Re: Additions to the iOS/Android Features Document

On 5/24/24 11:53 AM, Andrew wrote:

-hh wrote on Fri, 24 May 2024 10:30:57 -0400 :
 

You missed the point of having choices that Apple never gives users
(mainly because there are few companies as anti-consumer as Apple is).

>
Since the rest of the Industry (well, 95%) has adopted the same design
choice, it really isn't as tyrannical of Apple as you're trying to make
it out to be.  It is more indicative of Apple appropriately identifying
a "where the puck is going to be".

 You're so desperate to excuse Apple's well-known anti-consumer stance that
you brazen fabricate out of thin air that more than half is, now, only 5%?

No, it was based on what you said:  half of Android contain at least one of these features that you worship .. that's ~50% .. and you conceded that virtually none contain all three:  I was gracious and allocated 5% to that.
Now you're welcome to go provide the substantiating citations which quantify the value more accurately, so get to it.  Frankly, I'd be quite surprised if it exceeded even but 1% of Android sales, esp. in the West.

It would take
some more research to determine if these holdouts are actually still in
production (and for what market segment) or if they're now down to "New
Old Stock" that's still available for sale.

>
Those were phones on sale at the time that the search was run.

>
I'm aware of that.  Now go back and check to see how many of those were
actually --> still in production <-- versus being obsolete stock that
was merely still available for sale.

 Those are recent figures which you hate because Apple has never supplied
the user with basic hardware functionality that Android always enjoyed.

It doesn't matter if the figures are 'recent' because what you've provided does not identify and differentiate between products currently in production vs "New Old Stock" that was discontinued 1-20 years ago.
As such, you're not making a successful line of argument for describing what Android's *current* product feature set decisions are.

What's relevant is if you're on Android & you want an sd card or an aux
jack or an FM radio, you can extremely easily find a model today with them,
(since about half of Android phones sold today have one or more of them).

>
Incorrect, because your claim also means ~half have none of these
features too.  And what have all three?  Probably just a tiny fraction.
>
Once again, you're just not being successful in identifying if any of
these product feature are integral to product success in the, to
demonstrate if Apple's disinclination towards them is "anti-consumer".
>
Indeed, if they were as much of a "pro consumer"  differentiator as
you're trying to imply, then the fraction of Androids which featured all
three should be quite large.  It isn't.

 It's no longer shocking how desperate you Apple religious zealots are to
defend that Apple has never supplied you with basic hardware functionality.

Nah. I've had smartphones with removable batteries & microSDs, so I actually know what I'm allegedly "missing out on" by those features being dropped in favor of others.
The facts of the matter are that if these features that you're trying to taut were actually compelling to users, then more than 5% of Androids would be equipped with them today.  They're not.  Indeed, by your own claim, barely half of them bother to have at least one of this set.

Unfortunately, it also means that if you want a user-removable battery,
then your choices are severely limited.
>
But it also shows Android hardware is always better than iPhone hardware
(because Apple gives you no choice for any of those 4 hardware features).

>
But 95% of Android doesn't offer that choice either, so that feature is
simply not an indicator.  Especially since you've not been able to show
if the 5% residual is actually still in production, as opposed to left
over inventory.

 It's no longer amazing how desperate you are to defend that cheap iPhone
which has never had even the most basic of standard hardware functionality.

If your claim was true that these features are fundamental to (as you call it): "the most basic of standard hardware functionality", then why do essentially no Android smartphones feature them either?

And the software that drops support after a few years.

>
The full software support for Android is far better than iOS for a
variety
of reasons which the Apple zealots would never be able to comprehend.

>
No... ...it's really not.

>
This doesn't actually matter, because fundamentally, its not a profound
statement:  by literal definition as per set theory, no subset of a
whole can ever be greater than the whole from which it was a subset.

>
Au contraire... given Apple's hotfix support is the worst in the industry,
you're only saying bugfix support isn't important because it's not there.

>
Just what is "hotfix" supposed to mean here?  And why is it now being
introduced as a new Goalpost?

 You zealots are so desperate to defend Apple's worst support in the
industry that you claim you don't even know what a bug fix is?

You said "hotfix", not "bugfix".
If you made a typographical error here, clearly say so.

As such, just what does 'full software support' really mean?

>
It's no longer shocking you didn't read Apple's own definition of full
support, given you Apple religious zealots not only know nothing of Apple
products - but you "think" you know everything about Android & iOS.

I've not read the fine print because I'm not a fanboy, nor have I ever
had any issues or troubles from their current & historical level of
product support:  I'm predominantly going by what you've tried to brag
about, which I see as evidence of Android/Google trying to catch up.

 You're too desperate. Fixing all the known bugs is not fine print.

No, that's not what was being said.

Fixing all known bugs is what everyone does for multiple releases.
             *Except Apple*

Except that the proof that your statement is false was contained within the challenge I gave you below ... which you've dodged addressing.

Only Apple only fixes all the bugs it knows about in only one release.
   *Apple has the worst support in the industry*

YA Unsubstantiated claim.  Cite, please.

Its only
of value if every Android smartphone sold is capable of using the 'full'
breadth of this software set (which is dang near impossible) and then
also only if this 'full' set is materially different (better) than
software sets from other providers (eg, Apple iOS).

>
Idiot. You're making lame excuses for Apple only patching all the bugs it
knows about in only the latest iOS or mac release - which are dumb excuses.

>
How can any software developer patch bugs that they don't know about?

Silence!

Or are you trying to criticize the entire industry for their practice of
sun-setting support on old obsolete & superseded software that's if its
used by anyone at all, its <0.0001% of the installed base?

Silence!

If so, show us the dates of the latest bug & security updates for
Android OS versions 1 (2008) through 6 (2015):  I'm sure that there's
been zero for the past five years, if not longer.

 You are defending what is known to be the absolute worst support in the
industry &  you don't even understand how iOS or Android update.

On the contrary:  because *NO* version of Android OS 1 - 6 (inclusive) have received any bugfixes or security updates for the past five (5) years, it shows that Android support isn't "forever" as you've tried to imply in your criticisms on how Apple provides their own support.

Apple's bugfix support for operating systems is the worst in the industry.

>
Unsubstantiated claim.  Golly, how about that.

 Read the cites. Every operating system except Apple's patches all bugs they
know about in multiple releases. Only Apple doesn't. That's just a fact.

Because (and as I've already noted), the simplest user solution is to make sure to keep the OS up-to-date, where --> as you pointed out <-- all [known] bugs are patched because its the latest release.

 <https://screenrant.com/apple-product-security-update-lifespan/>
<https://hothardware.com/news/apple-admits-only-fully-patches-security-flaws-in-latest-os-releases>
<https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/10/apple-clarifies-security-update-policy-only-the-latest-oses-are-fully-patched/>

Yup, confirmation of being up-to-date simply by having the latest OS, just as I've already pointed out to you.

Plus the Law of
Diminishing Returns applies too: just because something is "N+1" larger
doesn't mean that the "+1" increment is also significant.  To use a
analogy, $10,000,001 is pedantically "more money" than $10,000,000, but
that extra dollar doesn't make this difference be significant.

>
You didn't even read Apple's own explanation that they never patch all the
hole in operating systems that they know exist - except the latest OS only.

>
You're correct that I didn't bother to read that, because all that one
has to do to mitigate whatever theoretical risk you're concerned about
is just to maintain one's equipment to the latest OS.  Since MacOS and
iOS updates from Apple are free of charge, there's few reasons not to.

 It's no longer shocking you Apple religious zealots deny even what Apple
said about their hotfix support being the worst in the industry bar none.
<https://support.apple.com/guide/deployment/about-software-updates-depc4c80847a/>

No, that cite isn't Apple admitting that their support is the worst.
Try again.
Likewise, you're dodging addressing the point I made, which was to simply maintain the OS as current to be confident in being the most up-to-date on bug & security patches to one's device.

Apple has mostly supported it's phones for longer than Samsung OR Google.

>
Yes, that's been their track record history.

>
Apple's operating system support has _always_ been the worst in the
industry. The only reason you don't know that is you don't know what Apple
says about Apple NOT PATCHING all known bugs in any release but the latest.

>
Unsubstantiated claim.  Again.  Golly, how about that.

 And yet, I provided the cites which prove only Apple patches all the bugs
it knows about only in a single release while nobody's support is that bad.

No, that's not what was being said.  What was being said was that Apple wasn't guaranteeing that known patches would flow down to all old legacy OS versions.  That statement doesn't prevent them from providing all bug patches to earlier OS versions - its just not an ironclad obligation.  From a business sense, there's diminishing returns on the expense, since both current installed base and the relevant risk are in decline. This is precisely why I asked you about Android's current level of support for old OS's and Android 1 - 6 OS specifically:  with zero updates over the past five (5) years, they're obviously abandoned for _all_ patches.

Samsung and Google support 7 years of operating system updates
and 7 years of security updates to the operating system, Jolly Roger.
  *Samsung Extends Android and Security Updates to 7 Years*

Android OS 8 ("Oreo") is still less than 7 years old, yet there's been zero security patch updates to it since October 2021 ... over 2.5 years.   Is this because its already been abandoned too?
Or is Samsung/Google's "7 years" merely "from today going forward" promise?
Evidence suggests the latter, not the former:

<https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/samsung-extends-android-and-security-updates-to-7-years/>
  "Samsung phones now come backed with seven years' worth of
   security updates and seven generations of OS upgrades. >
  *Google fixes all known bugs for 7 years of software updates*
  <https://www.tomsguide.com/opinion/google-pixel-8-software-updates>
  "That support covers everything, including full Android updates,
   the regular Pixel feature drops and security updates."
 In addition, for billions of Android devices, Google has been updating
_all_ of those over version 4.4 for years! Monthly. Forever.

But 4.4 years is far short of 7 years, plus where's their official statement that these patches for **all** known bugs for older Android OS versions?  Cite, please.
Because the track record ain't that great:
Android OS 9 hasn't any security patches since Jan 2022 (2+ years)
Android OS 10?  None since Feb 2023 = 15 months & counting.
Android OS 11 is still less than 4 years since its initial release, and its latest security update was Feb 2024, so that's not "monthly" as per your above claim, since 12-14's latest security update were all in May:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_version_history>

<https://www.androidheadlines.com/2022/01/google-monthly-changelog-play-system-updates.html>
   "Google System updates, meanwhile, are fully automated. Originally
    referred to as Project Mainline, these updates fix bugs discovered
    in various OS components like device connectivity, location services,
    media services, Emergency alerts, and others."
 It's so seamless, most Android users don't even know it.

But iOS updates aren't?  Pull my other leg.  The main way that I'm aware that there's been an iOS update is that iOS requires its security code to be entered after a reboot.  Perhaps a question for Android here is what comparable security element do they choose to incorporate, if any?

There's a reason iPhones are the most exploited phones in phone history?
  <https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog>
It's because Apple's support is well known to be the worst in the industry.

YA unsubstantiated claim on your part ..
  ... plus a mere list of known exploits isn't proof of "most" exploited.
  ... plus even if it was true that iOS is most exploited, one then needs to seek understanding as to why it would be so deliberately targeted.  FYI, I've already alluded to one major reason for such a motivation.

See references in the sig since I speak facts about Apple & Android.

>
No need to, as you clearly don't sufficiently understand the industry.

 Heh heh heh... there's a reason I say about you Apple zealots what I do.

Because you're merely a troll, and a pretty lame one at that.
-hh