- cross-posted to:
- android@lemdro.id
- cross-posted to:
- android@lemdro.id
You must log in or register to comment.
Isn’t that nice for the Pixel8. I wonder what’s holding them back do the same for older models with their chip. Like the Pixel6
I remember reading an article few days ago about this. The gist is:
- Google was not confident with Tensor 1 & 2 chips and didn’t want to burden itself with a hardware that was going to be difficult to support.
- Previous iterations of Pixel had Qualcomm chips, and QC doesn’t support its chip for that long.
Funny how a single, relatively tiny company that tries to do things more ethically can move the entire industry. We really need more companies like Fairphone.
- shiveyarbles ( @shiveyarbles@beehaw.org ) English4•9 months ago
It’s hilarious how they market security updates as a limited time feature. These fuckers need to be regulated so badly.
Software maintenance and updates cost money. Nobody reasonable would say you’re entitled to a lifetime of support for a piece of hardware you buy, unless you specifically pay for this service. The specific support lifetime that is cost-effective for the business and consumer depends on the product and the business, it’s not an easy target for regulation.
7 years of security updates isn’t that bad for a phone.
Could they now?
How about that they would and should?