3GS : 600MHz, 1 core, 32-bit (under clocked)
4 : 800Mhz, 1 core, 32-bit (under clocked)
4S : 800MHz, 2 core, 32-bit (under clocked)
5 : 1.3GHz, 2 core, 32-bit
5S : 1.3GHz, 2 core, 32-bit
6 : 1.4GHz, 2 core, 64-bit
6S : 1.85GHz, 2 core, 64-bit
7 : 2.34GHz, 2 core, 64-bit (4 cores, 2 used)
8 : 2.39GHz, 6 core, 64-bit
X : 2.39GHz (2 cores) & 1.42GHz (4 cores), 6 cores, 64-bit
XS : 2.49GHz (2 cores) & 1.52GHz (4 cores), 6 cores, 64-bit
11 Pro : 2.66GHz (2 cores) & 1.82GHz (4 cores), 6 cores, 64-bit
(NB: I took these numbers from Wikipedia, I'm assuming I read them correctly as I just threw this together in a couple of minutes. There's probably a mistake or two, and I skipped some versions like 5C, XR, and 11.)
Emphasizing the RAM would also be nice, which jumped from 1GB to 2GB for the 6S.
Yes, but I got tired of making the tables :) I've pointed that out in some other comments, that was a massive jump and is probably a major reason the 6S is still supported.
Clock speed of the CPUs doesn't tell the tale here at all.
Geekbench does a far better job of capturing the massive improvement in Apple's CPUs in recent years. And the GPU improvements have been even larger.
Geekbench does a far better job of capturing the massive improvement in Apple's CPUs in recent years. And the GPU improvements have been even larger.
I know, I just wanted to select one measure for this example, I had no desire to write a thesis on every aspect of improvement on the iPhones.
The 5S was 64 bit.
You are correct. I guess that was one of the details I got wrong. I think I'd clicked on the 5C page when I grabbed those numbers.
I agree with your main thesis, but I'm going to disagree on the inflection/saturation points you chose.
I think it's closer to the iPhone X and the iPad Pro, 2nd-generation, or thereabouts.
Compared to the devices you cited, raw speed and graphics power improved massively in the A-series chips during the years in question, the camera system is almost unrecognizably better as is the neural-net processing and computational photography.
The displays improved markedly as well.
I agree with you that the 6S is not obsolete, and that's a credit to Apple, but my current iPad Pro is miles ahead of the Air 2, which I owned as well. This has enabled me to do all kinds of new things with the device, and do them better. I wouldn't be able to go back. The last couple iPad Pros are 3x faster in Geekbench single-core than the Air 2, and more than 4x faster in multi-core.
It's going to start to get hard though, moving forward, to make that kind of massive improvement. We already have 120Hz refresh, we now already have raw CPU power that is superior to almost all current laptop computers including MB Pros, we now have about as good of a screen as can be imagined, laws of physics will start to bar further major physical camera improvements, etc.
Apple's already at the 5nm mode with its silicon; there are only a couple steps left before transistor sizes are just a few atoms across.
I think it's closer to the iPhone X and the iPad Pro, 2nd-generation, or thereabouts.
Compared to the devices you cited, raw speed and graphics power improved massively in the A-series chips during the years in question, the camera system is almost unrecognizably better as is the neural-net processing and computational photography.
The displays improved markedly as well.
I agree with you that the 6S is not obsolete, and that's a credit to Apple, but my current iPad Pro is miles ahead of the Air 2, which I owned as well. This has enabled me to do all kinds of new things with the device, and do them better. I wouldn't be able to go back. The last couple iPad Pros are 3x faster in Geekbench single-core than the Air 2, and more than 4x faster in multi-core.
It's going to start to get hard though, moving forward, to make that kind of massive improvement. We already have 120Hz refresh, we now already have raw CPU power that is superior to almost all current laptop computers including MB Pros, we now have about as good of a screen as can be imagined, laws of physics will start to bar further major physical camera improvements, etc.
Apple's already at the 5nm mode with its silicon; there are only a couple steps left before transistor sizes are just a few atoms across.
You've listed multiple technical improvements, but overall the user experience difference between a 6S and an 8 isn't nearly as big as the difference between the 5S and 6S.
The biggest noticeable difference probably being RAM. The 6S and 8 (non Plus) both have 2GB ram, while the 6 and 5S only had 1GB.
The biggest noticeable difference probably being RAM. The 6S and 8 (non Plus) both have 2GB ram, while the 6 and 5S only had 1GB.
Interesting. Just curious, what do you do on your iPad Pro that you wouldn't have been able to do as well as on the iPad Air 2?
I've been eyeing the iPad Pros for a while now but have never been able to pull the trigger. Just curious what use cases would push me over the edge.
I spend most of my time on the iPad on consumption activities like Twitter, Youtube, Prime Video, etc. My iPad is my travel device -- I don't even own a personal laptop anymore.
My content creation activities include writing stuff on Google Docs, editing photos synced from my iPhone, light 720p video editing on iMovie and of course drawing architecture diagrams on Sketches.
I've been eyeing the iPad Pros for a while now but have never been able to pull the trigger. Just curious what use cases would push me over the edge.
I spend most of my time on the iPad on consumption activities like Twitter, Youtube, Prime Video, etc. My iPad is my travel device -- I don't even own a personal laptop anymore.
My content creation activities include writing stuff on Google Docs, editing photos synced from my iPhone, light 720p video editing on iMovie and of course drawing architecture diagrams on Sketches.
For me, the 12.9" ipad pro screen is just gorgeous. It is an absolute pleasure to read on and side-by-side apps feel right. On the regular ipad, side-by-side felt cramped. For media consumption, the big screen and the the stereo speaker is night and day. I just picked up the new macbook air and I use the ipad pro as a second screen and it feels natural. The one thing you want to think about is the increased weight.
I mean, the apple pencil can be a nice touch which apparently isn't compatible with the 2.
But mostly it's just a more pronounced form-factor of what the iPad is all about, in particular in comparison to an iPhone.
The bezel to body ratio gets cut in half from about 30% of the body, to about 15%. It's kind of crazy when you think of it like that (instead of screen-to-body), as almost 1/3rd of the body is bezel on the Air models. On the original it was even 37%)
At around 15%, you're approaching the iPad's true form-factor: just one big screen. That's pretty wonderful for consuming content. All this screen real-estate is what sets it apart from say an iPhone for content-consumption, while retaining the notion of it being a lightweight mobile-device you can throw in your bag and whip out easier than a laptop e.g. on an airplane, in bed, in the bus, on a trip, on the couch.
But it's not like you can do all that much extra. For me personally though, reading a digital version to a paper newspaper or even a website always felt a little bit cramped on a regular iPad. It feels most websites and magazines are about 13 inches. For example, The Economist is about 13 inches diagonal. It's very natural to read on the 12.9 inch iPad Pro. Quite alright on the 11 inch, but just a tad too small on the 9.7 inch, requiring more frequent zooming in or alternative views.
The iPad air 3(rd gen) by the way is already a pretty decent middle-ground, at 10.5 inches, nearing a 20% bezel, and very fast for years to come.
But the Pros also have Promotion, which gets you 120 hertz refresh rates. Makes everything buttery smooth. Really not a big deal, but it's one of those things that made me feel like I was using some futuristic device you'd expect in a Star Trek universe. But again, really not a big deal, it's just a feeling. Usually there's some lag, some stutter, some delays. With 120 hertz it feels as if we're moving towards a world in which there is no UI lag and the tech is really futuristic. Combined with an insaaaanely fast device, the only time you get confronted with any latency is when the internet is involved. Not something that'd make me buy the Pro, but it's fun to know that this'll be coming to all normally-priced devices in a few years. You also get more colours, it gets brighter, and there's truetone display. The display is really something else, I'd check it out in stores and see if it matters.
The rest don't matter much to me. FaceID, four really great speakers, ultra fast, better camera, LIDAR, neural engine, I don't really care for. USB-C is a nice touch as I find it's always around for charging. And the magic keyboard is a nice touch together with the pencil, google docs should be a lot nicer with the keyboard and drawing diagrams with the pencil, but then it starts to get quite expensive.
https://phonesized.com/compare/#483,1422,1423
But mostly it's just a more pronounced form-factor of what the iPad is all about, in particular in comparison to an iPhone.
The bezel to body ratio gets cut in half from about 30% of the body, to about 15%. It's kind of crazy when you think of it like that (instead of screen-to-body), as almost 1/3rd of the body is bezel on the Air models. On the original it was even 37%)
At around 15%, you're approaching the iPad's true form-factor: just one big screen. That's pretty wonderful for consuming content. All this screen real-estate is what sets it apart from say an iPhone for content-consumption, while retaining the notion of it being a lightweight mobile-device you can throw in your bag and whip out easier than a laptop e.g. on an airplane, in bed, in the bus, on a trip, on the couch.
But it's not like you can do all that much extra. For me personally though, reading a digital version to a paper newspaper or even a website always felt a little bit cramped on a regular iPad. It feels most websites and magazines are about 13 inches. For example, The Economist is about 13 inches diagonal. It's very natural to read on the 12.9 inch iPad Pro. Quite alright on the 11 inch, but just a tad too small on the 9.7 inch, requiring more frequent zooming in or alternative views.
The iPad air 3(rd gen) by the way is already a pretty decent middle-ground, at 10.5 inches, nearing a 20% bezel, and very fast for years to come.
But the Pros also have Promotion, which gets you 120 hertz refresh rates. Makes everything buttery smooth. Really not a big deal, but it's one of those things that made me feel like I was using some futuristic device you'd expect in a Star Trek universe. But again, really not a big deal, it's just a feeling. Usually there's some lag, some stutter, some delays. With 120 hertz it feels as if we're moving towards a world in which there is no UI lag and the tech is really futuristic. Combined with an insaaaanely fast device, the only time you get confronted with any latency is when the internet is involved. Not something that'd make me buy the Pro, but it's fun to know that this'll be coming to all normally-priced devices in a few years. You also get more colours, it gets brighter, and there's truetone display. The display is really something else, I'd check it out in stores and see if it matters.
The rest don't matter much to me. FaceID, four really great speakers, ultra fast, better camera, LIDAR, neural engine, I don't really care for. USB-C is a nice touch as I find it's always around for charging. And the magic keyboard is a nice touch together with the pencil, google docs should be a lot nicer with the keyboard and drawing diagrams with the pencil, but then it starts to get quite expensive.
https://phonesized.com/compare/#483,1422,1423
Indeed the 6S definitely marks an interesting moment in the iPhone timeline. I'm still using mine after buying, and then returning, an 11 Pro last fall. I've had iPhones since 2009 and had, admittedly, very high expectations for the upgrade. When it didn't thrill me out of the box (as had previous upgrades), I kept using it for a week before deciding to just repair my 6S and save the $1000.
I had a 6 instead of 6S and started getting stutter and slight lags in the UI after the latest ios update around 2018. It was getting annoyingly slow at that point but i was happy with a 7 Plus until i got a good deal for a X recently.
> Moore's Law had stalled on PCs but was alive and well for mobile platforms at that time.
That's not a very convincing argument. Moore's law was alive and well two decades ago for PCs, but Windows XP (initially released 2001, supported til 2014) was able to run on hardware from 1995 (according to https://www.winhistory.de/more/386/xpmini_en.htm).
That's not a very convincing argument. Moore's law was alive and well two decades ago for PCs, but Windows XP (initially released 2001, supported til 2014) was able to run on hardware from 1995 (according to https://www.winhistory.de/more/386/xpmini_en.htm).
That gets into a difference in motivation as well, but watching hardware changes (for iOS) explains a lot about why different phones have lost support over the years.
Microsoft has a different motivation, in that they were selling Windows and Windows support. Apple didn't sell iOS (and they'd stopped selling OS X sometime in the '00s). MS had a vested interest, then, in supporting all hardware that they could because of businesses (and governments, especially governments) that wanted the latest OS, but didn't want to drop $2-3k on new computers. MS made their money off of the OS, their software on that OS, and the money spent by developers to have access to MS's development tools.
Apple makes their money off of their hardware. So some people like to claim that Apple does a shit job of supporting old hardware, which may be true. They tend to cut off support more readily than many people would like. But in mobile they do a ton better than any Android device manufacturer (who have the same motivation as Apple: selling hardware).
But my point still stands, older versions of iPhones are harder to continue supporting because they lacked hardware capabilities/features of newer ones. From improvements to the GPU, increasing RAM, adding cores, and going to 64-bit. Each of those added capabilities that the OS and app developers took advantage of that created boundary lines that barred older devices. This is more akin to the changes from x86 to x86-64 processors than the 1995->2003 hardware changes (Pentium 1 -> Pentium 4, all 32-bit) and the change from fixed-function GPUs to hardware shader GPUs.
Microsoft has a different motivation, in that they were selling Windows and Windows support. Apple didn't sell iOS (and they'd stopped selling OS X sometime in the '00s). MS had a vested interest, then, in supporting all hardware that they could because of businesses (and governments, especially governments) that wanted the latest OS, but didn't want to drop $2-3k on new computers. MS made their money off of the OS, their software on that OS, and the money spent by developers to have access to MS's development tools.
Apple makes their money off of their hardware. So some people like to claim that Apple does a shit job of supporting old hardware, which may be true. They tend to cut off support more readily than many people would like. But in mobile they do a ton better than any Android device manufacturer (who have the same motivation as Apple: selling hardware).
But my point still stands, older versions of iPhones are harder to continue supporting because they lacked hardware capabilities/features of newer ones. From improvements to the GPU, increasing RAM, adding cores, and going to 64-bit. Each of those added capabilities that the OS and app developers took advantage of that created boundary lines that barred older devices. This is more akin to the changes from x86 to x86-64 processors than the 1995->2003 hardware changes (Pentium 1 -> Pentium 4, all 32-bit) and the change from fixed-function GPUs to hardware shader GPUs.
> Apple didn't sell iOS
Strictly speaking, Apple sold iOS for a while. iOS 2 was a $10 paid upgrade for iPod touch users.
Strictly speaking, Apple sold iOS for a while. iOS 2 was a $10 paid upgrade for iPod touch users.
The 6S is the point when a phone got "fast enough". It was fast enough to be useful as a mobile phone without being frustrating to use. Everything since has been gravy, but the 6S is still surprisingly useful as a mobile device.
The 6S (see my other comment near here) was almost 30% faster than the 6, and doubled the RAM to 2GB. Those two factors alone probably made the jump seem so significant, ignoring any other changes they may have included in it. The 7 got another major clock boost, but kept the RAM (7 Plus had 3GB though) so that would've been another noticeable improvement, though mostly in games and such, many applications probably didn't see much change between the 6S and 7.
> I haven't dug into the post-2015 phones yet to see if there are any other natural boundaries that will show up ...
I suspect TouchID will be the next one we hit, but that is going to be at least four years off because iPhone SE #2.
The neural engine may be a feature cut-off after that, where there are just too many features and services being run on device which can't be done on older hardware.
Other than that, I suspect Apple will still institute a vintage/obsolete lifecycle for phones - just choosing to drop support for phones where the hardware hasn't been sold in a certain amount of time (say five years), official replacement parts like batteries are no longer being made, etc.
I suspect TouchID will be the next one we hit, but that is going to be at least four years off because iPhone SE #2.
The neural engine may be a feature cut-off after that, where there are just too many features and services being run on device which can't be done on older hardware.
Other than that, I suspect Apple will still institute a vintage/obsolete lifecycle for phones - just choosing to drop support for phones where the hardware hasn't been sold in a certain amount of time (say five years), official replacement parts like batteries are no longer being made, etc.
> Mobile devices are typically underpowered compared to desktop systems.
Early PCs/home computers were also underpowered compared to workstations. The difference is: buyers expected them to be supported for a much longer time and expected developers to (if somehow possible) to write sufficiently fast code that also runs decently on "outdated" computers.
Early PCs/home computers were also underpowered compared to workstations. The difference is: buyers expected them to be supported for a much longer time and expected developers to (if somehow possible) to write sufficiently fast code that also runs decently on "outdated" computers.
You wouldn't have run Windows 95 on your circa 1987 Tandy, there were massive changes in that time as well that impacted supported hardware when new OSes and software came out.
Mobile phones (smart phones in particular here) saw changes in 1-3 years that took 5-10 years on PCs. That has to be taken into consideration when trying to understand why a piece of hardware isn't supported by the latest OS or software.
Mobile phones (smart phones in particular here) saw changes in 1-3 years that took 5-10 years on PCs. That has to be taken into consideration when trying to understand why a piece of hardware isn't supported by the latest OS or software.
> You wouldn't have run Windows 95 on your circa 1987 Tandy
Windows 95 (formally) did run on a PC that has an Intel 80386DX CPU of any speed and 4 MB of system RAM:
Windows 95 (formally) did run on a PC that has an Intel 80386DX CPU of any speed and 4 MB of system RAM:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Windows_95&oldid=962821687#System_requirements
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Intel_80386&oldid=952503560I mean, every OS release has left out older hardware.
https://www.technologytips.com/windows-system-requirements/
The software/application story is certainly better on desktops, I'll grant you that.
https://www.technologytips.com/windows-system-requirements/
The software/application story is certainly better on desktops, I'll grant you that.
A _substantial_ portion of the desktop PC market was running on 512MB of RAM in 2006[0]. Even today a significant portion of budget computers people buy have 4GB which is just barely on the edge of enough to run Windows 10 and a couple modern websites.
[0] https://i.imgur.com/YiMobdC.png
[0] https://i.imgur.com/YiMobdC.png
Fair enough, I guess my memory on RAM was biased by my environment (mostly around developers and CS students in that time period).
Also, the tasks we're accomplishing on our phones have not fundamentally changed over the past five years. (The five years before that, sure, but things have slowed down.) If my phone is performing the same actions as when I bought it, why should I have to buy a new one to get security updates? If nothing else, it's clearly bad for the planet.
And, for that matter—and this is where iPhones do miss the mark—why does my phone not perform those actions as well as it did when new? That we have even faster chips nowadays shouldn't make the old ones slower.
And, for that matter—and this is where iPhones do miss the mark—why does my phone not perform those actions as well as it did when new? That we have even faster chips nowadays shouldn't make the old ones slower.
Indeed. People like me care when a new phone has 20% more performance because that might mean the difference between being able to emulate a particular game console or not. I can't see why anyone else would care.
Your old phone is slower because its battery can no longer hold as much charge.
Rather it's because it can't supply the same voltage it could when it was new necessitating down-clocking of the CPU and thus the performance slowdown.
In my case, I replaced the battery four months ago.
It's not just the battery. Newer OS's are just slower.
It's not just the battery. Newer OS's are just slower.
I've just bought an iPhone 6S second hand with a new battery. I don't know how fast they used to be, but I've not noticed anything being slow. Animations are silky smooth, and app loading times seem fast too.
> I don't know how fast they used to be.
That's the problem. :)
I'm also on a 6S and Apple has kept it quite speedy! But, I was playing with a 2016 iPhone SE on iOS 9 about a year ago, and I could instantly tell it was snappier than my 6S on iOS 12.
That's the problem. :)
I'm also on a 6S and Apple has kept it quite speedy! But, I was playing with a 2016 iPhone SE on iOS 9 about a year ago, and I could instantly tell it was snappier than my 6S on iOS 12.
I want to say it's beyond "usable". I am using iPhone SE from 2016 - it works flawlessly imo on iOS 13.5.1
Agreed, I tweaked the wording in my post.
The iPhone SE had the same CPU, GPU and RAM as the 6S but had far fewer pixels to deal with. That was probably more of a contributor to the snappiness than the iOS version.
> Newer OS's are just slower.
In the iOS world, not generally so. Things generally get faster and more optimized (cruft gets removed) in the iOS world (barring some anomalies like iOS 13, but it's gotten back on track).
In the iOS world, not generally so. Things generally get faster and more optimized (cruft gets removed) in the iOS world (barring some anomalies like iOS 13, but it's gotten back on track).
iOS 7, 11, and 13 are definitely slower than their respective immediate predecessors. iOS 9 and 12 are definitely the opposite.
But while it's hard to prove definitively—largely because highly-out-of-date iOS devices are so rare in the wild—I would posit that even though 12 was faster than 11, 9 and 10 were both faster than 12. That's definitely what I saw in a brief iOS 9 experience I mentioned elsewhere in this thread.
It's the old frog-in-boiling-water analogy. If it happens slowly, you don't notice.
But while it's hard to prove definitively—largely because highly-out-of-date iOS devices are so rare in the wild—I would posit that even though 12 was faster than 11, 9 and 10 were both faster than 12. That's definitely what I saw in a brief iOS 9 experience I mentioned elsewhere in this thread.
It's the old frog-in-boiling-water analogy. If it happens slowly, you don't notice.
[deleted]
Then I should be allowed to replace my battery.
A store in my city (in The Netherlands) replaces an 6S battery for EUR. 39 (US$ 44). They offer a 1 year guarantee. You can do some grocery shopping while they replace it.
Replacing battery in 6S is trivial, no dancing with dryer like 8/XR.
You can.
Negative. The battery on my iPhone 6 was awesome and that phone was slow as molasses. Just switching to a family member's 6S was a dramatic improvement.
Only because I'm involved in this today and have apparently decided to not work on other things while I wait to go to the doctor:
6 -> 6S was a 450MHz clock speed (1.4GHz -> 1.85GHz) jump and doubled the RAM from 1GB to 2GB. That's a significant step up in capabilities. You probably noticed snappier application starts and transitions (more RAM, more apps can stay up at a time, or at least part of them so they start or seem to start faster) and better general performance (that 32% clock speed jump).
6 -> 6S was a 450MHz clock speed (1.4GHz -> 1.85GHz) jump and doubled the RAM from 1GB to 2GB. That's a significant step up in capabilities. You probably noticed snappier application starts and transitions (more RAM, more apps can stay up at a time, or at least part of them so they start or seem to start faster) and better general performance (that 32% clock speed jump).
What you mean to say is that the battery can lo longer deliver as much power.
Performance capability is reduced if the battery is worn, see iOS Settings > Battery > Battery Health.
Performance capability is reduced if the battery is worn, see iOS Settings > Battery > Battery Health.
Did your phone 5 years ago was able to edit 4k60 videos in seconds?
As far as I know most current laptops fail to do that.
As far as I know most current laptops fail to do that.
> why should I have to buy a new one to get security updates?
Who is writing those security updates? How do they get paid?
Who is writing those security updates? How do they get paid?
Google is writing the security updates, and random people online will port them to your device but somehow your OEM won't.
I wouldn't object to Apple (or anyone else) charging a reasonable fee for security updates past a certain date. (Where "reasonable" ≠ what Microsoft is charging businesses for Windows 7 support, for instance.)
Making people buy new hardware they don't need just to stay secure isn't merely wasting their money, it's actively harmful to the planet.
Making people buy new hardware they don't need just to stay secure isn't merely wasting their money, it's actively harmful to the planet.
Used to be normal to pay for things like that, and so people didn't update for security, and the world of devices/machines was less secure.
And not providing updates at all unless users buy new hardware is better?
I'm simply stating the charging for the updates probably won't generate the $ that was suggested as an incentive to produce the updates.
I wouldn't expect it to become a cash cow, no, but then neither does continuing to support the iPhone 6S. I do think they could more than break even, and that ought to be enough.
Moreover, companies ought to continue offering security updates because it's the right thing thing to do—for their customers, for their brand, and for the planet.
Moreover, companies ought to continue offering security updates because it's the right thing thing to do—for their customers, for their brand, and for the planet.
In terms of herd immunity, yes.
I actually wouldn’t be at all opposed to Apple charging, say, $30 for an iOS14 upgrade on an iPhone 6S. Seems like a fair trade off to me.
Possibly, but I believe this would be interpreted as a regressive tax - charging users with less money more than those with more money for the same software. Maybe it's fair if you consider QA and additional developers, but this is what the public reception would be.
+1 on Windows doing this for forever. I regularly use devices that are 10+ years old: printer (10), scanner (11), webcam (10), professional audio interface (12). I can stil install old music software to work with old songs I've recorded/produced.
Every Windows machine but 1 in my house is >5 years old. The 1 that is newer was just built this year to replace a machine with an >11 year old motherboard (CPU/RAM had been upgraded since). It does help that I went 100% SSD and touch (for laptops) when Windows 8 came out.
I don't think there will ever be another OS that has the same level of backwards compatibility that Windows does. It is just too hard. Support longer than iOS on an ecosystem more diverse than Android. Windows users expect it though.
Every Windows machine but 1 in my house is >5 years old. The 1 that is newer was just built this year to replace a machine with an >11 year old motherboard (CPU/RAM had been upgraded since). It does help that I went 100% SSD and touch (for laptops) when Windows 8 came out.
I don't think there will ever be another OS that has the same level of backwards compatibility that Windows does. It is just too hard. Support longer than iOS on an ecosystem more diverse than Android. Windows users expect it though.
And every new release of windows things break for some group of users, people complain about how quality control at microsoft has really gone downhill lately, and microsoft rolls out a bunch of fixes over time for all those users.
Windows users are an ungrateful bunch.
Windows users are an ungrateful bunch.
The last android device I bought was a Samsung tablet. It was sort of near the end of its sale life, and I got a good deal. However it received only one update after that - 6 months later. It was basically supported for only 6 months. The final straw was the last update rendered the tablet almost unusable - it added several seconds of latency to almost every operation. I'll never buy a Samsung device again.
Note that the Google branded hardware does seem to be supported for much longer. My old Nexus 7 got updates for many years - but the hardware itself was terrible and I couldn't even charge it after the third replacement's micro usb port failed - another typical Android experience, I'm afraid.
Note that the Google branded hardware does seem to be supported for much longer. My old Nexus 7 got updates for many years - but the hardware itself was terrible and I couldn't even charge it after the third replacement's micro usb port failed - another typical Android experience, I'm afraid.
Google are not much better. They supported my Pixel C for 2 years after I bought it (2017-19); and it was more expensive than a Samsung. I basically got scammed. Never again. I've given up on disposable tablets.
It's not that surprising to me -- Apple was selling this 5y old device about ~16 months ago, so they should still be supporting it
I have an 11 year old computer that I used as my Plex server until earlier this year. It is a Dell E6500 - introduced in October 2008.
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Dell-Latitude-E6500.12268.0.ht...
It was my work computer. It had 8GB of RAM, 500GB hard drive, a beautiful 1920x1200 display (as opposed to the 1920x1080 display that became the norm shortly thereafter), gigabit Ethernet and 802.11n (?) wireless. It has a Core 2 Duo 2.66Ghz processor
It’s running Windows 10. Besides the processor and spinning hard drive, those are still decent specs for modern computers.
An iPhone from that era had a single core 400Mhz processor and 128MB of RAM with a 480x320 display. A modern iPhone has a 2436x1125 display, 4GB of RAM, 6 core processor - 2 at 2.66Ghz, 4 at 1.82Ghz.
That’s not to mention that the 2008 iPhone doesn’t support 4G.
Now let’s go back further. A PC from 1996 wouldn’t support an operating system released in 2008.
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Dell-Latitude-E6500.12268.0.ht...
It was my work computer. It had 8GB of RAM, 500GB hard drive, a beautiful 1920x1200 display (as opposed to the 1920x1080 display that became the norm shortly thereafter), gigabit Ethernet and 802.11n (?) wireless. It has a Core 2 Duo 2.66Ghz processor
It’s running Windows 10. Besides the processor and spinning hard drive, those are still decent specs for modern computers.
An iPhone from that era had a single core 400Mhz processor and 128MB of RAM with a 480x320 display. A modern iPhone has a 2436x1125 display, 4GB of RAM, 6 core processor - 2 at 2.66Ghz, 4 at 1.82Ghz.
That’s not to mention that the 2008 iPhone doesn’t support 4G.
Now let’s go back further. A PC from 1996 wouldn’t support an operating system released in 2008.
The iPhone 5s (the first 64-bit phone, first iPhone with a secure enclave) is still receiving security updates. It received iOS 12.4.7 on May 20th.
It was released September 2013 (6.5yr), discontinued September 2014 for the 64GB version (5.5yr), March 2016 for the 16, 32GB versions (4yr).
It was released September 2013 (6.5yr), discontinued September 2014 for the 64GB version (5.5yr), March 2016 for the 16, 32GB versions (4yr).
I bought my iPhone 5S used in December 2013, and sold it in mid-2017, in part because I expected that iOS 11 that year would drop support. Nope; both it and iOS 12 supported the 5S, meaning that it could run the newest iOS until September 2019. As mentioned elsewhere, iOS 12 still gets security updates today.
(Based on the difference between the purchase and sale prices I ended up paying about $10 a month to use the 5S for 3.5 years. I sold it after replacing it with an SE that I made money on at purchase because of an insane promotion at Best Buy.)
(Based on the difference between the purchase and sale prices I ended up paying about $10 a month to use the 5S for 3.5 years. I sold it after replacing it with an SE that I made money on at purchase because of an insane promotion at Best Buy.)
No one uses 20 year old desktop hardware, unless it's somehow miraculously managed to survive (in a cupboard, ran once a month to do accounting) or it's absolute must control system for a nuclear ship (where actual hardware is replaced every 2 years, but with same old version).
Everyone else who runs XP installs it on new hardware.
Everyone else who runs XP installs it on new hardware.
> It’s crazy to think supporting a five year old device is now considered ground-breaking.
I wonder if this is slowing down, or speeding up? At some point it feels like we'll find a equilibrium for phones, similar to what we have for general purpose computers...
I wonder if this is slowing down, or speeding up? At some point it feels like we'll find a equilibrium for phones, similar to what we have for general purpose computers...
Windows 10 can install on a typical 2005 PC? I'd be surprised if that's the case.
Anyway, the point of the article isn't that five years is all that long, it's that Android's two-year policy is despairingly short.
Anyway, the point of the article isn't that five years is all that long, it's that Android's two-year policy is despairingly short.
> Windows 10 can install on a typical 2005 PC? I'd be surprised if that's the case.
I have Windows 10 running dual boot on my Dell Inspiron 530s from 2005. It's a Core 2 Duo 2.33 GHz. I don't run Windows 10 full time because it's a little sluggish, but it works ok.
(I did upgrade to an SSD + 8GB RAM + Nvidia GT 610 but everything else is 2005).
On the same note, I also have Kubuntu 18.04 on the same machine. Now this is my daily driver. Runs Chrome, plays Youtube etc. and everything else just fine. Things are extremely responsive. It's almost inconceivable to think I'm using a 15 year old computer in 2020 as my main machine but here we are.
I have Windows 10 running dual boot on my Dell Inspiron 530s from 2005. It's a Core 2 Duo 2.33 GHz. I don't run Windows 10 full time because it's a little sluggish, but it works ok.
(I did upgrade to an SSD + 8GB RAM + Nvidia GT 610 but everything else is 2005).
On the same note, I also have Kubuntu 18.04 on the same machine. Now this is my daily driver. Runs Chrome, plays Youtube etc. and everything else just fine. Things are extremely responsive. It's almost inconceivable to think I'm using a 15 year old computer in 2020 as my main machine but here we are.
> (I did upgrade to an SSD + 8GB RAM + Nvidia GT 610 but everything else is 2005).
What everything else? You kept the CPU, motherboard, and case? That's not a "typical 2005 PC" anymore.
What everything else? You kept the CPU, motherboard, and case? That's not a "typical 2005 PC" anymore.
True. The original 530s had a spinning platter drive, 4GB of RAM and Intel integrated graphics.
But the original was also a low-end Dell PC. With these upgrades, it would be a higher-end 2005 machine.
The performance boost was unnoticeable with the added RAM and video card (primarily for driving dual monitors -- the GT 610 was a cheap $70 card, not a high end card by any means). What really changed the performance was the SSD -- which I added much later -- now that was noticeable.
But the original was also a low-end Dell PC. With these upgrades, it would be a higher-end 2005 machine.
The performance boost was unnoticeable with the added RAM and video card (primarily for driving dual monitors -- the GT 610 was a cheap $70 card, not a high end card by any means). What really changed the performance was the SSD -- which I added much later -- now that was noticeable.
I believe so. The 32-bit variant, at least doesn’t even use SSE2 acceleration, iirc.
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/windows-10-specifica...
1 GHz CPU, 1GB ram, 800x600 display, 32GB drive. Those are not 2005 specs, those were easily around in 2000.
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/windows-10-specifica...
1 GHz CPU, 1GB ram, 800x600 display, 32GB drive. Those are not 2005 specs, those were easily around in 2000.
Yes but Linux will run on these same specs, while actually being usable (including for web browsing) and even snappy at times. In fact, you could even halve the amount of RAM and still be quite fine. (And 2000 is definitely pushing it. Mid-2000s seems more likely.)
I run Ubuntu on 2017 PC (8700K, 32GB RAM, admittedly, HDD), and it is nowhere near snappy. Boot takes over 2mins until apps actually start to show up, starting new Terminal instance takes over 3sec (if not over 5). Regular programs like VS Code or Firefox are about the same as on Windows.
Software are more bloated than 3 or 5 years ago. Performance with a HDD will suffer as everything has to be loaded to RAM before the CPU runs the code. Put a SSD in this machine and for most tasks your experience will be the same as with a brand new PC.
That would contradict a claim about 2005 machine being snappy with Linux. 2005 machine probably does not have an SSD.
The beast you mention is even more spec'd than my current main workstation, which has half the RAM, and the entire default install of Ubuntu fits in the cache after boot. The HDD is not to blame; there is something else wrong.
So when the Terminal is not running, how long does it take to start on your machine (e.g. to the first output from the shell is printed)?
The boot time (to the first app running) is likely due to Nvidia blob, but who knows?
The boot time (to the first app running) is likely due to Nvidia blob, but who knows?
It takes around 2-3 seconds on the first attempt, future launches are instantaneous (cache plus gnome leaves a gnome-terminal-server process floating around).
> Those are not 2005 specs, those were easily around in 2000.
It's harder to look up RAM numbers, but AMD launched a 1600MHz CPU (and a few others above 1GHz) in 2001.
It's harder to look up RAM numbers, but AMD launched a 1600MHz CPU (and a few others above 1GHz) in 2001.
I've installed Windows 10 on HP EliteBook 2730p from 2008, and Toshiba Protege M400 from 2006. For the most part if the machine ran Windows Vista acceptably it will run Windows 10. Disk access is pretty slow. Windows 10 really needs an SSD.
Windows 10 really needs an SSD
I got an 11" Dell Inspiron with a puny A6-9220e (1.7ghz, 2 core) CPU that is roughly comparable to an Atom, but with a somewhat better GPU. Replaced the HDD with a SATA SSD. Thought it would be a cute little beater netbook.
For all intents and purposes, it's just not usable unless that real-time protection is turned off. Things freeze up for multiple seconds while clicking any button, apps take dozens of seconds to launch, etc. With real-time protection off, it's pretty decent - good enough for web, YouTube, iTunes, Spotify, whatever.
Unfortunately, Windows turns real-time protection back on automatically after a certain amount of time. Apparently you need Win 10 Professional or higher to permanently disable it via group policy or something.
>Windows 10 can install on a typical 2005 PC? I'd be surprised if that's the case.
I had it on a 2006 Sony VIAO laptop until last year. It ran better than Windows 8 with 2GB of RAM. Slow without an SSD, but tolerable as downloader/media server.
Some of the OEM drivers (bluetooth, fingerprint scanner etc.) had stopped working in Windows 8 (it was an XP laptop that I upgrade to 7 onward) because Sony stopped supporting them.
The hilarious thing was that in Windows 10 those started working again with builtin drivers from Windows.
I could probably have kept the laptop around longer, but I went on an ecycling binge last year and got rid of a lot of tech crap that was just lying around.
I had it on a 2006 Sony VIAO laptop until last year. It ran better than Windows 8 with 2GB of RAM. Slow without an SSD, but tolerable as downloader/media server.
Some of the OEM drivers (bluetooth, fingerprint scanner etc.) had stopped working in Windows 8 (it was an XP laptop that I upgrade to 7 onward) because Sony stopped supporting them.
The hilarious thing was that in Windows 10 those started working again with builtin drivers from Windows.
I could probably have kept the laptop around longer, but I went on an ecycling binge last year and got rid of a lot of tech crap that was just lying around.
Sure. I installed the 32-bit version on a "tablet" Lenovo that came with Windows XP, a dual core Centrino, and 2GB RAM originally. Works fine, it's not quite as fast as XP was but no issues. All the pen features work perfectly. If I got the upgrade card to switch it to an SATA SSD and added more memory it would probably be a fully usable machine, thanks mostly to being dual core.
I dont know that "Android" has a two-year policy - certainly all of Google's recent devices were updated longer than that.
Pixel 1: Release Date October 2016, Last Update Dec 2019 (3 years, 2 months)
Pixel 2: Release Date October 2017, still current (2 years, 8 months and counting). Android 11 beta also available. If it is kept updated throughout the 11.0 cycle, that will be ~4 years or so.
Pixel 3, 3a, and 4 are newer but also still current.
Android 8.0 (released August 2017) was updated this month: https://android.googlesource.com/platform/build/+/refs/tags/...
Pixel 1: Release Date October 2016, Last Update Dec 2019 (3 years, 2 months)
Pixel 2: Release Date October 2017, still current (2 years, 8 months and counting). Android 11 beta also available. If it is kept updated throughout the 11.0 cycle, that will be ~4 years or so.
Pixel 3, 3a, and 4 are newer but also still current.
Android 8.0 (released August 2017) was updated this month: https://android.googlesource.com/platform/build/+/refs/tags/...
No, but it could install on flagship hardware for a 2005 PC
which is what we are comparing here.
which is what we are comparing here.
If it has enough free ram and a good graphic card, probably yes
You could buy a 6s and 6s Plus new at the Apple Store just two years ago.
You can still install DOS 6 on a modern pc.
The thing that holds most android manufacturers back is that their chipset vendors don't update their drivers for newer kernels.
So the next version of android comes along and requires a newer kernel, and the phones built around these chipsets can't be updated.
The chipset folks see no new revenue for forward-porting their hacked up kernels and drivers, and therefore aren't interested in updating.
That is the problem the Android ecosystem needs to solve.
Because Apple controls the full stack, they have no problem forward porting any custom changes that they need. It's all the same codebase.
So the next version of android comes along and requires a newer kernel, and the phones built around these chipsets can't be updated.
The chipset folks see no new revenue for forward-porting their hacked up kernels and drivers, and therefore aren't interested in updating.
That is the problem the Android ecosystem needs to solve.
Because Apple controls the full stack, they have no problem forward porting any custom changes that they need. It's all the same codebase.
This might be a contributing issue, but it seems this is far from the only reason why Android has such shit upgrade lifetimes.
Android itself doesn't have a strict requirement for an updated kernel. It will typically run fine on the original kernel tree the SoC launched with.
OnePlus occasionally does this, they are currently rolling out Android 10 for the OnePlus 5 and 5T, based on the original kernel tree. That's a 3 year old device (and I hate that I'm using a 3 year old device as my best example)
It seems like most Android vendors simply choose not to offer extended updates.
Android itself doesn't have a strict requirement for an updated kernel. It will typically run fine on the original kernel tree the SoC launched with.
OnePlus occasionally does this, they are currently rolling out Android 10 for the OnePlus 5 and 5T, based on the original kernel tree. That's a 3 year old device (and I hate that I'm using a 3 year old device as my best example)
It seems like most Android vendors simply choose not to offer extended updates.
Android device manufacturers make their money when you buy a new device. Apple, on the other hand, makes money when you buy apps (in addition to making money on device sales I'm sure). They have an incentive to make sure that the latest OS runs on as many devices as possible, so that developers can release their apps to a wider audience, and so that Apple can make more money. Google wants apps to run on as many devices as possible, so that's why they bend over backwards to support older devices with their SDK. Samsung doesn't have any incentive to update the Galaxy S6 since that won't bring them any additional revenue.
Wasn't Project Treble created a few years back to solve this problem? I'm wondering what the current state of it is, because I haven't seen the effects of it yet.
It made it easier for manufacturers to create updates. Doesn't mean that they will release update for longer and take advantage of it though
The postmarketOS project is trying to port these old Android devices to run on a mainline kernel, wherever feasible. It's non-trivial work, especially if you expect to submit patches upstream - I can see OEM SoC manufacturers running into issues with that. The whole Device Tree arrangement was intended to simplify this work, but a lot of hardware still comes with plenty of weird, one-off, entirely undocumented hacks. Sometimes it's a wonder how these devices can even boot at all!
Another problem is that most users don't know what Android is and even less what version they are using.
If anything, a new update changing anything in the UX might be met with negativity.
So OEMs have even less reasons to care sadly.
If anything, a new update changing anything in the UX might be met with negativity.
So OEMs have even less reasons to care sadly.
Kinda explains why Nvidia was probably the best when it came to Android updates from my experience. They made the SOC themselves and had access to the drivers
Yeaaaaaah, I don’t buy that as the thing that holds most manufacturers back. It’s absolutely gotta be upgrade incentive.
I have no ability to contribute to this technical analysis, other than to say Apple would never expect an average user to know what a "kernel" is or why it has anything to do with their phone being out of date. I'm sure 100% valid issue here but this is like telling a customer about your back office problems while ignoring their needs. Phones and computers are nice when they're as simple to use as a toaster.
Google doesn't expect an average user to know that either. The difference from such a user's perspectice is just that Android devices become unable to run the most recent software more quickly than iOS ones. The post above is discussing the underlying causes of that. You are on a website called "Hacker News".
If you bought an iPhone 6S Plus 128GB at launch, it cost you $949. $189.80 per supported year so far.
If you bought a Pixel 1 128GB at launch, it cost you $749. $249.67 per supported year over 3 years.
(The iPhone 6S Plus has same 1080p resolution as the standard size Pixel phone, which is why I use them as the base, but for folks wondering...)
If you bought a Pixel 1 XL 128GB at launch with the higher resolution screen, it cost you $849. $283 per supported year over 3 years.
If you bought a Pixel 1 128GB at launch, it cost you $749. $249.67 per supported year over 3 years.
(The iPhone 6S Plus has same 1080p resolution as the standard size Pixel phone, which is why I use them as the base, but for folks wondering...)
If you bought a Pixel 1 XL 128GB at launch with the higher resolution screen, it cost you $849. $283 per supported year over 3 years.
If you bought an iPhone SE 64gb at launch, it cost you $499. $120 per support year so far.
best. smartphone. ever.
(I actually just dug mine out to give it another go, but the battery is nuked from sitting untouched for eighteen months :\ )
best. smartphone. ever.
(I actually just dug mine out to give it another go, but the battery is nuked from sitting untouched for eighteen months :\ )
Try doing a battery replacement. I bought one off Amazon for $20 and it came with all the necessary tools. The process was pretty easy if you watch a few guides on YouTube beforehand.
> If you bought an iPhone SE 64gb at launch, it cost you $499. $120 per support year so far.
I was paid to buy my SE (https://www.reddit.com/r/NoContract/comments/6lyjyl/cheap_pr...)!
I was paid to buy my SE (https://www.reddit.com/r/NoContract/comments/6lyjyl/cheap_pr...)!
I can't wait for the iPhone 12 announcement. Rumor has it that we'll finally be able to upgrade to a newer small iPhone.
Apparently it's not that small, sadly :( But it might be the only one I can buy as my iPhone SE ages out of the support window soon.
It's said to be smaller than the new SE and just a couple of millimeters bigger than the original SE.
>the 5.4-inch iPhone won’t be much bigger than the original (2016) 4-inch iPhone SE 131 x 64 mm (5.15 x 2.51-inches)
https://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2020/05/07/apple-ip...
>the 5.4-inch iPhone won’t be much bigger than the original (2016) 4-inch iPhone SE 131 x 64 mm (5.15 x 2.51-inches)
https://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2020/05/07/apple-ip...
It's closer in size to the new iPhone SE than the old one :(
Such a rumor has been circling every year since the original iPhone SE was released.
I do still really hope so though...
I do still really hope so though...
I finally bit the bullet and upgraded from a SE, compromising on the size of the phone. I already notice increased wrist stress and place more sideways weight than is optimal on my pinky (to hold the phone up but also be able to reach single-handed).
So, knowing how life works, we can guarantee that Apple will release a small form factor phone as part of their next offering ;)
So, knowing how life works, we can guarantee that Apple will release a small form factor phone as part of their next offering ;)
You're not alone!
I'm die hard fan of SE (SE ONE of course!) and form factor is perfect for me.
I'm die hard fan of SE (SE ONE of course!) and form factor is perfect for me.
The update cycle on Android is not so straightforward. For instance RCS messaging, a newly added feature, is also available on Pixel 1 and older devices because such updates are directly sent via playstore to all the phones. So you don't really need full OS updates like in iOS.
Also, you are forgetting that Android phones drop in price almost immediately, so it's not fair to compare launch prices. For instance my Pixel 4 was essentially 74000JPY just 2 months after launch compared to 120000JPY iPhone 11 Pro year round.
Also, you are forgetting that Android phones drop in price almost immediately, so it's not fair to compare launch prices. For instance my Pixel 4 was essentially 74000JPY just 2 months after launch compared to 120000JPY iPhone 11 Pro year round.
You lose major OS updates after 2 years and security updates after 3. You really shouldn't be using a phone that's no longer getting security updates even if the apps themselves are getting updates.
Even at those prices, the iPhone is still a bit less expensive per supported year.
Even at those prices, the iPhone is still a bit less expensive per supported year.
Pixel phones get 3 years of full OS updates, not 2.
The difference comes out to be negligible 666JPY/year. And Samsung phones get even cheaper after launch, couple that with their 4 years of security updates their cost/year is substantially lower than Pixel or iPhone.
The difference comes out to be negligible 666JPY/year. And Samsung phones get even cheaper after launch, couple that with their 4 years of security updates their cost/year is substantially lower than Pixel or iPhone.
Well, one Pixel got three OS updates, but there has been no change in their written support policy that I've seen.
Also, they cut off that particular Pixel from further updates right after switching to the .0 version of the new OS.
Who in their right mind wants to be stuck with the buggy .0 version of an OS?
Also, they cut off that particular Pixel from further updates right after switching to the .0 version of the new OS.
Who in their right mind wants to be stuck with the buggy .0 version of an OS?
> Well, one Pixel got three OS updates, but there has been no change in their written support policy that I've seen.
https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/10/4/16403922/g... Every Pixel has 3 year of support mentioned in it's support page.
> Who in their right mind wants to be stuck with the buggy .0 version of an OS?
Android updates have changed over time, they didn't do 9.1 or 10.1 updates at all. All bug fixes are pushed alongside security patches. And Pixel 1 got 4 updates on Android 10, last one being especially a month late due to fixing of all final bugs.
https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/10/4/16403922/g... Every Pixel has 3 year of support mentioned in it's support page.
> Who in their right mind wants to be stuck with the buggy .0 version of an OS?
Android updates have changed over time, they didn't do 9.1 or 10.1 updates at all. All bug fixes are pushed alongside security patches. And Pixel 1 got 4 updates on Android 10, last one being especially a month late due to fixing of all final bugs.
Two years of OS updates with an additional year of security updates is not the same thing as three years of OS updates.
As far as the Pixel 1, the people I knew who installed Android 10 on it regretted the decision. The couple of patches they got before getting cut off definitely did not iron out all the bugs.
As far as the Pixel 1, the people I knew who installed Android 10 on it regretted the decision. The couple of patches they got before getting cut off definitely did not iron out all the bugs.
> Two years of OS updates with an additional year of security updates is not the same thing as three years of OS updates.
I don't see what your problem here is? Every Pixel gets 3 year of FULL OS UPDATES. Not 2 years OS + 1 year Security updates.
> As far as the Pixel 1, the people I knew who installed Android 10 on it regretted the decision. The couple of patches they got before getting cut off definitely did not iron out all the bugs.
Android folks tend to moan and complain a lot. Just look at /r/Android. All my non-tech-enthusiasts friends using Pixels have never complained about anything.
I don't see what your problem here is? Every Pixel gets 3 year of FULL OS UPDATES. Not 2 years OS + 1 year Security updates.
> As far as the Pixel 1, the people I knew who installed Android 10 on it regretted the decision. The couple of patches they got before getting cut off definitely did not iron out all the bugs.
Android folks tend to moan and complain a lot. Just look at /r/Android. All my non-tech-enthusiasts friends using Pixels have never complained about anything.
If Google has indeed changed their support policy, it's going to take more than an article asking if Google has done so to serve as a citation.
>If Google is indeed adding another year, it would at least move closer to matching the lengthy span of time that Apple’s iPhones continue to receive new features and operating system updates. Security updates are also promised for three years, but that was already the case with the original Pixels.
Also, you'll have to excuse me if I take the word of people I know when they say getting Android 10 right before they were cut off from all other updates resulted in a buggy mess.
>If Google is indeed adding another year, it would at least move closer to matching the lengthy span of time that Apple’s iPhones continue to receive new features and operating system updates. Security updates are also promised for three years, but that was already the case with the original Pixels.
Also, you'll have to excuse me if I take the word of people I know when they say getting Android 10 right before they were cut off from all other updates resulted in a buggy mess.
At least Pixel 1 is one of the officially-supported lineageos devices, with very straight-forward installation step. Once google stop supporting it, jumping to lineageos is easy enough to do and will give the device another years of life. Nexus 6, an almost 6 years old device, is still officially supported by lineageos, so Pixel 1 will likely get supported well past 5 years as well (assuming the maintainers are motivated enough to keep working on it).
On the other hand, if you use a less popular device, your option will be much more limited as the device get older.
On the other hand, if you use a less popular device, your option will be much more limited as the device get older.
I like that the updates are offered. I wonder how usable these older devices are after updates.
I have an iPhone 8 which hasn't been usable since the last update. Most functions work but the performance has taken a nose dive. Some apps crash randomly.
I would not use that device as my daily phone.
I have an iPhone 8 which hasn't been usable since the last update. Most functions work but the performance has taken a nose dive. Some apps crash randomly.
I would not use that device as my daily phone.
I have an iPhone 7 I bought for $110 recently on Swappa to mess around with iOS development. It runs the current iOS 13 version quite well.
I'd suggest checking your battery health and maybe doing a reset.
I'd suggest checking your battery health and maybe doing a reset.
[deleted]
I’ve had the 6S since shortly after launch and it still runs smooth. The only issue is the battery which I can probably get replaced if I wanted to ditch my portable battery. Prior to this, I had an iPhone 4 for many years. While it wasn’t apparent at the start, switching to the Apple ecosystem for my mobile devices has ultimately saved me a lot more money compared to my friends and family that use Android phones.
I've still been using an iPhone 8 Plus as a daily driver since launch. Right after updates, or after not being used for a bit, there's some indexing that slows down the phone a little, but that recovers pretty quickly with some additional use.
I'm even running the iOS 14 Developer beta on my 8 Plus right now and it still runs like a dream.
I'm even running the iOS 14 Developer beta on my 8 Plus right now and it still runs like a dream.
I have the original SE. Same chip as the 6s.
It's smooth as hell, even on the beta.
I'm guessing the iPhone 8 has some other issue (full storage?). Mine has had great performance and no app crashes since I bought it.
I’m reading your comment on my iPhone 8. It runs as well as the day I got it.
I had a 6S Plus until earlier this year when the port went on the fritz and car play started acting erratically. That was pretty much my sole reason for upgrading.
Performance wasn’t great for a while but after the whole battery kerfuffle last year I took it into the store to get the battery replaced for $30 and it felt like a brand new phone after that.
Performance wasn’t great for a while but after the whole battery kerfuffle last year I took it into the store to get the battery replaced for $30 and it felt like a brand new phone after that.
Like the siblings say, you may have some other problem. I have an iphone 7 that I always keep up to the date. I didn't notice any performace problem, and my battery is supposedly degraded (the settings page says I should change it).
My near-new iPhone 7 is snappy with latest iOS.
Check battery health?
Check battery health?
Thanks for all the hints. So it seems it's the device itself and not the update.
I have an iPhone 8 Plus. Still runs like its brand new. Perhaps a battery replacement or system restore would remedy your issues.
My iPhone 8 has been my daily driver for 3 years now and runs like fresh out of the box. Battery degradation is the only issue but that's just natural wear and tear.
The screen on the Pixel is 0.5 inch smaller than the 6s plus
Correct and updated my original post. My point still stands about resolution, though. The 6s has a 4.7" 750p screen, so doesn't exactly compare to the 5" 1080p Pixel screen. But even with that screen size difference, the iPhone wins. Handily.
You're completely ignoring the flagship killer market here.
You can buy a poco f1 (Snapdragon 835) for 250$ that will perform just as well as any pixel.
For that price you can buy a new flagship killer every year.
You can buy a poco f1 (Snapdragon 835) for 250$ that will perform just as well as any pixel.
For that price you can buy a new flagship killer every year.
I think a key (deceptively absent) point of that comparison is that the premium price on Android is coming from replacing it after 3 years. So basically from years 3-5 you are using a 2018 Pixel 3 as opposed to a 2015 iPhone 6S Plus.
But that's totally the opposite of the common (and maybe false) narrative that Apple is pushing users to upgrade faster than their counterparts.
Performance of the cheapest iPhone available today is greater than the most expensive android phone, so this is a moot point. You need to upgrade the Android hardware just to maintain parity.
CPU performance, sure. But there are other things like power consumption, cameras, LTE performance and band support, etc that are also a factor.
Personally, I dont think CPU performance has been an important factor for years on midrange and higher phones, but that's a matter of opinion.
Personally, I dont think CPU performance has been an important factor for years on midrange and higher phones, but that's a matter of opinion.
CPU performance directly impacts performance of those other elements.
The iPhone 5s got six years of OS and security updates.
The six got cut off after "only" five years because it didn't have enough RAM to run the current version of iOS.
Now the original SE and 6s will also receive that sixth year of support.
If you bought that original iPhone SE, that works out to $67 per supported year.
The six got cut off after "only" five years because it didn't have enough RAM to run the current version of iOS.
Now the original SE and 6s will also receive that sixth year of support.
If you bought that original iPhone SE, that works out to $67 per supported year.
Apple released updates to iOS devices back to the 2011 iPhone 4s last year.
https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/07/22/apple-issues-ios-...
https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/07/22/apple-issues-ios-...
I find it surprising that the 5S has had 6 more updates since it was dropped from support when iOS 13 was released. The last was just over a month ago.
I hope that this is a sign that Apple will continue to provide security updates even after they no longer provide feature updates.
Of course, the upgrade to the 1st gen SE is the obvious path for those who had a 5S so continued upgrades aren't so important, but it might be relevant with the 1st gen SE if Apple don't release a smaller iPhone 12.
I have got my Android phone with twice the resolution of iPhone 6S for $100. And recently updated (after long delay) to Android 10. Another year to go or more.
So it is more like 25$ per year for Android.
Not a perfect phone but good enough.
So it is more like 25$ per year for Android.
Not a perfect phone but good enough.
It's not reasonable to compare on resolution alone. Not to mention, the iPhone 6S and Pixel were both flagship devices in the period OP is discussing.
What phone is it. I seem to average to ~200usd per year on Android as well, in order to have a functional device.
I went for Xperia 10. Camera sucks but otherwise the phone does the job remarkably well. 90% functionality for 10% price and I don't need to worry about loosing or breaking it.
Of course the phone is de-Googled and runs on stock European Android without operator's crapware which is also nice about Xperias. Full factory install takes 15 minutes with newflasher.
I do not enjoy iPhones and Apple's miserable software in general. I am running ChromeOS/debian on my Macbook Pro (the last good model) for years now.
Guess that makes me odd guy..
Of course the phone is de-Googled and runs on stock European Android without operator's crapware which is also nice about Xperias. Full factory install takes 15 minutes with newflasher.
I do not enjoy iPhones and Apple's miserable software in general. I am running ChromeOS/debian on my Macbook Pro (the last good model) for years now.
Guess that makes me odd guy..
Better resolution yet takes 5 seconds to open and paint the app drawer... great.
Yeah, but I can install one of the many unofficial Android builds over and old Android phone.
My mom still uses my old Galaxy S2, which probably costed 50 euros/year over almost 10 years and supports Android 10 thanks to LineageOS.
An iPhone's faith is to become a doorstop no matter what.
My mom still uses my old Galaxy S2, which probably costed 50 euros/year over almost 10 years and supports Android 10 thanks to LineageOS.
An iPhone's faith is to become a doorstop no matter what.
Most Android phones don't have a 'supported' version of LineageOS. It's very hit or miss, usually miss. Hence why my Nexus 6 and my girlfriend's Pixel have supported versions but none of the other Nexus or Pixel phones do. Or the HTC One m8 has a supported build but no other HTC phones do.
Google phones are only popular in the US, but Android users are mostly outside of the US.
In Europe the most popular smartphone brand is Samsung.
Lineage supports basically all of their models.
Also: Nexus support is not bad
Nexus 6 and 6p are supported
https://wiki.lineageos.org/devices/#google
They even support all my Xiaomi devices, including a very old Mi pad second edition.
It's probably the OS that actively supports more devices in existence right now.
iOS doesn't even support all the iPhones.
In Europe the most popular smartphone brand is Samsung.
Lineage supports basically all of their models.
Also: Nexus support is not bad
Nexus 6 and 6p are supported
https://wiki.lineageos.org/devices/#google
They even support all my Xiaomi devices, including a very old Mi pad second edition.
It's probably the OS that actively supports more devices in existence right now.
iOS doesn't even support all the iPhones.
"Warning: The Google Nexus 6P is no longer maintained. A build guide is available for developers that would like to make private builds, or even restart official support."
The devices link you included links to legacy builds/devices that are discontinued. The only Google phones currently supported on LineageOS are the Nexus 6 and Pixel 1/1XL. As another data point, the Samsung Galaxy S6 and S7 have no active support either while the S4 and S5 do.
This is where you should look: https://download.lineageos.org/
Apple's upcoming iOS version -- not just current, but the one that's not even released yet -- supports all iPhones released in the last 5 years. There's just no comparison.
The devices link you included links to legacy builds/devices that are discontinued. The only Google phones currently supported on LineageOS are the Nexus 6 and Pixel 1/1XL. As another data point, the Samsung Galaxy S6 and S7 have no active support either while the S4 and S5 do.
This is where you should look: https://download.lineageos.org/
Apple's upcoming iOS version -- not just current, but the one that's not even released yet -- supports all iPhones released in the last 5 years. There's just no comparison.
> There's just no comparison
Exactly.
One supports just a few devices, the other supports hundreds.
One is free, the other is not.
Guess which is which.
if Nexus 6P is not supported is Google's fault
Nexus 6P was a bad phone, with sever problems, it was discontinued after a year and you could obtain a compensation if you had one that was faulty.
Still the community tried to support it
They decided wasn't worth anymore
The community is people, Apple is not people.
Exactly.
One supports just a few devices, the other supports hundreds.
One is free, the other is not.
Guess which is which.
if Nexus 6P is not supported is Google's fault
Nexus 6P was a bad phone, with sever problems, it was discontinued after a year and you could obtain a compensation if you had one that was faulty.
Still the community tried to support it
They decided wasn't worth anymore
The community is people, Apple is not people.
You can jailbreak it and mess with it however you want.
Unofficially of course.
What's the point if you can't update the OS and if you do you have to jailbreak it again, every time, until you reach a point where you device is not supported or there's no jailbreak available and you are back to the doorstop?
Unofficial Android builds are fully supported, maintained and updatable builds, they simply are not released by the phone vendor or Google.
Unofficial Android builds are fully supported, maintained and updatable builds, they simply are not released by the phone vendor or Google.
If you can’t update it, the jailbreak is permanent, it’s again by the people as you describe.
> If you can’t update it
That's the original point
you can' update your phone, because it's not yours
If you're happy, good for you, but it's not ok.
That's the original point
you can' update your phone, because it's not yours
If you're happy, good for you, but it's not ok.
I'm unsure whether I'll ever forgive Google/Verizon for only offering 2 years of support for the Samsung Galaxy Nexus. After all the promises of "this is our flagship phone and we'll absolutely support it!" and then... only 2 years?
I've my issues with Apple like anyone else, but at least my phone is supported for a reasonable amount of time - 5 years or so?
I've my issues with Apple like anyone else, but at least my phone is supported for a reasonable amount of time - 5 years or so?
This is one of the many reasons why I switched to the iPhone after 7yrs on Android, and I'm also getting my mother a iPhone as soon as possible.
My mom is used to android phones, its complex but she's understood the basic design language and can navigate the phone easily. Whenever she needs help though, its a massive struggle for me to do tech support over phone / video call. Each android phone is different, and we've never had the same phone, and we both get frustrated because the menus and the steps needed to modify settings is different.
With an iPhone though, regardless of the iPhone model, I can send her a screen recording that she can easily replicate on her phone. Consistency is extremely valuable for a non power-user, and only iPhones offer such consistency over multiple generations of iPhones, and iOS updates. Yes there are changes, such as the switch from TouchId to FaceId in iPhone X, but they are incremental, as compared to the confusing experience of switching from a Samsung device to a OnePlus or a Xiaomi device.
My mom is used to android phones, its complex but she's understood the basic design language and can navigate the phone easily. Whenever she needs help though, its a massive struggle for me to do tech support over phone / video call. Each android phone is different, and we've never had the same phone, and we both get frustrated because the menus and the steps needed to modify settings is different.
With an iPhone though, regardless of the iPhone model, I can send her a screen recording that she can easily replicate on her phone. Consistency is extremely valuable for a non power-user, and only iPhones offer such consistency over multiple generations of iPhones, and iOS updates. Yes there are changes, such as the switch from TouchId to FaceId in iPhone X, but they are incremental, as compared to the confusing experience of switching from a Samsung device to a OnePlus or a Xiaomi device.
Wait.. Apple support a 5 year old phone? Why the heck am I still using an Android device? I have a Galaxy S8, while I'm still lucky enough to get the occasional security update, I won't be getting the latest Android release (at least officially), although the CPU in it is probably perfectly more than capable of running Android 11.
I have been considering getting a new phone and I keep eyeing up the iPhone 11 Pro, mostly because of the longevity of available software updates. Secondly, with an Apple I'm not subject to waiting for the carrier to push out the update.
I have been considering getting a new phone and I keep eyeing up the iPhone 11 Pro, mostly because of the longevity of available software updates. Secondly, with an Apple I'm not subject to waiting for the carrier to push out the update.
[deleted]
Companies don't backwardly support old phones so they can ship new ones. Planned obsolescence.
However, Apple rightly foster "brand loyalty" (awful phrase), by doing exactly the opposite. And with the knowledge that people sell phones second hand, thus increasing Apple's market share, and future customers.
It sounds like Samsung could learn a lesson or two.
A phone does have a shelf life though (4g, 5g...), but it's not as short as these companies would like you to believe.
However, Apple rightly foster "brand loyalty" (awful phrase), by doing exactly the opposite. And with the knowledge that people sell phones second hand, thus increasing Apple's market share, and future customers.
It sounds like Samsung could learn a lesson or two.
A phone does have a shelf life though (4g, 5g...), but it's not as short as these companies would like you to believe.
UMTS (3G) is still up and running in many locations, sometimes HSDPA (3.5G) is faster than congested/low signal LTE and it still is totally adequate even for video streaming.
Those are early 2000's technologies which telcos are upgrading from to increase subscriber density, but on the customer optics, they are mostly equivalent to 4G.
Those are early 2000's technologies which telcos are upgrading from to increase subscriber density, but on the customer optics, they are mostly equivalent to 4G.
This makes the old 4" SE still viable too! Apple was still selling them until late last year – it's a fantastic little phone (with an obsolete camera) – and you can get them refurbished for about $100. Highly recommended if you want to hold and use your phone with one hand comfortably, or forget if it's in your pocket!
The worst part of Android which Apple said screw you to was that each Samsung phone and others has to released with a firmware bundle specific to a carrier for each country (Orange/Vodacom etc ...).
It's true, Apple products age very well. I don't like iOS much, I hate its restrictions, but this is the number one reason for why I like Apple's products.
I'm a previous Android user, my iPhone 8 is almost 3 years old and I'm thinking of keeping it for another year or 2. I also have 2 Macbook Pro laptops at home from 2012 and 2015 respectively and I actually prefer them over the 2019 model from work. And a first generation iPad Pro (2015) that's better than what I see on the market for Android.
Was just thinking of getting a Samsung tablet, but this is making me reconsider. All of my Apple products still work and are kept up to date.
I'm a previous Android user, my iPhone 8 is almost 3 years old and I'm thinking of keeping it for another year or 2. I also have 2 Macbook Pro laptops at home from 2012 and 2015 respectively and I actually prefer them over the 2019 model from work. And a first generation iPad Pro (2015) that's better than what I see on the market for Android.
Was just thinking of getting a Samsung tablet, but this is making me reconsider. All of my Apple products still work and are kept up to date.
I'll be honest. It's true that it makes Android look a bit bad, at least the ecosystem. But this only matter in the iOS world, where the the whole park always move to the latest version, and you're required to get the latest version. Because on android, you can still download apps from the PlayStore for an Android KitKat. On iOS, if you're 2 versions behind, your device is getting pointless.
I think the problem with those devices is more that security updates for the OS itself aren't released anymore, not that new apps don't work.
My mom doesn't have a lot of apps installed on her phone, just something like maps, the local transit provider app and whatsapp. She sometimes browses the web.
I actually installed LineageOS on her phone a while ago, but I think even that isn't updated anymore (for her particular model).
My mom doesn't have a lot of apps installed on her phone, just something like maps, the local transit provider app and whatsapp. She sometimes browses the web.
I actually installed LineageOS on her phone a while ago, but I think even that isn't updated anymore (for her particular model).
The App Store still supports older iOS builds.
I have a first generation iPad and the App Store will still allow me to download compatible apps. The Kindle app still allows me to download purchased books.
Apple has supported downloading the “last compatible version” for years. I wiped a first generation iPad and as of last year, I could reload Netflix, Hulu, Plex, Google Drive, and a few other apps still worked. It last saw an update in 2012.
When I first bought an iPhone (iPhone 5, I was a slow learner), Android's track record with updates was terrible but Google/ Samsung/ etc said it was going to get better and promises were made. I was skeptical and bought the iPhone. Every year since then, it seems like more promises and efforts get made by the Android crowd but it's never gotten more than marginally better and only for the top end phones.
There are other reasons I don't use Android, but this was very distinctly the single reason I bought iOS initially and I've never regretted it.
There are other reasons I don't use Android, but this was very distinctly the single reason I bought iOS initially and I've never regretted it.
Almost five years ago I got a OnePlus Two when it was released and about the same time my then work gave me a new iPhone 6 (unrequested by me, and when they appeared they told me I had to take it).
I still use that OP2 as my daily driver, now with LineageOS 17.1 (Android 10, the current version) installed on it. It's not blazing fast but the battery is at 80% capacity and it otherwise works well (and has a 3.5mm jack).
This obviously is the enthusiast option, but the first OnePlus had Cyanogenmod as the factory installed OS on there. If their relationship had continued and Cyanogen hadn't imploded it's quite possible that the OP2 would have the latest build on there officially as LineageOS is what Cyanogen became. Unfortunately there are no builds of 17 for the OP1.
That iPhone of the same vintage? I gladly gave it back when it was stuck on the then just-outdated iOS 12 and there wasn't much of an obvious future for it.
I still use that OP2 as my daily driver, now with LineageOS 17.1 (Android 10, the current version) installed on it. It's not blazing fast but the battery is at 80% capacity and it otherwise works well (and has a 3.5mm jack).
This obviously is the enthusiast option, but the first OnePlus had Cyanogenmod as the factory installed OS on there. If their relationship had continued and Cyanogen hadn't imploded it's quite possible that the OP2 would have the latest build on there officially as LineageOS is what Cyanogen became. Unfortunately there are no builds of 17 for the OP1.
That iPhone of the same vintage? I gladly gave it back when it was stuck on the then just-outdated iOS 12 and there wasn't much of an obvious future for it.
Google updated the original Pixel to Android 10, which was nice because that was beyond stated major updates period. That was followed by a single security update before it was abandoned.
I don't understand why they wouldn't keep issuing security updates when they already did the hard part of the major update.
I don't understand why they wouldn't keep issuing security updates when they already did the hard part of the major update.
I'd sure appreciate it if Android phones got five years of support. Right now my GS8+ is relegated to quarterly security updates only, and even that is a pretty big achievement in the Android world.
It's probably time that I upgraded it, but nothing new even appeals to me anymore due to nearly all phones ditching the headphone jack, even the phablets. The "newest" phone I can find that ticks all the boxes I want (wireless charging, headphone jack, expandable memory slot) would have to be a regular S10, which is over a year old at this point.
It's probably time that I upgraded it, but nothing new even appeals to me anymore due to nearly all phones ditching the headphone jack, even the phablets. The "newest" phone I can find that ticks all the boxes I want (wireless charging, headphone jack, expandable memory slot) would have to be a regular S10, which is over a year old at this point.
If you think that a smartphone should be supported for much longer than 5 years, consider Librem 5 [0] or Pinephone [1].
[0] https://puri.sm/products/librem-5/
[1] https://www.pine64.org/pinephone/
[0] https://puri.sm/products/librem-5/
[1] https://www.pine64.org/pinephone/
Knowing basically nothing about either of these, I'm super curious as to if either company will exist in 5 years. I've set myself a reminder and am looking forward to the result.
You do not need those companies for the software support. You only need upstreamed drivers for Linux kernel for the hardware. This is what these companies are doing and Android doesn’t.
Similarly, my laptop from 10+ years ago works flawlessly With Debian 10.
Similarly, my laptop from 10+ years ago works flawlessly With Debian 10.
Sure, but it's nice to have an active company for repairs, replacement parts, support, etc.
It'll certainly keep running without a company backing it, but there have been so many similar initiative, I'm personally curious how this one will turn out.
It'll certainly keep running without a company backing it, but there have been so many similar initiative, I'm personally curious how this one will turn out.
It's still not even close to the oldest PC Windows 10 supports. I've found Windows 10 to be happy on ~any PC with more than one core, 4+ GB of RAM, and, most important, an SSD.
I still think the SSD requirement doesn't make sense.
RAM is cheap, and XP/win7 worked well without HDD, so I don't understand why SSD matters.
RAM is cheap, and XP/win7 worked well without HDD, so I don't understand why SSD matters.
Hard drive speed is one of the slowest parts of your computer (after accessing remote systems over the network). It usually becomes the bottleneck after increasing RAM for most users, in my experience. The bus that transfers data from your hard drive to the CPU is much faster than what many spinning disks can actually manage. Address that, and many performance issues go away and you approach the essential limit of your system (bus speeds).
Of course, I say this primarily from the perspective of a developer, where hard drive access is frequent when building systems. But a lot of workloads are similarly HDD dependent, but maybe not to the same extreme.
Of course, I say this primarily from the perspective of a developer, where hard drive access is frequent when building systems. But a lot of workloads are similarly HDD dependent, but maybe not to the same extreme.
> Hard drive speed is one of the slowest parts of your computer
I guess the SSD is also slower than the RAM, so generally, storage is always slower. Ethernet/wifi is generally as fast as a HDD, in order of magnitude.
There are many possible ways to avoid accessing the HDD, by buffering things and storing them on ram as often as possible. If HDD worked well on windows 7/xp/linux desktops, there are no credible arguments why it would not work properly on windows 10.
Again I would say the problem is Wirth's law, which here easily benefits SSD. At one point, for an OS like windows is becoming so much complex that it becomes just impossible to optimize things appropriately for something else than a HDD. Backward compatibility and hardware compatibility might be one source of the problem, but I'm sure there are other things at play.
I'm suspecting that in the end, the hardware people and people at microsoft decided to abandon the idea of having an OS that works well on a HDD, because the SSD industry would obviously benefit from this.
Wirth's law has completely replaced Moore's law, in my view. I say this over and over, but when climate problems will cause economic problems, computing will return to an era of lightweight software and hardware.
I guess the SSD is also slower than the RAM, so generally, storage is always slower. Ethernet/wifi is generally as fast as a HDD, in order of magnitude.
There are many possible ways to avoid accessing the HDD, by buffering things and storing them on ram as often as possible. If HDD worked well on windows 7/xp/linux desktops, there are no credible arguments why it would not work properly on windows 10.
Again I would say the problem is Wirth's law, which here easily benefits SSD. At one point, for an OS like windows is becoming so much complex that it becomes just impossible to optimize things appropriately for something else than a HDD. Backward compatibility and hardware compatibility might be one source of the problem, but I'm sure there are other things at play.
I'm suspecting that in the end, the hardware people and people at microsoft decided to abandon the idea of having an OS that works well on a HDD, because the SSD industry would obviously benefit from this.
Wirth's law has completely replaced Moore's law, in my view. I say this over and over, but when climate problems will cause economic problems, computing will return to an era of lightweight software and hardware.
I can confirm, that even on beta 1, it runs really, really, really well on the 6s.
I wonder if they rewrote all of the UI in swift or just really cleaned up the libraries because the perceived speed, that thing makes a end user device feel fast because it quickly moves you from on screen to the next when you command it to, is improved over 13.5. I can also confirm that it runs really well on an ipad (5 i think) with the same generation SoC, though I have seen more bugs with things like widgets.
In my limited testing, all of the apps I run often work, i love that it tells me when an app is trying to use network discovery and allow me to block it.
I might install it on my daily use phone by beta 2 its so good.
That is the single reason I switched to an iPhone. I don't want to pay US$800 for a phone that will stop being supported after 2, 3 years.
> Even with a phone that old, Apple is still sending it the latest iOS 14 features, which will allow people still holding onto that device to use it for at least another year.
I'm running an iPad 3 with iOS9 and a OnePlus 3 running Android 9 that I bought off Craigslist for $200. I know it's like driving a 20 year old Corolla, but does lack of the latest OS make a device unusable? If my current car worked I wouldn't buy a new one to get auto distance cruise control.
I haven't found features on smartphones very compelling probably since 2015. Fingerprint sensor is nice, more speed is nice, but the complexity of what I use it for isn't that significant.
I'm running an iPad 3 with iOS9 and a OnePlus 3 running Android 9 that I bought off Craigslist for $200. I know it's like driving a 20 year old Corolla, but does lack of the latest OS make a device unusable? If my current car worked I wouldn't buy a new one to get auto distance cruise control.
I haven't found features on smartphones very compelling probably since 2015. Fingerprint sensor is nice, more speed is nice, but the complexity of what I use it for isn't that significant.
One of the central tenets of Apple's marketing since forever is that price != value, and this is the manifestation of that idea. You might be paying more for an iOS device, but unlike Android ones, it maintains its value for years on.
Even better iPad Air2 was released a year earlier than iPhone 6S and it's getting iPadOS 14; it's like Galaxy Tab 3 Lite which was released with Android 4.2.2 Jelly Bean and never got even a single OS upgrade getting Android 11.
Little-known fact:
As part of the "Android Enterprise Recommended" program, some Android devices (such as rugged devices) receive FIVE years of updates.
Unfortunately they are all very expensive and most of these devices are not standard phones.
As part of the "Android Enterprise Recommended" program, some Android devices (such as rugged devices) receive FIVE years of updates.
Unfortunately they are all very expensive and most of these devices are not standard phones.
Hmm, according to this page[1], google pixel 1 has the android enterprise recommended seal, but it seem to be out of support after 3 years. Last guaranteed security update is October 2019 according to this page[2].
[1] https://androidenterprisepartners.withgoogle.com/device/#!/1...
[2] https://support.google.com/pixelphone/answer/4457705?hl=en
[1] https://androidenterprisepartners.withgoogle.com/device/#!/1...
[2] https://support.google.com/pixelphone/answer/4457705?hl=en
Pixel 1 is not a rugged device
Yeah, but which one of those rugged devices that has five years of support? The page doesn't provide that information, and if we use the "android enterprise recommended" filter, it listed pixel phones that obviously don't have 5 years of support. Or are all those devices marked as "rugged" actually got 5 years of support? I tried going to some of the listed rugged device manufacturers website and they don't seem to indicate how long they'll going to support their device (unless the information is hidden somewhere).
It was mentioned here: https://9to5google.com/2018/09/05/google-android-enterprise-...
I much prefer Android over iOS, but this is the only reason I switched to an iPhone 11 last year.
iPhone SE (1st gen) will get iOS 14, too. “Be still, my heart.”
This is lovely news. I am rather new to the smartphone world, I hardly use my iPhone SE, which was about discontinued when I first bought it. I like the smallness of it, primarily.
What's interesting is the iPadOS supports A8-based iPads like the Air 2 and the Mini 4, while the new iOS does not support any A8-generation devices like the 6/6+.
I believe the iOS 13 cutoff was mostly a function of onboard RAM. (iPhone 6/6+ had a fairly anemic amount for what was being expected of them.)
The ability to install a custom OS like LineageOS again gives the advantage back to android
Spot on! Coincidence: my Samsung S6 is on LineageOS 17.1 since May - that is, Android 10 - and despite being an unofficial build, I've got everything covered - save a few minor glitches. Before that, it was on the last official update (7.0).
Seriously, the Note 3 and S4 have los support for Android 10. 6 year old devices.
Its not the exact same as vendors supporting it though since its los devs backporting Android 10 to 5 year obsolete kernels but it is the power of free software at work.
Its not the exact same as vendors supporting it though since its los devs backporting Android 10 to 5 year obsolete kernels but it is the power of free software at work.
Yeah, but that's something most people will never try.
Sigh .... as an Android user this really hurts.
Does it though? Most android users I know don't care how recent their OS is. Most Apple users I know don't care how recent their OS is. Most people I know don't update their OS because then they have to update a bunch of other stuff too.
In my family we have both iOS and Android devices. All Android devices are Android One devices receiving updates.
I wouldn't want unpatched old devices on my network.
Android One is quite successful from what I can tell. This is the reason.
Android One is quite successful from what I can tell. This is the reason.
The defining reason for my original switch back to iOS from Android was lack of confirmation that a security update would be released to my phone.
It absolutely impacts the reasoning for some iPhone and Android users.
edit: added words to the last sentence
It absolutely impacts the reasoning for some iPhone and Android users.
edit: added words to the last sentence
I think it's a very tiny number of user though. Most users don't care about a security update and many actively avoid them. A phone updating all the time is seen by many to be a bug, not a feature. If my car was constantly nagging me to take it into the shop to be optimized, I'd be pretty annoyed. If it was taking itself to the shop and coming back telling me I now needed to update my seat belts in order to work with it's newest updates I'd be further annoyed.
I switched from iPhone to Android because I end up breaking my phones after about two years and I can't be paying more per annum for a phone than for a car. I need an email client, web client, maps and sometimes a camera for taking a reference photo. It's astounding to me that the cost of meeting those needs seems to be increasing over time instead of decreasing.
We've seen over time how Apple uses software updates to aggressively force new hardware purchases. The latest OS doesn't support version X of the software, and more often than not your device doesn't support OS version Z so open up thy wallet and get the latest hardware. This is precisely the reason people are terrified of updating their software. It goes from working to not working. This impacts my reasoning for NOT buying Apple hardware.
EDIT: You know what, I change my mind. This gains some respect from me for Apple. I hate phones in general and I'm just grumpy.
I switched from iPhone to Android because I end up breaking my phones after about two years and I can't be paying more per annum for a phone than for a car. I need an email client, web client, maps and sometimes a camera for taking a reference photo. It's astounding to me that the cost of meeting those needs seems to be increasing over time instead of decreasing.
We've seen over time how Apple uses software updates to aggressively force new hardware purchases. The latest OS doesn't support version X of the software, and more often than not your device doesn't support OS version Z so open up thy wallet and get the latest hardware. This is precisely the reason people are terrified of updating their software. It goes from working to not working. This impacts my reasoning for NOT buying Apple hardware.
EDIT: You know what, I change my mind. This gains some respect from me for Apple. I hate phones in general and I'm just grumpy.
I don’t think your car comparison is a fair one. You don’t see your iPhone nag you to take it to an “Apple shop.” They usually update while you sleep.
My Tesla does the same thing, it’s a car that literally gets software updates while I sleep. And it’s AMAZING. I get new features (sometimes a new alarm system, one time a dash cam system, another time Spotify and once it made the car actually faster) for free! There’s no taking it to the shop or nagging or anything. This is an amazing feature.
On the android side you literally have phones that don’t get critical security patches - that’s the scariest type of “it doesn’t work anymore so you need to go buy new hardware” because you don’t even know you’re at risk.
Android devices not getting OS updates after two years, especially $800 android phones, is obscene. There’s no way to defend that.
My Tesla does the same thing, it’s a car that literally gets software updates while I sleep. And it’s AMAZING. I get new features (sometimes a new alarm system, one time a dash cam system, another time Spotify and once it made the car actually faster) for free! There’s no taking it to the shop or nagging or anything. This is an amazing feature.
On the android side you literally have phones that don’t get critical security patches - that’s the scariest type of “it doesn’t work anymore so you need to go buy new hardware” because you don’t even know you’re at risk.
Android devices not getting OS updates after two years, especially $800 android phones, is obscene. There’s no way to defend that.
And yet, cue the armchair commentators about how Apple tries to hobble your hardware to make you buy a replacement.
I hear this conspiracy theory so often from non-technical people. I think what's going on is that obviously this isn't being done intentionally, but rather each new release is mainly written for and performance tested on the newest Apple devices (not to mention obvious hardware differences like CPU instructions/speed/cache size/memory). Apple might test that everything works, but they're not on these older devices 24/7 that they'll notice slight degradations. Also, devices are not uniform. On some devices the flash memory has been written to countless times and degraded. Other people are running tons of crapware or have the storage full to the brim. Finally there's always going to be some psychological suggestion going on: if I tell you to look for a certain thing, you'll be more likely to notice it, real or not.
I used Android phones for several years before switching to an iPhone 8 two years ago. I think the major reason why manufacturers don't care to provide updates is because they don't expect those phones to last more than 2 years. It's not a joke. I've had some mid-range to expensive Android phones (HTC, Samsung, Motorola) and none of them lasted more 2 years. Whereas my wife's 6 year old iPhone 5s is still working! How do you explain that? Every Apple devices I've owned so far has been incredibly reliable and held their value really well. My wife's 6 year old Macbook air with 4 gigs of RAM still works fine and runs the latest Mac OS! I don't think I can get that level of support from any other vendor.
The fact that Samsung won't even provide Android 10 for my Note8 should be criminal, even by their policy of only updating their devices for two "major" revisions. They shipped it with Android 7 when Android 8 was already out.
Given the harm caused by cybercrime, plus the increased police work, governments really ought to make a minimum duration of security updates mandatory.. Phones are already required to meet a raft of various regulations.
That, and supported battery replacement from the oem is why I recently switched from Google Nexus and Pixel phones to an iPhone 11.
I called Motorola support once to ask about a battery replacement for a Moto G (3rd gen). They told me it was impossible and effectively that I should buy a new phone.
It’s been surprisingly easy to support various Apple devices.
I think the notch and home-screen-bar layouts were a bit tricky but they did have APIs in place and it was OK.
The biggest issue really was the 32-bit to 64-bit hardware transition; I remember seeing weird graphical issues because floating-point results were slightly different with float vs. double.
I think the notch and home-screen-bar layouts were a bit tricky but they did have APIs in place and it was OK.
The biggest issue really was the 32-bit to 64-bit hardware transition; I remember seeing weird graphical issues because floating-point results were slightly different with float vs. double.
Has anyone done a comparison to see when iOS 14 features were introduced into Android? I believe picture in picture works on the S7 (which was introduced 4 months after the 6S).
Normally I'd feel a bit bummed about missing features and long term support is a problem but there wasn't much that was new to Android.
Normally I'd feel a bit bummed about missing features and long term support is a problem but there wasn't much that was new to Android.
Nice work Apple. My 6S is having problems†, but I don't want to let it go. Headphone jack and lack of biometric scanning.
† Battery is shot and lightning connector bent from their impractical dock I fancied in years past. Very difficult now to get the perfect angle to allow charging.
† Battery is shot and lightning connector bent from their impractical dock I fancied in years past. Very difficult now to get the perfect angle to allow charging.
I guess the jacks need a clean-up after sometime. My lightning jack was not holding the charging cable anymore and I was super desperate to lose access to the phone during Holidays.
I went to an Apple Store and they just cleaned-up for me (walk-in). I bet the same applies to the headphone jack ;)
I went to an Apple Store and they just cleaned-up for me (walk-in). I bet the same applies to the headphone jack ;)
My phone's port is bent from use of these docks:
https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MGRM2AM/A/iphone-lightnin...
It looks good but after a few years destroys the port due to lack of support.
https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MGRM2AM/A/iphone-lightnin...
It looks good but after a few years destroys the port due to lack of support.
Also still have my 6S and have been a heavy user with it for years. It's also my main testing HW for iOS apps I maintain. Other than a decreased battery life, it's still kicking great.
I often compose music on the go in GarageBand on my iPhone.
I own several pairs of extremely high quality and highly accurate headphones, and; no - I don’t want to carry an adapter around for headphones that prevents charging while headphones are plugged in. That’s obviously logistically a no go for anyone performing live with an iPad. I’d never want to rely on battery power live.
Even if I hadn’t invested in my audio gear and headphones specifically so much, the latency on Bluetooth has made it a non option forever - unless I buy one of the select few W1 certified Beats units, which then is just an additional expense.
Apple does not currently offer, and it seems that they have no interest in offering, a phone that I will buy in the future. I couldn’t believe they pulled the headphone jack on the SE2, it seemed like the last ‘fuck you’ to the audio content creators they’ve claimed to support forever.
iOS 14 support on iPhone 6S means Apple keeps me as an iPhone user for maybe another year.
I will probably be downgrading to a dumbphone and an old, flash-drive modded iPod gen 3 or 4.
I own several pairs of extremely high quality and highly accurate headphones, and; no - I don’t want to carry an adapter around for headphones that prevents charging while headphones are plugged in. That’s obviously logistically a no go for anyone performing live with an iPad. I’d never want to rely on battery power live.
Even if I hadn’t invested in my audio gear and headphones specifically so much, the latency on Bluetooth has made it a non option forever - unless I buy one of the select few W1 certified Beats units, which then is just an additional expense.
Apple does not currently offer, and it seems that they have no interest in offering, a phone that I will buy in the future. I couldn’t believe they pulled the headphone jack on the SE2, it seemed like the last ‘fuck you’ to the audio content creators they’ve claimed to support forever.
iOS 14 support on iPhone 6S means Apple keeps me as an iPhone user for maybe another year.
I will probably be downgrading to a dumbphone and an old, flash-drive modded iPod gen 3 or 4.
I have a beater iphone 5s around to stream podcast and music while I'm doing yard work. Works great! pretty smooth OS UI..
Can't say the same about any Andorid phones from the same era.
Looking forward to this new era of Apple ARM chips in desktops!
Can't say the same about any Andorid phones from the same era.
Looking forward to this new era of Apple ARM chips in desktops!
Love how my old Galaxy S6 is stuck on ancient Android 7. And it's the verizon version too, so I can't unlock the bootloader. Perfectly capable device, what a shame.
Switched to iPhone SE a while ago because of this.
Switched to iPhone SE a while ago because of this.
I found a big difference in application and app store support for older versions. You need to keep updating the iPhone to the newest version of iOS because if you don't, all the apps will be undownloadable. When they stop updating it, it's toast.
I had an Android Gingerbread (2.3) phone for a while when KitKat was out, and I had lots of software to download. Then I updated to one on Marshmallow (6.0) and it had plenty of software and probably still does. I'm not sure how much software is still available that works on Nougat (7.0.1) on the S6 all the way through Android 10, but I was really disappointed that I couldn't even keep the iPhone 4S alive as a toy because all the old software was gone.
However, it's lame that Google drops security updates so early.
I had an Android Gingerbread (2.3) phone for a while when KitKat was out, and I had lots of software to download. Then I updated to one on Marshmallow (6.0) and it had plenty of software and probably still does. I'm not sure how much software is still available that works on Nougat (7.0.1) on the S6 all the way through Android 10, but I was really disappointed that I couldn't even keep the iPhone 4S alive as a toy because all the old software was gone.
However, it's lame that Google drops security updates so early.
The minimum iOS version supported for most apps is iOS 11,sometimes even iOS 10.
Yes but the old versions disappear more quickly. So if they decide to upgrade to requiring 13, they don’t leave an old version available.
Yes you can. Apple will allow you to download the “last compatible version” going back to iOS 5.
One of the reasons I left Android for iOS was just this issue. 2 years of updates, then you're expected to purchase a new device. My iPhone 11 I expect to have for many years. Hopefully 5+.
Size is important and that is something Apple should have deal with from day one. It miss the big phone time and now it miss the small phone time. Really want to have a small one.
You can still install Linux, FreeBSD and FreeDOS on an old PC.
And if phones used UEFI (or openfirmware or whatever), you could do just as well there (subject to driver support, but that's varied on PC, too). The absurd lack of standards in phone bootloaders and device trees is killing us.
You will probably be interested in Librem 5 or Pinephone.
Given that I own a Pinephone, you would guess correctly:D
I'm having trouble finding out whether this truly helps though; do either of those have a bootloader/firmware that provides device tree info to the booted OS, or are they still relying on the booted system to have its own device tree to describe the hardware?
EDIT: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/devicetree/usage-mode... implies that u-boot can probably feed a device tree file to Linux at boot time?
EDIT2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Device_tree says, "As an example, Das U-Boot and kexec can pass a device tree when launching a new operating system.", so yeah it looks like that would work! Sweet:)
I'm having trouble finding out whether this truly helps though; do either of those have a bootloader/firmware that provides device tree info to the booted OS, or are they still relying on the booted system to have its own device tree to describe the hardware?
EDIT: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/devicetree/usage-mode... implies that u-boot can probably feed a device tree file to Linux at boot time?
EDIT2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Device_tree says, "As an example, Das U-Boot and kexec can pass a device tree when launching a new operating system.", so yeah it looks like that would work! Sweet:)
I think that no one in the comments recalled that the last times that older iPhones got the last updates, they became slower with reduced artificially reduced battery life.
So somehow, despite getting updates, old iPhones were becoming less functional and users would get the feeling that they have to change it for a shiny new recent more powerful iPhone!
So somehow, despite getting updates, old iPhones were becoming less functional and users would get the feeling that they have to change it for a shiny new recent more powerful iPhone!
The battery life wasn't artificially reduced, it was naturally reduced by years of use and charge cycles. Apple should have done a better job of communicating why they slowed down the systems, and perhaps made it an option rather than just doing it, but having had devices that shutdown because of the battery (while it still had a charge, but was not capable of providing power to the CPU running at full-speed) I'd have preferred slow downs to random shutdowns.
The latter makes the device unreliable and unusable, the former makes it reliable and maybe unusable for some applications. It's also rectifiable by replacing the battery (which I've done on several iPhones myself, and used stores for others just for the convenience). That last part is what Apple should have communicated to people. We did that with my dad's old iPhone 6 and it went from "slow but usable" to "like brand new and snappy".
EDIT: A note, the device I had that did that to me was a laptop with a spinning disk hard drive. When the battery started failing the laptop was fine until I hit the GPU (which was often, I was in grad school and doing a lot of graphics programming). Plugged in there were no issue, but on battery it'd bring the system down when I ran anything that made the GPU and CPU run close to full-speed. Fortunately I was able to get the data off, unfortunately I'd pretty well fucked the system before I realized why it was happening (so it happened a few times) and ended up just replacing the whole laptop rather than just getting a new battery.
The latter makes the device unreliable and unusable, the former makes it reliable and maybe unusable for some applications. It's also rectifiable by replacing the battery (which I've done on several iPhones myself, and used stores for others just for the convenience). That last part is what Apple should have communicated to people. We did that with my dad's old iPhone 6 and it went from "slow but usable" to "like brand new and snappy".
EDIT: A note, the device I had that did that to me was a laptop with a spinning disk hard drive. When the battery started failing the laptop was fine until I hit the GPU (which was often, I was in grad school and doing a lot of graphics programming). Plugged in there were no issue, but on battery it'd bring the system down when I ran anything that made the GPU and CPU run close to full-speed. Fortunately I was able to get the data off, unfortunately I'd pretty well fucked the system before I realized why it was happening (so it happened a few times) and ended up just replacing the whole laptop rather than just getting a new battery.
Indeed, you are right, they did not reduce the battery level but reduced the performances after the update.
So before the update, your phone was reasonably fast. A new phone/os version comes out, you have an automatic update, and then your phone will be slower to do the tasks that it was doing well before.
So, as an user what will be you conclusion? If you are not even aware that performance slow down is due to the update, you will think "my phone become older, I need to buy a more recent one!".
For memory:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batterygate
"Apple Confirms It Degrades Your Old iPhone's Performance"
https://www.forbes.com/sites/ewanspence/2017/12/20/apple-iph...
And to be remembered, they were fined for that by the French regulator:
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-51413724
So before the update, your phone was reasonably fast. A new phone/os version comes out, you have an automatic update, and then your phone will be slower to do the tasks that it was doing well before.
So, as an user what will be you conclusion? If you are not even aware that performance slow down is due to the update, you will think "my phone become older, I need to buy a more recent one!".
For memory:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batterygate
"Apple Confirms It Degrades Your Old iPhone's Performance"
https://www.forbes.com/sites/ewanspence/2017/12/20/apple-iph...
And to be remembered, they were fined for that by the French regulator:
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-51413724
The Android update model is very different from the iOS model since many Android vendors only support their devices for a short time, often no more than 2-3 years where Apple provides updates for a much longer period. This is offset by the fact that the core of Android is free software, on top of which you can - but do not have to - install Google-proprietary parts. I choose not to install those parts since I prefer to keep my data (mostly) to myself.
When Apple says "that's all, folks" they mean it - the device will no longer get updates. When Samsung says "that's all folks" the user can install one of the alternative distributions and continue to use the device.
I'm using a Galaxy SIII - using it right now in fact - with Android 9 more or less because I have not updated it to v10 (the current version of Android) yet. I might upgrade it, then again I might not, the thing works fine on v9. For reference, this phone was launched in 2012 (3 years before the iPhone 6s) with Android 4.0 and got official updates to 4.4. It then got updates through Cyanogenmod, later through LineageOS. It is still updated OTA (as in 'over the air', like when it was new). Once Android 11 comes around it'll probably be ported to the SIII, the limiting factor tends to be driver support.
[1] https://www.xda-developers.com/developers-android-10-samsung...
When Apple says "that's all, folks" they mean it - the device will no longer get updates. When Samsung says "that's all folks" the user can install one of the alternative distributions and continue to use the device.
I'm using a Galaxy SIII - using it right now in fact - with Android 9 more or less because I have not updated it to v10 (the current version of Android) yet. I might upgrade it, then again I might not, the thing works fine on v9. For reference, this phone was launched in 2012 (3 years before the iPhone 6s) with Android 4.0 and got official updates to 4.4. It then got updates through Cyanogenmod, later through LineageOS. It is still updated OTA (as in 'over the air', like when it was new). Once Android 11 comes around it'll probably be ported to the SIII, the limiting factor tends to be driver support.
[1] https://www.xda-developers.com/developers-android-10-samsung...
Vast majority of the users are not going to get the update through an unofficial channel by downloading a custom rom. The problem are the manufacturers, not that you can’t get updates at all.
When Samsung says "that's all folks" the user can install one of the alternative distributions and continue to use the device.
The problem is that a tiny percentage of users actually do that. It leaves the rest vulnerable to any security issues that are found after the last update.
The problem is that a tiny percentage of users actually do that. It leaves the rest vulnerable to any security issues that are found after the last update.
That is a matter of user education comparable - but not equal - to what is keeping 'the year or Linux on the desktop' always somewhere in the future. The difference is that LineageOS (et al) is more or less identical to (the better) vendor-supplied distributions while Linux is a different operating system, not just a different distribution. Once installed something like LineageOS is just as easy to keep up to date as vendor-supplied distributions.
It used to be Apple was criticized for dropping support for phones too early. Now, they're still supporting the iPhone 6S, a phone from 5 years ago. Did Apple change their policy due to criticism, or have they honed their tech to improve support for older devices?
> It used to be Apple was criticized for dropping support for phones too early
When exactly did that happen? The first iPhone received 3 major updates, more than most Android phones even today.
When exactly did that happen? The first iPhone received 3 major updates, more than most Android phones even today.
I think it's the latter, but it is also an under-reported aspect of Tim Cook's regime: a focus on sustainability. They have a whole page on their site about their efforts [1], including how they had to invent new materials and processes to achieve some environmentalist goals.
[1]https://www.apple.com/environment/
[1]https://www.apple.com/environment/
This is just a theory, but I think a fair bit changed with this as their custom A series chips improved. It was easier to support devices further back because they started to have such a commanding lead in performance, which gives some extra room to keep improving the OS without it slowing down like it used to do.
It's not likely to be a pure "performance" thing. The 6S, according to wikipedia [1], is the oldest phone containing an A9 chip, which has an image processing unit, a coprocessor that can handle Siri voice commands, and an NVMe storage controller. It is also the minimum requirement for ARKit.
I doubt very much that Apple is being arbitrary in their support cutoff for phones. If it's capable of the features they build into the OS, it gets support. If I had to make a guess, the next cutoff point (iOS 15?) is going to be a chip having the Bionic Neural Engine, which would make the iPhone 8 the oldest supported phone.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_A9
I doubt very much that Apple is being arbitrary in their support cutoff for phones. If it's capable of the features they build into the OS, it gets support. If I had to make a guess, the next cutoff point (iOS 15?) is going to be a chip having the Bionic Neural Engine, which would make the iPhone 8 the oldest supported phone.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_A9
I mean that's fair, but I think in general, the advancements they've made to the A series chips over the years has been them a lot easier to continue to support for longer periods of time.
Hopefully we'll see Mac's with longer lifecycles and macOS support as well. I think the Mac side is a tad short at the moment.
Hopefully we'll see Mac's with longer lifecycles and macOS support as well. I think the Mac side is a tad short at the moment.
Apple beats Android in the smartphone space but Windows has a much stronger desktop support record
I think that's fair. Big Sur support is limited to 2014 iMacs and later, which is a shame because my late 2012 iMac is absolutely fine for home and business use still.
Intel released Haswell in 2013. Big Sur probably requires features introduced with it, such as AVX2, new low power states, increased GPU execution units, etc.
Apple wants to meet environmental aims and paint themselves green - something I fully support for that matter - and they have at least for consumers the expectation of quality and craftsmanship, not "crap that's obsolete in two years".
Windows has a different reason why they're so focused on desktop BC: lock-in. Had Windows not taken care of BC over decades and a provable track record of that from the beginning of the DOS era, enterprises with tens of thousands of licenses would have fled the ship (and funded WINE with ludicrous amounts of money, probably). On mobile they didn't give a flying finger about BC, and the contrast was noticeable.
Windows has a different reason why they're so focused on desktop BC: lock-in. Had Windows not taken care of BC over decades and a provable track record of that from the beginning of the DOS era, enterprises with tens of thousands of licenses would have fled the ship (and funded WINE with ludicrous amounts of money, probably). On mobile they didn't give a flying finger about BC, and the contrast was noticeable.
>On mobile they didn't give a flying finger about BC, and the contrast was noticeable.
Yep, a fatal mistake, made by leadership brought in from outside Windows. Pretty much wrote the epitaph for Windows with that move.
signed: bitter Windows Phone user.
Yep, a fatal mistake, made by leadership brought in from outside Windows. Pretty much wrote the epitaph for Windows with that move.
signed: bitter Windows Phone user.
It was that way even at the Windows CE times. Truly a shame, MS and Blackberry essentially owned that market, and they let it slip away. Now both are fucked in that space.
It's not that Apple is particularly good at supporting older devices, it's that Android vendors are catastrophically bad across the board.
Apple tends to drop support when some hardware feature or limitation doesn't play well with the new OS. For instance, the iPhone 6 only has 1GB of RAM.
Apple tends to drop support when some hardware feature or limitation doesn't play well with the new OS. For instance, the iPhone 6 only has 1GB of RAM.
My Nokia 6 from 2017 is still receiving security updates. The update cycle switched from 1 month to every 3 months after the device reached the 3 year update guarantee but it's still acknowledgedby the manufacturer.
Nokia phones are in my opinion way too underrepresented on the market for the support they give.
Nokia phones are in my opinion way too underrepresented on the market for the support they give.
I don't think you have your history right on this one. At least not if it's about support for older iPhones. Apple has always exceeded typical industry practice in how long it supported old mobile hardware.
Yeah, my experience across their device lines is that, for build quality reasons alone, their products outlive any competitors: I have a ‘08 MacBook Pro that still basically works, except it can’t connect to my WiFi network and 2GB of memory is basically useless today.
Or hardware improvements have become more incremental and less cataclysmic.
From a software and developer side, it makes sense to drop 32 bit support early. It's less radically different architectures to target. It means they can guarantee the performance of the os and apps. But as processors got good enough to handle most things, the need to drop the slow ones, and the slow ones holding back the software evolution is minimized.
From a software and developer side, it makes sense to drop 32 bit support early. It's less radically different architectures to target. It means they can guarantee the performance of the os and apps. But as processors got good enough to handle most things, the need to drop the slow ones, and the slow ones holding back the software evolution is minimized.
Apple makes money from services, more devices supporting the latest features == more potential money.
Those updates have a price though [0], Android phones sure have their issues, but I never heard something about Google slowing down Pixel phones after updates. Moreover, if your Android device is not supported anymore, you can still opt for LineageOS, with iPhones you're pretty much fucked up.
0: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-51413724
0: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-51413724
Since you keep posting that link, I don't think it's the smoking gun that you think it is.
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208387
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208387
I'm well aware of this, but I guess my point was: it's not just black and white like many people wanted to picture it in this thread, I use an iPhone 6S myself.
From a consumer perspective, it’s crazy how often we’re expected to replace mobile devices (even though the story now isn’t as crazy as it was five years ago) and how much we shell out for them (even putting aside the monthly bills associated with them). Not to mention a PC was shared by the family and now every kid needs their own phone. Great for the economy but oh so wasteful.