So recently I’ve been seeing the trend where Android OEMs such as Google, Samsung, etc. have been extending their software release times up to like five, six, and seven years after device release. Clearly, phone hardware has gotten to the point where it can support software for that long, and computers have been in that stage for a very long time. From what I can tell, the only OEM that does this currently might be Fairphone.
Edit: The battery is the thing that goes the fastest so manufacturers could just offer new batteries and that would solve a lot of the problem.
Who cares if they release a new one every year? Just buy a new phone when you actually need one.
Lots of people care because it creates e-waste.
If the culture changes so that all consumers act like that and forces the companies to change their production cycle, that would be a big boon for the environment.
Yep.
For about the past decade, I’ve only ever upgraded because the current broke (and beyond economic repair), or otherwise became untenable.
Using a refurb S10 now. The S8 prior had a bust screen. Only had that because I needed it to play nice with Bluetooth LE hearing aids. Probably my only recent upgrade that went from one working phone to another.
Tend to only buy flagships, as they are better supported by alternative software - good if they live long enough to age out of official updates.
Just don’t buy one every year? We get new car models every year based on improvements in technology why not phones? You don’t have to buy one every year, nobody is forcing you
Since everyone here has the big brain idea of telling you you’re dumb for not just buying a phone every couple years (completely missing the point of what you were asking), I’ll take a minute to actually answer your question.
Yes. Annual refreshes are way too frequent for technology this mature. Slowing it to every other year instead (maybe software releases on odd years, hardware on even?) would dramatically reduce costs and improve stability. Changes would have time to be thoroughly rested and implemented, and they’d get more use out of the same design (including components, molds, tooling, etc.). It would actually be better for manufacturers too, in that it would be more efficient (they’d make slightly less money, but with significantly less work and investment), but they would never do it. Manufacturers don’t succeed by being good at what they do, they succeed by manipulating the meta. Regular releases keep your brand on people’s minds. Timing your announcements and making a big deal about it makes a huge difference (everyone wants to be the hot thing in Q4 so people buy them for Christmas), and brands don’t want to miss an opportunity.
The annual cycle is a marketing tactic. And it honestly works, so I think it’s probably here to stay.
I didn’t really have any reason to listen to them because I already do not buy a new phone every year and keep them for as long as I can.
They could have always supported software for that long. They simply refused to.
There is no benefit to slowing the release cycle. All of the research gets done either way, all of the supply chain modifications get made either way, and as an individual you have no need to replace your phone every year. A multi-year release cycle does very little but screw over people who need a new phone during the wrong point in the release cycle, while also substantially complicating the supply chains by making demand much spikier.
Conservation wise there is a very big reason to slow down the release cycle
No, there isn’t. People who are buying new phones every year are trading them in, and they’re going to other people who are more price conscious.
Manufacturing several year old tech results in brand new hardware with a shorter life cycle. You’re not going to get 5 or 10 years of updates on a phone that was 5 years behind tech advancement when you bought it.
The people chasing novelty would do so by jumping manufacturers instead, so you don’t change their behavior at all.
And like you said, sometimes you need to replace a phone.
Maybe it was lost, or destroyed.
Good points
Edit: Though there was the point in the early to mid-2010s where hardware was improving so rapidly that it would have been infeasible to not replace it as soon as possible.
Compare with the yearly release cycle on cars.
People apparently use installment plans for phone purchases these days, along with a downstream used market, so it’s actually a really apt analogy.
That is kind of my thought. Phone technology doesn’t change drastically within two years and a car does not change drastically within two years.
But people are constantly buying millions of both, so makes sense to have small yearly updates and major revisions every few years.
Which is basically how both phones and cars are developed now.
Typically they’ll do a major revamp or a clean sheet design of a model, so the 2005 Hoyota Civrolla is a completely new car. The 2006 Civrolla will be available in a few different paint colors and 2 different wheel options. The 2007 model has a different grille so it looks even more like it’s smiling while wearing a retainer. The 2008 model has a different washer bottle assembly and the battery tray is now molded plastic instead of stamped steel. The 2008 model is available with a 2.7 liter engine in addition to the 3.6. 2009 they eliminate the base model trim so now they all have power mirrors and cruise control. The 2010 models with CD players can now play mp3s off the CD. 2011 they only sell the 6-speed manual with the 2.7 liter engine, the V6 is only available with an automatic. 2012 they do a major style update, same chassis and running gear, different bodywork and the interior shares more components with the Elamry.
It’s been time for like 10 years
I don’t even understand the concern here: why shouldn’t manufacturers have a yearly release cycle? Technology continues to change and there’s value in continuing to improve. I also don’t understand how better software support means less hardware improvement.
If you mean “a consumers yearly purchase cycle”, then yeah. Long since. It’s such a huge waste of money for incremental value and always was. Don’t get caught up in the hype or be manipulated by marketing. It always made more sense to upgrade on your terms
The annual cycle is quite nice from a buyer’s perspective too, when I need a new phone I’ve got a reasonable idea that Google aren’t going to release a new device in a couple of months and leave me feeling shafted.
Very true. In contrast, I’m fed up with Firestick and am interested in trying AppleTV instead. But that device is two years old. I’m not in a hurry to buy, so that means I’m on the sidelines as I waited for the Spring announcement, then the summer announcement, then the fall announcement, and a new model never came. Now I’m getting stubborn: there must be a new version coming soon. If I knew when to expect any update, Apple would likely already have my money
Other than a flip phone in 2005 that died a death I now have the skills to fix, I have never bought a new phone after only one year. I upgraded from an S4 to an S10. The time to flat out reject the yearly release cycle is over a decade old at this point.
The whole idea of making phones disposable was stupid from the get go. I’d say that most mid-tier phones from 2017 should be perfectly serviceable for every stupid app being widely used nowadays. High end phones from 7, 8 years ago are still perfectly fine
I mean, even power gamers barely need all the power that the high end phones offer, because mobile games always aim for the low end, with few exceptions.
That fucking Apple started with the stupid shit of gluing the phone, and every other fucking company copied that shit, really pisses me off. 2015 phones could have their backs opened and the battery changed if needed, no need for special tools.
Phones are unlikely to become open, as in owners can actually fuck around with the software and hardware as they’d like, anytime soon. A few try that, but it’s unlikely to become mainstream because there’s no market pressure
Yeah, up until about 2 weeks ago I was still using a Pixel 4. It was 5 years old but never felt slow at all.
Still rocking the Pixel3. Waiting on appleSE refresh
I just went with the $100 Motorola stylus (it has a built in stylus!) and just pay $4/month with 0% interest so I’m paying much less than $100 over two years. These cheaper phones usually hold up better to abuse than more expensive phones. I had the pixle 5a and the screen died just after two years (a known issue) screens for it are more expensive than $100 right now.
4*24=96, you’re probably paying exactly $100 over two years.
Not a huge savings, but still.
another way of looking at it.
What’s the NPV of 24 monthly $4 payments assuming a 4% annual rate of return?
At least $3.50
The vendors like you to buy a new phone every year so that they can get more money from you.
When they advertise that “only our latest product has smart thingy, or picture erase, or circle to search”, they’re really telling you that they are trying to find a reason for you to throw perfectly good hardware away so that you can spend more money.
If the software lasts that long, and it’s doing what you need, there’s no reason you have to buy a new phone each year.
Every time you keep your phone a bit longer instead of buying a new one, you’re reducing the waste that goes to landfill (let’s be honest, most people throw their obsolete electronics literally in the trash rather than direct them to approved recycling and disposal).
Makes sense from manufacturing and business perspective to refresh your offer every year. It doesn’t have to be a huge improvement, but technology slowly advances, there might be a better or cheaper manufacture for some components, etc.
On the other hand there no reason for any individual to be buying a new phone so often. Software support must be a thing - there’s no reason for a phone to become obsolete after 2 years because of the software. It’s a computer, you can update the OS almost indefinitely.
Just this month I finally moved off my 2017 flagship… Only because my cell provider stopped supporting it (for no fucking reason).
I was running the latest version of Lineage too. Thing was great. It did need a battery (which I may still replace for about $7).
Retail stores rarely carry a phone older than two years, as long as they push new phones every year, people will be buying those phones.
OEM’s could have like 3 battery types, mass produce these 3 and offer battery replacement for maybe 30 bucks or less? OEM’s could have like 3 phone designs and update the internals, making each screen replacement maybe 50 bucks or less? Instead each has unique screen, motherboard, subboard and battery combo. My 10y/o nokia has the same battery as a new one, they cost like 5 bucks each.
Needless to say I love the EU for bringing back user serviceable batteries, that’s a great start.
I don’t think there would be any advantage in stopping yearly releases.
I think individuals should stop buying new phones often and that you should still be able to use a 15 year old phone just like you can use a 15 year old computer without security risks (with Linux).
That’s what the system or laws should encourage.
Well 15 years won’t quite work as well due to cell frequency changes and the occasional fundamental software changes, but people could really stand to keep their phones for like 5 years no problem. New stuff coming out isn’t usually “revolutionary” most of the time. AI isn’t cool enough to want right now, and picture stuff only ever gets a minor improvement. Same for battery life or screen quality.
Do people really buy new phones every year? I keep mine for a minimum of 4-5 years and always have. I had one for so long that it was no longer supported and I was forced to upgrade.
I guess I just never paid attention to how often other people get new phones, but every year seems excessive.
I’d say every other year is pretty close to average.
Well we can use computers, consoles and TV’s which are 15 years old everyday and still connected to the internet.
I know it’s not doable right now, but I think we should change the way we consume and get rid of technology.
And I’m not talking about a car that you can use for way more than 15 years reliably.
On a general note I would say for the individual consumer it doesn’t matter so much if they keep releasing yearly, we just don’t have to buy yearly.
It’s kind of a waste of resources for the manufacturers supporting more models than necessary. If that leads to shorter support schedules that’s when it impacts us. But as you observed they seem to be lengthening at the moment.
I’m currently on a Pixel 6 from 2021, that I bought used from someone who was chasing the latest and greatest. I have no reason for changing yet. After October 2026 when support ends I’ll see if I have to migrate to Graphene OS or something. If no secure path forward exists I may have to get newer hardware then.
Manufactures are not going to offer replacement part, its more valuable for them to make you buy a new phone than replace a part yourself
They will with batteries since the EU is forcing the issue starting in 2026.
From what I can tell, the only OEM that does this currently might be Fairphone.
Does what? I don’t see anything in the sentences before that “this” could refer to.
Apparently they use one of the faster IoT chips that’s supported for like 10 years.
There is no CPU that is ever going to be supported for 10 years for a consumer application. ARM CPUs today are 20x faster than they were 10 years ago, and the ARM/RISC-V chips a decade from now will likely be 10-20x faster than today.
Regardless, the Kryo 670 CPU in the Fairphone 5 is already 3.5 years old, and it’s not super special, it’s just a semi-custom Snapdragon SoC. Consider that 4G LTE launched 13 years ago in the USA, and in 10 years that Kryo chip in the FP5 will be older than that. Could you handle the performance of your last 3G phone today?
There is quite a large delta between 512 KVPS 3G and even rather slow 4G at say like 10 MBPS which allows you to stream 1080p video etc. Yes 10 MBPS is not super fast for downloading but it will get your tasks done within a decent time.
