Edit: Thanks for your comments and ideas, I added a new section to my post below. This post is a work in progress, that I intend to develop with you.

State of Smartphone Software Updates

In October 2013, Apple announced and started selling the iPhone 5S. It was the first Apple smartphone to feature a 64bit processor and a ID fingerprint sensor. It cost around 700€ when introduced, since about a year, the price is stable at around 300€. Repairing the display costs 160€ at a Apple Store, Battery service costs 90€. Since it’s introduction, the iPhone 5S has received day one software updates, not only security updates but major OS upgrades. The phone was introduced with iOS 7, it will run the iOS 11 version to be released this fall just fine. It is unclear if the device will receive iOS 12 or whatever next year, it certainly will get security and bugfix updates during the full iOS 11 lifetime – which means for longer then a year. Apple stopped selling the iPhone 5S 17 months ago. This is pretty near to the 5year lifetime many of us envision for our smartphones.

At the same month, October 2013, Google launched the Nexus 5 with Android 4.4. As a reference phone sold by Google, the Nexus 5 received Android Updates at their official launch. The latest major upgrade was Android 6 in fall 2016, the last security update was released in October 2016. Google stopped selling the Nexus 5 in March 2015. This makes two major software updates and three years of software support. While this is exactly in line with Googles Software Policy for Nexus and Pixel phones, which promise two years of updates from release day and 18 months of security updates from the last day sold in the Google Store, this is two major updates and already a year less of software support compared to the still supported iPhone 5S, which is the same age. Google still includes Android 6 in its monthly security bulletins, by the way. The Nexus 5 sold for around 360€.

The Fairphone 1, launched in December 2013, did not receive a single major OS upgrade (or one if you count an prerelease Alpha build) and stopped receiving security updates more then a year ago. Since shortly after it’s launch, it was clear that Fairphone would not be able to provide major Android Upgrades, without gaining control of the source code. And as the recent announcement shows, even that was not enough, Android 4.4 development was canceled, that essentially means the Fairphone 1 software was outdated since it’s launch and can be considered unsupported since over a year. That means less then three years of security updates and no major software upgrades for the OS at all. The Fairphone 1 cost 325€. Support for the FP1, including repairs and spare parts has been stopped by Fairphone.

The Sony Xperia Z3 compact was launched in fall 2014 with Android 4.4. It received Android 5 in July 2015 (six months after Android 5 was announced) and Android 6 in April 2016 (again six months after the OS was announced). The Z3 will not receive future Android Updates (it uses the same chipset as the FP2) and it is on security level Mai 2016 (Google started issuing monthly security updates). With two major software updates, the Z3 compact is actually more of a good then a bad example in the industry, however, it still means that the OS is unsupported since over 12months has only received support for 18months. It cost around 400€ when launched.

The Xperia Z5 compact was launched in December 2015 with Android 5 Lollipop, it received Android 6 in spring 2016 and Android 7 in winter 2017. Since June 2017, it’s one of the very few non Google phones running Android 7.1.1. It received some security updates and is currently on Security Level June 1., 2017. It’s unclear if the Z5 compact will receive an Update to the next Android release “O” or if future security updates will be released. That makes 17 months of software support as of now. The list price was 550€ in early 2016.

The Fairphone 2 was launched in December 2015 with Android 5. It received Android 6 in spring 2017 and has since received regular security updates. It’s at Security Level June 1., 2017 as of writing and still in software support. However, it cannot receive Android 7 with Google certification, since it uses the same chipset as the Xperia Z3, a Snapdragon 801 by Qualcomm. It remains to be seen if Fairphone can pull some tricks at get major software upgrades for the FP2 through Lineage OS, but i would not count on it, so users who want to upgrade to Android 7 or newer will need to use community build and maintained software.

Is the only way to prevent software obsolescence to buy Apple?

At the moment, it seems so. If we want our devices to live a long live, software updates are essential. Not only do they keep the software secure and make sure you can install new apps, they also reduce the incentive and need to buy new hardware. At work, we can safely develop apps using old iPhone 5S phones, but still use all the latest APIs, for example. And since the OS is (almost) exactly the same on all iPhones, there is less incentive to be a new phone just to be on the bleeding edge.

As a software developer, i stop supporting old version of iOS not earlier then half a year after the next iOS release is out, if possible, to give users enough time to upgrade. That means if you bought an iPhone 5S in 2013, you will probably still be able to run my app in spring 2019 and i only have to test two OS versions.

If you bought an Nexus 5 in 2013, by 2019 you would be running a device that has not received security updates for over two years. I probably wont be able to stop support for Android 6 by then without loosing marketshare, but I need to test support not one or two OS releases but four. As a developer, I will probably not be using Android 6 by then, but a newer OS, as most users will. There will be very little incentives to fix bugs affecting your platform/version only and you will miss out features I can only provide on newer versions.

Whats the reason for this difference?

I see three main reasons for this difference in software support:

Finances Incentive Control Architecture of the OS

Finances

Apple is the most successful smartphone produces in the world. It has not only industry leading devices and software, but probably also the highest profit per device in the industry. That leaves more reserves to keep supporting older hardware, since all the support time has to be calculated in the device price. Profits in Android smartphones are said to be razor thin, at least if you are not in the high price model range, in which only very few manufactures have reasonable marketshare.

On the other hand, Apple devices a more pricey and customers expect better and longer support. This reflects in very high prices in the second hand market. How are you supposed to sell a used Android device for a good price if it has already been abandoned by the vendor.

Incentive

Apple has an image to lose. But more importantly, in stark contrast to Android manufacturers (except for Google), Apple continues to make money after the device is sold through App Store shopping and subscriptions to Apple and third party apps and services. This is doubly important: Again, it provides financial resources, but it also is a strong incentive to keep existing users happy. Everytime an iPhone is abandoned, Apple risks loosing customers to the far less expensive and sometimes technically superior Android world.

Android manufacturers make all their money when the device is sold. Larger manufacturers experimented with own app stores to get a small piece of the money, but all of them were ill-fated. In Europe and the US, the only relevant market for apps and services is the Play Store. And those profits go to Google. You could say that’s fair, since Google develops the Software and the manufacturer the hardware, but that is not the point. The point is: It provides very few incentives for manufacturers to keep older devices alive. They only have to support them long enough to prevent public outroar.

Control

Apple controls software and hardware development, including the chipset. On Android, on the other hand, there are several hundred manufacturers building thousands of different smartphones. They use software from Google and SoC from Qualcomm or MediaTek or their own. They simply don’t have the same level of control over their product and product lifecycle as Apple does. Even if Sony and Fairphone wanted to bring Android 7 to their respective devices, they simple can’t since the cant pass the Android 7 compatibility certification. If that is Google’s or Qualcomms fault or if both companies are equally to blame is still undecided.

By the way, the Google Pixel is the first device that’s not only sold but also developed by Google. That did not improve the support times mentioned above.

Solutions

I think I established a key point: Software maintenance is required to prevent obsolescence and Apple is leading in this area with iOS Software support. When I asked for your opinions on the post above, a frequent response was that I missed custom ROMs. Below I explain why I currently don’t think they are the solution to that problem.

Custom roms

A custom rom is a software (OS) you install on your smartphone, that is not provided by your manufacturer, but a third party. The best known custom rom was CyanogenOS, now it is Lineage OS. Custom roms are provided by enthusiasts, support length and quality vary between devices. Getting them to work required a lot of work, deep knowledge of Android and Linux programming and some tricks that manufacturers of devices cannot pull. Initiatives like Fairphone Open Source or Sony Open Devices can make porting customs roms to specific devices easier. At their best, custom roms provide long-time, up-to-date software that is maintained without a commercial interest. Still, by definition, they are by a third party. They are able to support older devices and can be developed by relativly few people since they do not need to go through certification, neither by Google nor by carries or governements. They come without Google Apps which are essential to many users and they are not supported, in a traditional sense, by the manufacturer.

Custom roms can be a fallback for enthusiasts, and i think it is important to support them through any means possible. But I don’t consider them a solution for the typical user.

Alternative Open Source Operating Systems

Note: Fairphone provides “Fairphone Open OS”, an Android based operating system that is in general compatible with Googles Version of Android, but lacking Googles Applications, especially the Play Store and some services popular with app developers. I don’t consider that an alternative operating system.

Similiar to many popular variants of Linux on the Desktop, there a few Open Source Operating System apart from Android. However, all efforts to establish more operating systems in the mobile space failed, in my view. Microsofts Windows Phone is history and Windows 10 on phones pratically non-existent, Microsofts Apps famously are better supported on iOS and Android compared to their on mobile OS. Blackberry stopped developing their technically interesting BlackBerry 10 OS, Mozilla stopped Firefox OS, a web based mobile OS that failed like WebOS, developed by Palm, then HP, years ago. The Nokia, Intel and Samsung Initiative MeeGo failed to, while it’s ideas live on in Sailfish OS by Jolla and Tizen by Samsung. Canonical stopped developing UbuntuTouch just this years, after years of development.

We need to accept it: At that time, there is no alternative to Android if you want to have any chance of commercial success. I would argue there is no alternative to Android with Google Services, as it is installed on the Fairphone 2, opposed to the Google free Fairphone Open OS, which I consider a niche. I love free software and I want it to develop in it’s niche. But it’s not, by any means, a solution for the problems above since it does not fit the requirements considered standard on a smartphone.

Interesting reads