It’s time to start paying for Android updates

No. The time has come for phone manufacturers to cease locking down phones and preventing one click updates.<p>Imagine a world where you had to buy a new desktop because the vendor provided you with Windows XP service pack 1 but decided the machine would no longer be supported? That situation does not exist, thankfully, because PC vendors never had the nerve to lock owners out of their own property.<p>The cell phone industry still thinks they should control every little interaction on the handset, forcing their bloated UI overlays, restricting features, and nickel and diming customers. I refuse to entertain the notion I should be giving these people more money for the sole purpose of formalizing their control my property.<p>I run ICS on a Samsung Galaxy S. Samsung officially will not support it because their resource intensive "improvement" called TouchWiz can't run on the older handset when ported to ICS. Meanwhile some kid, for free with spare time, managed to build a fully functional ICS version I run without issue.<p>At this point in time, locked bootloaders only exist to keep customers on the hardware upgrade treadmill. It needs to stop.

Aside from the strong note of Android OEM apologist emanating from this piece, the fact that this idea isn't /entirely/ preposterous speaks volumes about the sad state of the platform. What Google releases and what most buyers eventually experience are as different as day and night.<p>As a long time devotee and early-adopting "evangelist" (especially Maps, Gmail/Apps, Picasa, and eventually Android) it seems we are witnessing Google's decent into terminal failure to grasp the concept, and value, of "customer"...

The following is a wishing metric:<p>"If it charged just $10 for access to the update, that would be $150 million if only half of all users wanted an official update."<p>Few would pay for an update. Especially when the phone is likely to have even more bloatware added each update. Those who would want the update would install a custom rom, especially if it was unlocked by default. The only incentive to upgrade is when someone can't run the next big game.<p>More importantly, that new handset locks the customer into a new contract. That's the priority. Hopefully some egghead executive will realize that offering software updates, replacing batteries, and reducing monthly fees for loyal customers can earn them even more money.<p>Along a similar thought, I have very little desire to pay for Android software because developers have a habit of screwing their customers. I have purchased games with zero permissions to avoid adware in the past, only to have updates add a plethora of unwanted and unneeded security permissions.<p>Paid apps should not be allowed to add security permissions without giving the option for refunds and/or an honest Google code review.

May be we are barking at the wrong tree, carriers and device manufacturers that is. Case in point - Google's own Nexus S phone which has not yet received official ICS update! Either google intentionally holding it back hoping to sell more Galaxy Nexus phone with ICS installed or most likely the ICS leapfrogged at the expense of its backwards compatibility with the existing hardware. Google should wake up and smell the roses before it's going to be too late to repair the damage. Next time they announce a major OS update consumers will not even care because by the time they see the update on their phone, the next iOS version will be announced and pushed to iPhones on the same day.

This sounds ineffective. To most consumers, a software update is an annoyance whose benefits are often hazy. Look how hard they procrastinate <i>free</i> updates. So expecting money for an update to a device that's often replaced within a year or two is a non-starter.<p>The most effective thing Google can realistically do is ship desirable Motorola phones that get updated to the latest Android version the day of release.

If newer versions of Android monetize better for Google, then Google should be paying handset makers a bounty for each of their phones that is upgraded to the latest OS to encourage them to push the update. Otherwise it is likely cannibalizing their revenue from selling new phones (or at least they think it will), and they have little motivation to invest in updates.

Galaxy Nexus owner here. I'm still the only person in my office (a tech company with lots of geeks) who's running ICS. It's really lonely here on Android 4.<p>I don't think that paying for updates is going to help matters - that's just another good argument to get an iPhone. Instead, I think Google has to start giving device manufacturers a cut of the Android app store revenue. Others here have pointed out that handset makers have no incentive to keep their customers using the latest version of Android. If they wanted to make sure that their customers were still buying Android apps, keeping them on an up-to-date version of Android would be more important.

It seems to me that less in the way of UI tweaks and more standardization of drivers would solve the problem. Does anybody really buy a phone for Touchwiz or Motoblur? Could some of these tweaks be delivered as apps that can simply target Android releases instead of specific devices (with some sort of basic DRM to keep the average consumer from installing them on other manufacturer's devices)?<p>It shouldn't be so hard; the PC industry got this mostly right decades ago.

That seems like a tall order. You want them to charge for updates, but also make it easier for you to install updates without paying for them?

I think we should start paying for Android updates, but only by donating to the after-market Android community like CyanogenMod. These are the folks who bring the latest Android goodness to devices long abandoned by their makers.

Having to pay for Android updates would be a good reason to switch to iOS -- where updates are free.<p>The 3GS which was originally released with iOS 3 almost 3 years ago is still able to update to the most current iOS 5.1 for <i>free</i>.

Ah, b0o seems to be hell-banned, but quite frankly, I agree. I've donated over $300 to various overlay maintainers for CyanogenMod.<p>Why? Because, time and time and time again, they manage to do in 2 months what it takes carriers/manufacturers 8 months (or really, never) to do: update the software on my Android phone to the latest release.<p>I kept both my Droid and Fascinate for a good 6-months or more extra because I was able to load CyanogenMod on it. They both were on higher versions of Android when I decommisioned them than they will ever see official builds for.<p>Give me an unlocked bootloader, follow the terms of the GPL and I'm happy. For regular users, if you want fast updates, buy Nexus or buy Apple. I'm a big Android guy, but honestly, if you want fast updates and the Galaxy Nexus isn't available for your carrier, and you're not willing to install CyanogenMod... just buy an iPhone.