So recently I’ve been seeing the trend where Android OEMs such as Google, Samsung, etc. have been extending their software release times up to like five, six, and seven years after device release. Clearly, phone hardware has gotten to the point where it can support software for that long, and computers have been in that stage for a very long time. From what I can tell, the only OEM that does this currently might be Fairphone.
Edit: The battery is the thing that goes the fastest so manufacturers could just offer new batteries and that would solve a lot of the problem.
I mean it gets the customers status symbols and the manufacturers money. As long as those phones later end up on the used market it’s a win-win.
They could have always supported software for that long. They simply refused to.
There is no benefit to slowing the release cycle. All of the research gets done either way, all of the supply chain modifications get made either way, and as an individual you have no need to replace your phone every year. A multi-year release cycle does very little but screw over people who need a new phone during the wrong point in the release cycle, while also substantially complicating the supply chains by making demand much spikier.
Compare with the yearly release cycle on cars.
That is kind of my thought. Phone technology doesn’t change drastically within two years and a car does not change drastically within two years.
Conservation wise there is a very big reason to slow down the release cycle
No, there isn’t. People who are buying new phones every year are trading them in, and they’re going to other people who are more price conscious.
Manufacturing several year old tech results in brand new hardware with a shorter life cycle. You’re not going to get 5 or 10 years of updates on a phone that was 5 years behind tech advancement when you bought it.
The people chasing novelty would do so by jumping manufacturers instead, so you don’t change their behavior at all.
Good points
Edit: Though there was the point in the early to mid-2010s where hardware was improving so rapidly that it would have been infeasible to not replace it as soon as possible.
Retail stores rarely carry a phone older than two years, as long as they push new phones every year, people will be buying those phones.
OEM’s could have like 3 battery types, mass produce these 3 and offer battery replacement for maybe 30 bucks or less? OEM’s could have like 3 phone designs and update the internals, making each screen replacement maybe 50 bucks or less? Instead each has unique screen, motherboard, subboard and battery combo. My 10y/o nokia has the same battery as a new one, they cost like 5 bucks each.
Needless to say I love the EU for bringing back user serviceable batteries, that’s a great start.
I don’t think there would be any advantage in stopping yearly releases.
I think individuals should stop buying new phones often and that you should still be able to use a 15 year old phone just like you can use a 15 year old computer without security risks (with Linux).
That’s what the system or laws should encourage.
Makes sense from manufacturing and business perspective to refresh your offer every year. It doesn’t have to be a huge improvement, but technology slowly advances, there might be a better or cheaper manufacture for some components, etc.
On the other hand there no reason for any individual to be buying a new phone so often. Software support must be a thing - there’s no reason for a phone to become obsolete after 2 years because of the software. It’s a computer, you can update the OS almost indefinitely.
it has been for a few years already.
I just haven’t really seen it brought up as a point of discussion.
My still new-ish phone is a pixel 4a I got used. My laptop is a 2012 model and my car from 2006.
The release cycles are insanely fast and have been for a while.
