As a point of comparison, Microsoft ships its OS across a variety of manufacturers and largely keeps it maintained across them (give or take some exceptions like enterprise environments & the like).

Even unlocked Android phones purchased independently of carriers have inconsistent lengths of support, so it doesn’t seem to be entirely a result of carriers, so…What happened here?

  • Mrduckrocks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Good explanation and lines in with why iPhone get years of support as they have full control of hardware and drivers.

    • stappern@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      a huge asterisk here. apple cuts off support to perfectly valid devices for greed. since they dont have any hardware limitation. an ipad mini 2 today is a brick basically, because fuck you buy another product bitch.

      • ribboo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I mean an iPad mini 2 would obviously struggle with iOS today due to hardware limitations.

        And you’re very much free to use it, problem is app developers do not find it worthwhile their time supporting older devices (we are talking devices that’s a minimum of five years old, more likely 7-8) so few use them and it impacts what they can and cannot do. Thus it becomes unusable.

        But all Apple apps will obviously still work.

        • stappern@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I mean an iPad mini 2 would obviously struggle with iOS today due to hardware limitations.

          NO, it would not.

          you can take a 20yo laptop and run WIN 11 and the latest macos and the latest linux kernel.

          im sick of this excuse. you have been brainwashed if you REALLY think thats a limitation. it is NOT.

          • ribboo@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            My 10 year old Thinkpad barely qualifies as “running” windows 10, not Ubuntu for that matter. Haven’t bothered trying 11. I do partly agree with you, especially moving forward. But an iPad mini 2 has 1 gb of ram and 16 gb of space, both rather huge limitations for a mobile OS of today.

            • stappern@lemmy.one
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              i can run the latest linux kernel on a device with 512mb of ram.

              My 10 year old Thinkpad barely qualifies as “running” windows 10,

              that laptop can run windows 10 just fine.it can run win 11 just fine and its gonna be able to run win 12 just fine.

              • ribboo@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Did a computer bought to run windows 95 run XP? Did a computer bought for 98 run Vista? That’s a more fair comparison, as mobile operating systems are very young. And mobile devices from 10 years ago have hardware that could not really be compared to computers.

                Sure, processors at peak capacity where good. But forcing a 10 year old processor running todays software would drain the battery - that was also in no way comparable to today - to fast. And that is even if you could install the OS, as there is so little device space on many of them. Then you open one app and you’re out of ram potentially causing crashes all over the place, because mobile apps are rarely built for efficiency.

                It would be a horrid experience.

                • stappern@lemmy.one
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Did a computer bought to run windows 95 run XP?

                  yes

                  Did a computer bought for 98 run Vista?

                  yes

                  shit the brainwash is complete,i guess you are too far gone

                  • ribboo@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    XP was based on the NT kernel while 95 was using DOS. You’re just plain wrong. Spec wise it would not have worked.

                    And a computer built for 98 sure as hell did not reach the requirements to run Vista. Hell, many XP computers struggled and were not allowed to upgrade.

                    You’re just plain wrong.