If the OS is written in a way, that core can be updated and it won't break anything.
Kinda like Linux, Windows and MacOS.
Agree with most people here, 2 years should be absolute minimum for ALL devices, 3+ for expensive stuff.
Higher mid-range devices and above have hardware good enough to easily last 3-4 years, so it would be real nice if software didn't become obsolete after less than 2 ...
Galaxy Note 9, 04 Feb 2018For flagship mobiles costing above $800 must provide security updates and possible enhancement... moreThat's right. And manufactures doesn't really need to push too hard to give fast updates. They need to test it first before released for lessen the risks or prevents bloatware and software problems.
2years for mid-range and 3 for anything above 500$ and no cheating like launching a phone with outdated software.
Doesn't quite matter as long as custom ROMs keep going.
What a stupid question, imo as long as ti works.. even if its 4years old.
At least 2 years, since most contracts are 2 years long now.
My opinion using examples
Low ends = 8.0 out of box, then 9.0
Low midranges = 8.0 out of box, then 9.0
Midranges = 8.0 out of box, 9.0 and 10.0
Flagships = 8.0 out of box, 8.1, 9.0, 9.1 , 10.0, 10.1 and 11.0
More OEMs should join Android One programm, at least their simple phones. It is easier to run stock. And who buys simple phones does not need all features from modified UIs.
For flagship mobiles costing above $800 must provide security updates and possible enhancements for three years from the day it starts launching. All other mobiles could be max two years updates. No need for monthly updates. One update every quarter or six months is enough. Major upgrades could be within one year.
2 years should be a minimum (and we expect relatively often updates during this time) but even after these 2 years we should still get at least one update each year for another 1-2 years.