332
Microsoft cuts ties with the Surface Duo after just 2 Android version updates
(www.windowscentral.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2023
332 points (97.7% liked)
Technology
59148 readers
2324 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
You know, I don't disagree with vendors putting whatever hardware they want in their devices, and I don't mind vendor-customized software. But what I do mind is the barrier of supporting these devices without relying on the vendor.
If I buy an x86 computer, I can use it basically however long I want to. I can put a variety of operating systems on it, and I don't really need to rely on vendors much aside from binary driver blobs, which isn't really that much of a problem these days.
I really wish that Android wasn't so customized per device. I wish I could just install upstream Android on anything that can run it, instead of special binary images for each vendor's make and model. Android is open source and all, but simply having the sources to work with is the easiest part. Making it actually work is significantly n more difficult.
Imagine buying that aforementioned x86 machine, but you had to run a giant, customized binary blob specifically made for a laptop's make and model. And you had to throw it away after a few years not because you need more resources, but because you cannot upgrade the OS anymore.
The reality is that we need laws that force them to either to continue to offer affordable support or publish all the specs and documentation when they drop support. Vendors shouldn’t be allowed to do otherwise.
That sounds pretty reasonable. I feel so owned by technology lately. It used to be exciting to have tech that you could decide when you wanted to retire it and focus spending on something new and different that served a different purpose. Now I feel like I'm stuck with all the same basic gadgets but I just need to keep throwing money at them to replace them every few years. It's about as unexciting as having to spend money on an oil change. I'm pretty primed by this as recently my electric objects picture frame just pulled the plugs on their server recently with no notice and bam, I have a black screen in my living room instead of pictures of my dog, family, and favorite artwork.
Why doesnt it work like that though? Combined with mandatory open bootloader it would free people
^pls,eu🥺^
Generally, the hardware in a small, power-efficient, SoC embedded device is going to be a lot more particular and a lot less general than your gaming computer’s motherboard. It’s harder to write general OS software for specific integrated systems rather than a big set of chips which provide an individual chip for the BIOS, specialized chips for the PCI ports, etc., all of which have become more standardized over time.