Because they want you to upgrade, duh.That’s a step in the right direction, but certainly disappointing given the additional two years provided by their competitors. I see no reason why Apple doesn’t provide the same length of support as their Macs which is essentially 7 years.
You can certainly do better here Apple.
Children can want whatever they want. However most don’t have any income until they are at least a teenager. Kids are at the mercy of what their parents decide when it comes to these things.kids usually want the latest more than their parents who know the value vs cost equation since they earn money to pay for them.![]()
Please read again. The commitment isn’t for more than security updates.The problem with this 'commitment' is it does not mean that iPhones will have full facilities, i.e. AI for example, where it suggests that even phones way under 5 years will find they can not utilise functions otherwise available.
Effectively it might support software upgrades, but not necessarily full upgrades across the 5 year range, so by recent comments about AI, it would make that 5 year support somewhat erroneous.
That’s a step in the right direction, but certainly disappointing given the additional two years provided by their competitors. I see no reason why Apple doesn’t provide the same length of support as their Macs which is essentially 7 years.
You can certainly do better here Apple.
Strange move by Apple to only guarantee the five-year minimum. Would be interesting to know what the rationale is behind this.
Long term software support is probably the most important reason why I buy and recommend Apple devices.
Don't they already do much more than that ? And not just security fixes, but major releases too.
My iPhone XR from 2018 has the very latest OS six years later.
Wouldn’t that force the manufacturer to provide security updates until after the last authorized dealer makes a sale? So theoretically forever?Should be from when the device is last sold.
The 5s, 7 and 8 got the same amount of updates. The 6 and 6s are the outliers.This is actually *less* of a commitment than Google for the Pixel, which is very surprising. 7 years should be a minimum. The iPhone 5s got 7 years of software support, and roughly two more in occassional security updates.
But support has been decreasing over years. iPhone 6 got a year less of support, and so did the iPhone 7 and iPhone 8.
Apple's hoping we don't notice.
The "rationale" is that the UK created a law saying that you must have 5 years of security support, and Apple just filed regulatory filing promising the comply with the law.Strange move by Apple to only guarantee the five-year minimum. Would be interesting to know what the rationale is behind this.
Long term software support is probably the most important reason why I buy and recommend Apple devices.
That’s a step in the right direction, but certainly disappointing given the additional two years provided by their competitors. I see no reason why Apple doesn’t provide the same length of support as their Macs which is essentially 7 years.
You can certainly do better here Apple.
lol never happyNo, they should do better.
A minimum of five years of major OS versions (as they have already been doing in the past) is okay IMO, but security updates should be guaranteed for longer. Google and Samsung show it's possible.
Remember, Apple sells iPhones for 3 years. So 5 years after initial release is only 2 years for some customers. That's just not enough. (Again, not talking about new features but security updates, without which using the phone is frankly gambling.)
So slow? Seems unlikely to me as I have multiple android devices that are older than 7 years and remain very functional, I also have a Galaxy S9+ (6+ years old) with an original battery and I run that phone ragged charging it sometimes 2-3 times a day on days I continuously have a game running on it - it's become my primary mobile gaming device.The problem is, Google giving the Pixel 8 line 7 years of updates mean that by the time they get their final update, the devices will likely be so slow to the point of not even being remotely as functional as they are now. So longer update periods aren't always a good thing. And knowing Google and how often they kill things off, there's no way of knowing if Google will even stick to that support period. And Samsung still takes forever to roll out major software updates. And to be honest, you can't exactly say "Google and Samsung show it's possible" when at the moment there's been no proof, just text on a website.
The law says it’s 5 year minimum so they said okay cause they’re doing it anyway. This is a non-storyStrange move by Apple to only guarantee the five-year minimum. Would be interesting to know what the rationale is behind this.
Long term software support is probably the most important reason why I buy and recommend Apple devices.
First it was requiring USB-C ports on new Apple devices. Then came alternative app stores. Now comes the legal requirement that Apple has to provide a certain number of years of security updates? So sick and tired of countries creating laws that tell Apple how to run their business.Apple has revealed its commitment to a minimum of five years of iPhone security software updates from the date a device is launched, thanks to a new legal requirement in the United Kingdom
I'll just clarify a few things.The problem is, Google giving the Pixel 8 line 7 years of updates mean that by the time they get their final update, the devices will likely be so slow to the point of not even being remotely as functional as they are now. So longer update periods aren't always a good thing. And knowing Google and how often they kill things off, there's no way of knowing if Google will even stick to that support period. And Samsung still takes forever to roll out major software updates. And to be honest, you can't exactly say "Google and Samsung show it's possible" when at the moment there's been no proof, just text on a website.
Google also said they will supply all replacement parts for pixel 8 series for 7 years so they're in it for the long haul.I'll just clarify a few things.
So if the Pixel 8 and 8 Pro would become unusable, or barely usable as a direct consequence of getting new Android versions I'm very sure Google would have not committed to 7 years of updates. The simple truth is that the last few Android versions most of the changes and improvements were under the hood(better berformance, optimisation, efficiency in general). Also Google’s canceling of certain products doesn't have anything to do with their commitment to provide software updates for the phones, if anything Google generally provided more software updates for their Pixels than they initially promised .
Regarding Samsung, no, they don't take for ever to roll out major updates.New Android versions don't even have an official launch date anymore , in general the cadence is one major software update every 12 months or so, just like Apple. For example last time, Google launched the new Pixels in October and the S23U got Android 14 in November. And OneUI 6.0 wasn't just plain Android 14.
Did you just completely miss the part of the article that said Apple has already shown multiple times recently that they've been pushing critical security updates for devices that are 7-10 years old? What more do you them to do? Anyone still rocking an iPhone 6s in 2024 is long overdue for an upgrade...That’s a step in the right direction, but certainly disappointing given the additional two years provided by their competitors. I see no reason why Apple doesn’t provide the same length of support as their Macs which is essentially 7 years.
You can certainly do better here Apple.
When do they issue just a security update?The commitment is for SECURITY UPDATES not all new features.
You can't advance hardware and memory and expect 5 year old phones to cope.
They would have to cater to the base level hardware from 5 (or 7) years prior.
When do they issue just a security update?Please read again. The commitment isn’t for more than security updates.