undefined | Better HN

0 pointsDCKing8y ago0 comments

I'm very skeptical of the level of optimism that is thrown towards Project Treble.

In the end it's just a way to make OEM's lives easier while developing updates. It will still require them to actually make updates for devices. Despite Project Treble they will still not have an economic incentive to update devices. And that is the core issue here, really.

My expectation is that Project Treble will help speeding up Android updates - they should come to devices sooner than they are released now, because Treble shortens the development process of updates. I don't expect devices to be updated any longer than they are now, or receive much more updates. OEMs will remain economically unpunished for not updating and likely will just pocket the money saved in the development process.

The only way to solve this problem is to build a "Windows Update for Android" whereby system components are updated in a modular and OEM independent way. The fundamental issue in Android's update problem is that OEMs are fully responsible for device updates and not motivated to do this job well, and Project Treble does not signficantly change this [1].

Don't get me wrong, Project Treble is a great move for Android. I however don't think it will make a huge difference in the Android update story.

[1]: EDIT: it's worth pointing out that Project Treble looks like a necessary move to make a "Windows Update for Android" happen though. Let's see if that becomes a reality.

0 comments

mariusmg8y ago

>and Project Treble does not signficantly change this

This hits the nail on the head. ProjectTreble thing will make no significant change in the long run. OEMs don't care about updating Android, they only care about selling hardware and developing shitty custom launchers.

Google is the only one that could change this. They could "tie" the Android licensing (Play Store and their custom bits) to forcing the OEM to release n major version updates . But they won't do this because it will hurt them financially (less licenses sold in the long run..)

DCKingOP8y ago

To be honest, I think Google has LG, HTC, Sony, Nokia, Lenovorola, and almost every other Android manufacturer in the pocket here. These companies don't have the capabilities to independently make a competitive OS and app ecosystem and will have to comply with Google wherever it goes. With the exception of LG, all of these companies have even significantly dialed down their efforts to customize Android from AOSP or "Google's Android flavour" (that ships on Pixels) in the first place.

However, when Google would make such a move then they will see Samsung leave immediately and Huawei shortly thereafter. And Samsung makes 50% of Android devices - it will be a very hard business decision to justify destroying their ties with Samsung over device updates [1]. Note that Samsung periodically trots out their Tizen operating system to remind everybody that they can be independent of Android should they want to. Huawei will probably just fork Android and attempt to maintain their own app store.

The Android device market is rife with politics and the consumer is mostly on the short of the stick for it. And Apple is the real winner there - they can sell more expensive devices because people are rightly happy to pay a premium not to deal with Android's bullshit.

[1]: Ironically, Samsung is likely the best Android OEM for device updates - if and only if you consider their high end Galaxy S and Galaxy Note lines. The real issue is that Samsung wants to also flood the market with cheap crappy devices and never update them - and will likely happily ditch Android for Tizen to continue to do so.

Mindwipe8y ago

Honestly, I'm not sure it's any threat from Samsung that means Google won't do this. I think it's (justified) fear from their legal team that adding any additional licensing terms to the Play Store right now given the European Commission are about to come down on them like a ton of bricks under anti-competition law is suicidal.

Shame Google wasted a lot of capital they had trying to do some really silly things in Android for a few years, and didn't lance this boil while they still had the chance.

irq-18y ago

Couldn't Google use an immutable HAL as a way to make updates themselves? Let users drop manufacturer customizations and get stock android on an older phone.

1 more reply

srcmap8y ago

There might be another way.

I heard from "Security Now" podcast that there is a new law that require all government purchased IOT devices must be update-able to fix security issue.

Expand the law a bit:

Make all internet connected device makers (Include phone maker) liable for any loss of private consumer info, hack for 10 years from any internet connected devices release.

Anyone can file lawsuit against them easily or in class actions against the vendor if they don't provide security fixed/upgrade within 4-6 months of from being notify of the vulnerability.

Establish an ISO security standard for IOT (and all Phone): such as

1) Standardize SW/FW update requirement, method and audit. ssl, security hash, CA, etc.

2) Requires system to monitor and log all program/critical system components creation/execution/all internet connection and download for auditing by owner of device.

3) Require system vendors to have source code / tools chain / build system in place to rebuild and fix security issues.

Once the vendors are liable for hack. They will need Insurance. The Insurance Company can follow the ISO security standard to audit and estimate the potential cost.

digi_owl8y ago

At least for companies rolling mostly stock Android, rather than the Samsung's of the world, Treble may well make it possible for them to simply forward what is coming from Google without the SoC source being an impediment. Something Google themselves were burned by when Qualcomm dropped support for the SoC used in a Nexus model, forcing Google to cut their support time short.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse