So as long your device is still receiving security updates, it means you can pretty confidently run the majority of Android apps, even if you're in an older device. This is specially true since essential apps like browsers use their own engine and can receive security updates. This is very different from iOS that once it stops receiving updates, you're pretty much screwed up.
Not saying that one approach is better than the other, but both have trade-offs.
The original poster just said that some apps required the latest OS.
iOS 16 supports all phones back to the iPhone 8/X released in 2017.
> This is very different from iOS that once it stops receiving updates, you're pretty much screwed up.
Apple just released a security patch for the iPhone 5s January of this year. It was released September 2013. It was the first 64 bit iPhone and the first that supported LTE. Is Google or any Android manufacturer doing security updates for a phone released in 2013?
> The original poster just said that some apps required the latest OS.
Yes, of course there is a small number of apps that will need the latest OS, because they're trying to do something new that is not possible before etc. This is not true for 99% of the apps that you use though, and is specially not true for apps used by the mass market like Facebook/Twitter/Instagram/your bank because you would be crazy to only support a small % of your user base.
Also keep in mind that this is valid for both iOS and Android (bigger publishers generally support older versions of iOS because there are folks that will never upgrade/their devices doesn't support the latest version).
> Apple just released a security patch for the iPhone 5s January of this year. It was released September 2013. It was the first 64 bit iPhone and the first that supported LTE. Is Google or any Android manufacturer doing security updates for a phone released in 2013?
I still used my 10 year old tablet (LG G Pad 8.3) a few years ago because even if it didn't had the latest security updates, because at least my browser was up-to-date. Keep in mind that I wouldn't do anything security critical on it, but it is still arguably more useful than a iPhone 5s that should be using an ancient version of WebKit (so a good portion of the Web is broken on it probably).
BTW, before you ask why I stopped using the tablet: it finally broke after all those years.
The equivalent iPad in 2013 when your tablet was released is the 1st iPad Air that had a slightly better screen than your Asus and a much better processor - the A7. It stopped getting OS updates in 2019 and also got a security update January of this year.
The version of WebKit available in 2019 is not “ancient”.
> The equivalent iPad in 2013 when your tablet was released is the 1st iPad Air that had a slightly better screen than your Asus and a much better processor
Apple didn't had that much advantage in CPU power them, looking at the benchmarks A7 seems to be ~30% faster that isn't "much better".
Also, iPad was way expensive than my tablet, specially in my country. It was fifty percent more expensive. 50% more expensive for 30% more performance looked really bad for that time. The screen being better in the Air also didn't matter because I choose LG G Pad 8.3 exactly because it had a 8.3 inch screen.
> The version of WebKit available in 2019 is not “ancient”.
It is. This is at least 4 years without relevant security updates (except maybe for "extremely critical") and without improvements in Web standards.
I could get that same tablet today and get a modern browser like Chrome to run with relatively acceptable performance.
> Is Google or any Android manufacturer doing security updates for a phone released in 2013?
lol, goal posts moved.
To demonstrate the absurdity of this logic, let's talk about how much better Linux is than Apple. Linux (various distributions, collectively referred to here as "linux" for convenience) still supports many systems that are 20+ years old! In fact, Linux is often used to give unsupported Apple devices a longer lease on life. Does Apple do that?
How is this moving the goalposts? We are comparing phones. Unless you have a phone from 20 years ago running the latest version of Linux.
> Google is also much more serious about backward compatibility than Apple, and
How is Google “better” at backwards compatibility when they don’t support devices as long?
The iPhone 5s which was introduced in 2013 got a security update earlier this year. Is the same true for Android phones that are almost 10 years old?
The iPhone 8/X that was introduced in 2017 still is running the latest OS. Is that true for Android devices?
Seeing that Apple didn’t even create phones 20 years ago, and that you can’t even connect a phone older than the iPhone 5s to a modern network, I fail to see how that is relevant.
Or do you expect Apple to support the original iPhone that 128MB of RAM, 4GB/8GB of storage, 2G networking (which isn’t supported by carriers anymore) and a 320x480 screen?
> How is this moving the goalposts? We are comparing phones.
No the conversation is not comparing phones in general. They're discussing specifically when the Pixel (from 2016) stopped being supported. Your comment is the first one that expanded/changed the subject from when one specific phone lost support to all phones/Apple/Google in general, and it was in a reply/rebuttal to a defense of when the Pixel 2016 stopped receiving updates. Classic definition of the fallacy of moving the goalposts.
If you want to debate all phones in general, you should clearly bring that up rather than sneak it in as a rebuttal to a different subject.
For the record, I'm not disagreeing that in general Apple > Android on updates. It clearly is IMHO and this is a major thing Goolge needs to improve on (and I say that as someone who will never buy an Apple product again).
So as long your device is still receiving security updates, it means you can pretty confidently run the majority of Android apps, even if you're in an older device. This is specially true since essential apps like browsers use their own engine and can receive security updates. This is very different from iOS that once it stops receiving updates, you're pretty much screwed up.
Not saying that one approach is better than the other, but both have trade-offs.