Starting with Android smartphones running on the Snapdragon 8 Elite Mobile Platform, Qualcomm Technologies now offers device manufacturers the ability to provide support for up to eight consecutive years of Android software and security updates. Smartphones launching on new Snapdragon 8 and 7-series mobile platforms will also be eligible to receive this extended support.
↫ Mike Genewich
I mean, good news of course, but Qualcomm has a history of making empty promises, so I’ll see it when I believe it. Also note that this news doesn’t mean every Snapdragon 8 Elite Android device will get eight years of updates – it just means OEMs are able to offer such support now, not that they’ll actually do it. Considering it’s usually the OEMs refusing to offer updates, I wonder just how big the actual impact of this news will be.
In any event, this includes both regular Android updates as well as two Android Common Kernel upgrades, which are required to meet this eight year window. If you want to get into the nitty-gritty about Android and the Android Common Kernels, the official Android documentation has more details.
So, Qualcomm will develop a chip et al. in year 0. Samsung will buy it and put it into its overpriced S series ultra mega whatever tabletlike phone in year 1. The chipset will eventually find its way to more reasonably priced phones in years 2-4. When I finally get to use it, there will be only 3 years of updates offered by Qualcomm, and Redmi will be completely ignoring them because why not.
Great news.
Strangely it’s not that far from what the Fairphone 5 tries to achieve by selecting a specific Qualcomm CPU (QCM6490) : https://support.fairphone.com/hc/en-us/articles/9979180437393-Fairphone-OS
Google Pixel devices will be able to get 8 years of updates, that’s the impact.
In only a handful of countries (namely Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, United Kingdom, United States (except Puerto Rico)).
Google designs its own chips for Pixel phones, they don’t use Qualcomm. So it is irrelevant.
And I think current 7 years of updates are enough.
Oh, that makes me curious. When we have hardware that suits most people’s usages for pretty much ten years, what makes 7 years enough ? I mean, I understand the financial balance that limits what can be done without being a huge burden on the price of the device. And I could certainly accept people saying “7 years is an acceptable tradeoff”. But with the number of people around me using devices that have become dangerous because of a lack of software updates, but are otherwise working fine for their needs, I don’t get how 7 years is just “enough”. Furthermore, I’ve become painfully aware of the number of people and ecosystems adversely affected on the planet by each new smartphone produced, and I’d say that every year of lifetime that can be added is a win for absolutely everyone, except those that just want to sell more units in a given fiscal year than in the previous one. That doesn’t mean those that want to change every 2 year are barred from it, on the contrary: their previous devices will be worth more if their useful life is prolonged.
worsehappens,
I agree with you here. On the one hand, I understand why it’s not commercially viable for a manufacturer to support new android releases on their hardware indefinitely, it’s a damn shame we’re dependent on them for new releases at all.
Manufacturers complain that it’s unreasonable for them to support hardware indefinitely, and I actually agree with them here. But it’s a problem of their own making for their own benefit. Take manufactures out of the OS release pipeline and we’d all be much better off! It’s ironic, but the less they do the better off we are. This is the way it works with x86 and we have viable support for decades. I don’t need or want to rely on HP/Dell/Toshiba/etc for OS update. We are better off when they stay the hell away!
Now mobile operating systems are so tethered to the manufacturers that our hardware becomes unsupported garbage at EOL – adding to our planet’s systemic ewaste problems. This is technically solvable by getting rid of the middle men and it would be cheaper also….except for a secret agenda. Manufactures are not an indifferent party simply trying to cut costs, they want to control the OS even though it costs them more to do so and want devices to have limited lifespans. This conflict of interest is the fundamental problem and so many of our problems are a side effect of this conflict.
I share your vision, but unfortunately the corporations don’t
They only understand money, and to that end I think the only way to change their behavior would be to add an ewaste tax for their hand in creating ewaste. Manufactures who provide the community with the tools needed to support themselves can avoid paying the tax. This would create a financial incentive to do the right thing by forcing manufactures to internalize the long term ecological costs of their own policies.
>Qualcomm Technologies now offers device manufacturers the ability to provide support for up to eight consecutive years of Android software and security updates.
I don’t understand why Android makers need Qualcomm to support *ANDROID* versions and security updates. Shouldn’t it just work? Get Android code from Google, add drivers for the camera and other hardware bits, and voila. All the updates I’d expect from Qualcomm is firmware.
I hate the ARM world.
Welcome to the world of GPL, where SoC vendors can take the source code of the kernel, add a little shim to allow access to their proprietary driver, call the resulting product their “custom kernel”, and require from OEMs to use said “custom kernel” if they want various features of the SoC to work as intended. As long as the SoC vendor open-sources that little useless shim they added to the kernel under the same GPL license, the Holy GNU is happy. And of course Google doesn’t care and happily certifies such devices for Play Services/GMS instead of requiring that devices to use a standard pre-defined kernel.
BTW Windows CE had a similar model where you could take Windows CE and modify it to your liking, as long as you paid Microsoft their per-device royalty. And yes, it was the same kind of mess, with devices updated never and also needing “custom ROMs”. In fact XDA developers started from the Windows CE mess, not the Android mess, hence the “XDA” in the name.
j0scher,
I also despise the situation. We were very fortunate that PCs evolved around hardware and software being produced by separate parties. This helps solidify standards and reduced the dependency on hardware manufacturers for software updates. We getting absolutely screwed with the android model. I call it the “android model”, but really it’s every new technology and PCs are the exception to the norm. If PCs were reinvented today without strong pressure to maintain backwards compatibility, they would be just as bad as android. The BS is here to stay
There are no real technical reasons involved, on why a decade or more of support wouldn’t be possible. So good to hear that other reasons (mostly commercial) aligned for support window to get extended.