Sponsored by Surfshark. Secure your privacy with Surfshark! Enter coupon code MRMOBILE for an extra 3 months free at https://surfshark.deals/mrmobile[NOTHING...
It costs less than any of Apple or Google’s offerings and they do not make money through software and services unlike Apple or Google. I think it’s unreasonable to expect 7 years or more of OS updates on a phone that costs $300-400. They should do better on their flagship though, it costs double but still has the same support.
It’s still hardware in the trash in 4 years, regardless of cost to the end user. I intend to keep my Pixel 6 until it dies or runs out of security updates in 3 years, whichever comes first.
I don’t know if the hardware will be good enough in 4 years anyways. They’ve cut corners to get to that price point, the chip is similar to the 778G from 3 years back and it’s using UFS 2.2. Honestly the phone feels like it was made for India and the marketing indicates that. They don’t have many options with a clean OS and 3 years of OS updates at that price point there.
It might not be powerful enough to run the software longer and the hardware may show it’s age. Secondly the cost of the phone cannot be ignored either, more software updates means more money spent on software development. Android updates have to be certified by Google. This process costs money. It isn’t feasible to expect a company to provide more than 4-5 years of updates at that price point unless they start charging for updates or make money through services or ads.
I guess that’s fair, it’s wishful thinking on my part that mobile computing could be like laptops or desktops. I still personally wouldn’t get a device without a long update guarantee, you get better bang for your buck even with a pricier device since you’re keeping it longer and it’s better for the environment.
He mentioned three years of support in the video, but not sure if that’s to fully end of support or just system updates.
3 years of OS updates and 4 years of security patches according to the product page
4 years of security on a mid-range phone is okay, Bare minimum but it wouldn’t put me off buying one.
That’s a nah from me. Beat Google / Apple at support or I’m not considering the product.
It costs less than any of Apple or Google’s offerings and they do not make money through software and services unlike Apple or Google. I think it’s unreasonable to expect 7 years or more of OS updates on a phone that costs $300-400. They should do better on their flagship though, it costs double but still has the same support.
It’s still hardware in the trash in 4 years, regardless of cost to the end user. I intend to keep my Pixel 6 until it dies or runs out of security updates in 3 years, whichever comes first.
I don’t know if the hardware will be good enough in 4 years anyways. They’ve cut corners to get to that price point, the chip is similar to the 778G from 3 years back and it’s using UFS 2.2. Honestly the phone feels like it was made for India and the marketing indicates that. They don’t have many options with a clean OS and 3 years of OS updates at that price point there.
I don’t see why cheaper hardware would have to last less long, or even if it should, from an ethical and e-waste standpoint.
It might not be powerful enough to run the software longer and the hardware may show it’s age. Secondly the cost of the phone cannot be ignored either, more software updates means more money spent on software development. Android updates have to be certified by Google. This process costs money. It isn’t feasible to expect a company to provide more than 4-5 years of updates at that price point unless they start charging for updates or make money through services or ads.
I guess that’s fair, it’s wishful thinking on my part that mobile computing could be like laptops or desktops. I still personally wouldn’t get a device without a long update guarantee, you get better bang for your buck even with a pricier device since you’re keeping it longer and it’s better for the environment.