> that makes it easier and faster for hardware makers to deliver Android updates.
They still don't get it. Google as the OS vendor should update all phones and NOT the hardware makers. Hardware manufacturers can still update their special features on the side after an OS update got deployed but I want that the OS and its core become updates directly and only from Google. Why is this so hard?
Except Google is not the OS vendor for these OEM's. Each OEM forks and creates their own version of Android that they build from source. If you want a phone with Google as the OS vendor that gets updates every month and new OS versions every year then you have to buy a Pixel. If history has taught us anything it's that OEM's cannot be trusted to update their devices.
Google doesn't want to bear the cost of testing and releasing updates for all of the hardware. Most Android manufacturers barely manage to break even (or outright lose money) trying to sell and support Android hardware. (Samsung makes money, most others don't.)
Blaming the OEMs for your security issues is free.
I don't think that MS tests all hardware when updating Windows. Sometimes some hardware doesn't work after an Windows update and then you just head to the respective hardware manufacturer and try to get updated drivers. This model could work for phones too. Google updates and maybe my S8's camera is not working anymore but at least we have secure and patched phones. And the good thing is: Samsung has to quickly fix the broken camera, so you create a totally different urgency.
But Android is an odd OS, we will never see a proper update policy from them.
It depends what we're talking about. Specifically with ARM processors, it isn't trivial to add drivers separate from your OS deployment. Microsoft DOES work with (and update) third party hardware directly for Windows 10 Mobile devices. And this is true for their third party phones from HP, Acer, etc. as well.
(Note, I have a Windows Mobile device from 2014, and I still receive the latest security fix on Patch Tuesday around 1 PM, every month.)
This is what they tell us for decades. You can just disable parts of an SoC if no driver is available. This is just an architectural decision Google is not willing to address.
And ARM reference designs from a handful of manufacturers are not that different.
> You can just disable parts of an SoC if no driver is available.
So you want Google to ship updates where parts of the hardware just stop working? That sounds fucking awful, no thanks.
And yes ARM's ecosystem has largely still not standardized on self-discover or self-configuration because they have no incentive to. They just hardcode whatever configuration they need and call it a day.
They still don't get it. Google as the OS vendor should update all phones and NOT the hardware makers. Hardware manufacturers can still update their special features on the side after an OS update got deployed but I want that the OS and its core become updates directly and only from Google. Why is this so hard?