| ▲ | amarant an hour ago | |
It can be done, fairphone rather famously did it once. But it is vastly uneconomical, and I doubt anyone is going to start doing it regularly. We really need some kind of regulation demanding firmware support for longer. The EU seems the most likely entity to achieve something like that. Phone vendors can't even control how long they support their own hardware, because the SoC is almost always Qualcomm, and once they drop support, there aren't any good options left. | ||
| ▲ | strcat 17 minutes ago | parent [-] | |
> It can be done, fairphone rather famously did it once. No, they ported a new major Android release beyond what the SoC officially supported. They had already stopped providing firmware, kernel or driver security patches long before that point. They did what LineageOS regularly does by porting a new major Android release to hardware not officially supporting it. Unlike LineageOS, they had to convince a company to certify it as meeting the CDD/CTS requirements. Most OEMs including Fairphone have major CDD/CTS violations but yet still get certified in practice so that doesn't really mean as much as you'd think. It's common for Android OEMs to break functionality tested by the CTS and yet somehow they have certification. This is part of why the Play Integrity API's flimsy justification for the highly anti-competitive approach it uses is such nonsense. Even the Fairphone 5 already lacks standard Linux kernel security patches due to having an end-of-life kernel branch. Fairphone doesn't provide anything close to proper updates. Qualcomm offers up to 8 years of major Android version updates and basic security patches for their firmware and drivers. They charge money for each year of support. It's there if OEMs are willing to pay for an up-to-date SoC and pay for many years of support. | ||