Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.mobile.android > #148749 > unrolled thread

Alternate OS for LG V20?

Back to article view | Back to comp.mobile.android

Contents

  Alternate OS for LG V20? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-06-11 02:53 -0500
    Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2025-06-11 11:22 +0100
      Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-06-11 08:46 -0500
        Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? Marion <marion@facts.com> - 2025-06-11 15:27 +0000
        Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-06-12 10:20 +0200
          Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? Marion <marion@facts.com> - 2025-06-12 17:27 +0000
          Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-06-12 13:58 -0500
            Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-06-13 01:06 +0200
              Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? AJL <noemail@none.com> - 2025-06-13 00:57 +0000
                Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? Marion <marion@facts.com> - 2025-06-13 02:09 +0000
                  Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? AJL <noemail@none.com> - 2025-06-13 02:44 +0000
                    Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-06-13 08:29 +0100
                      Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? Marion <marion@facts.com> - 2025-06-13 13:51 +0000
              Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-06-12 20:42 -0500
              Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-06-12 21:28 -0500
                Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-06-13 13:26 +0200
              Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? Marion <marion@facts.com> - 2025-06-13 02:35 +0000
            Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? Gelato <gelato@.is.invalid> - 2025-06-12 22:14 -0400
              Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-06-13 04:21 -0500
                Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-06-13 11:18 +0100
                  Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? Gelato <gelato@.is.invalid> - 2025-06-13 10:06 -0400
                    Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-06-13 15:17 +0100
                      Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-06-13 11:43 -0500
                        Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-06-13 20:55 +0200
                          Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? Marion <marion@facts.com> - 2025-06-15 03:50 +0000
                            Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-06-16 19:54 +0200
                        Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-06-13 20:46 +0100
                          Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? Marion <marion@facts.com> - 2025-06-15 03:53 +0000
                        Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-06-16 08:50 +0200
                    Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-06-13 11:01 -0500
                      Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2025-06-13 17:18 +0100
                    Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-06-13 20:57 +0200
                      Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? Marion <marion@facts.com> - 2025-06-15 03:59 +0000
                        Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-06-15 07:23 +0100
                          Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? Marion <marion@facts.com> - 2025-06-15 16:18 +0000
                            Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-06-16 19:58 +0200
            Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2025-06-13 16:48 +0100
              Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-06-13 12:00 -0500
                Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? AJL <noemail@none.com> - 2025-06-13 17:40 +0000
                  Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? Marion <marion@facts.com> - 2025-06-13 18:13 +0000
              Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? Wolf Greenblatt <wolf@greenblatt.net> - 2025-06-13 14:07 -0400
      Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? Marion <marion@facts.com> - 2025-06-11 15:07 +0000
    Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-06-11 11:35 +0100
      Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2025-06-11 11:43 +0100
        Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-06-11 09:07 -0500
          Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2025-06-11 15:31 +0100
            Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? Oscar <oscar@invalid.net> - 2025-06-11 11:11 -0400
              Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2025-06-11 22:02 +0100
                Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? Oscar <oscar@invalid.net> - 2025-06-12 14:51 -0400
                  Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2025-06-13 16:59 +0100
            Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-06-12 14:10 -0500
              Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? AJL <noemail@none.com> - 2025-06-12 21:48 +0000
                Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-06-12 18:08 -0500
                  Re: Alternate OS for LG V20? AJL <noemail@none.com> - 2025-06-13 00:42 +0000

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

#148749 — Alternate OS for LG V20?

After rooting my unlocked LG V20 (AT&T model H-910), I'd like to get
something newer than the Android 8.0.0 that is on it now.  I thought
about Lineage OS, but https://wiki.lineageos.org/devices/#lg does not
list the V20, just the V30, and up.  They have a clear warning "Devices
not listed are not supported."  Yet I read where someone said they got
LineageOS 21 on their LG V20 phone, but they didn't mention which model,
yet the following mentions LineageOS on the H-910 model:

https://xdaforums.com/t/official-lineageos-20-for-the-lg-v20.4618097/
https://xdaforums.com/t/closed-official-lineageos-21-for-the-lg-v20.4649861/

However, both note some significant failures of these OS versions in
handling all the hardware or proprietary libs used on my phone.

With the old Android 8.0.0 now on my phone, too many apps have severed
their usability by upping the minimum Android version they require
either to get installed, or to operate correctly.  I'm losing too many
apps because they require a higher Android version, and there are some
apps I can't get at all because their manifest mandates a higher minimum
Android version.  I'm loathe to buying a pricey phone just to satisfy
the requirements of these apps which sometimes to be due to non-critical
changes in functionality or simply a different UI.

What other Android replacements (maybe getting me to v15) could I put on
this phone?  Unlike some ardent anti-Google users, I don't need a
de-Googled OS.  Tis why I was uninterested in GrapheneOS, plus they seem
geared to only Pixel phones.

crDroid is a fork of LineageOS, but they don't list LG.  Havoc-OS is, I
believe, another fork of LineageOS, and they don't list anything LG,
either.

One of the problem I've read about with the LG V20 is some models cannot
be rooted.  There are several unlocked models which were factory
unlocked by the carrier, like Verizon.  I have the H910 model unlocked
by AT&T.  

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#148751

VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
> After rooting my unlocked LG V20 (AT&T model H-910), I'd like to get
> something newer than the Android 8.0.0 that is on it now.  I thought
> about Lineage OS, but https://wiki.lineageos.org/devices/#lg does not
> list the V20, just the V30, and up.  They have a clear warning "Devices
> not listed are not supported."  Yet I read where someone said they got
> LineageOS 21 on their LG V20 phone, but they didn't mention which model,
> yet the following mentions LineageOS on the H-910 model:
> 
> https://xdaforums.com/t/official-lineageos-20-for-the-lg-v20.4618097/
> https://xdaforums.com/t/closed-official-lineageos-21-for-the-lg-v20.4649861/
> 
> However, both note some significant failures of these OS versions in
> handling all the hardware or proprietary libs used on my phone.
> 
> With the old Android 8.0.0 now on my phone, too many apps have severed
> their usability by upping the minimum Android version they require
> either to get installed, or to operate correctly.  I'm losing too many
> apps because they require a higher Android version, and there are some
> apps I can't get at all because their manifest mandates a higher minimum
> Android version.  I'm loathe to buying a pricey phone just to satisfy
> the requirements of these apps which sometimes to be due to non-critical
> changes in functionality or simply a different UI.
> 
> What other Android replacements (maybe getting me to v15) could I put on
> this phone?  Unlike some ardent anti-Google users, I don't need a
> de-Googled OS.  Tis why I was uninterested in GrapheneOS, plus they seem
> geared to only Pixel phones.
> 
> crDroid is a fork of LineageOS, but they don't list LG.  Havoc-OS is, I
> believe, another fork of LineageOS, and they don't list anything LG,
> either.
 
In general, for any phone, your best bet is to search XDA Forums and see who
has done a third party OS for your specific model number (and I mean number,
ie not just the marketing name Samsung Galaxy Note N, but the number
SM-GT1234).  In your case it's this subforum:

https://xdaforums.com/f/lg-v20-roms-kernels-recoveries-other-developm.5874/

Unless there is a build for your specific model there's no point considering
any OS because it won't run.

Many of those threads look like they're from 2019-21, even though they might
have more recent posts.  So that's probably the kind of age of OSes that
might be available.

Be prepared for things not to work.  Porting a newer OS to an old device is
comparatively easy, getting all the hardware to work reliably is a long
slog.  You may find some components don't work - the threads should say
this.

> One of the problem I've read about with the LG V20 is some models cannot
> be rooted.  There are several unlocked models which were factory
> unlocked by the carrier, like Verizon.  I have the H910 model unlocked
> by AT&T.  

Carrier unlock is not the same as bootloader unlocking.  Carrier unlock
means you can use a different carrier's SIM card.  Bootloader unlock means
you can use a different OS.  Many phones sold in the US have locked
bootloaders, which means no OS replacement. Although if you have rooted then
maybe your bootloader isn't locked.

Theo

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#148757

Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:

> VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
>
>> After rooting my unlocked LG V20 (AT&T model H-910), I'd like to get
>> something newer than the Android 8.0.0 that is on it now.  I thought
>> about Lineage OS, but https://wiki.lineageos.org/devices/#lg does
>> not list the V20, just the V30, and up.  They have a clear warning
>> "Devices not listed are not supported."  Yet I read where someone
>> said they got LineageOS 21 on their LG V20 phone, but they didn't
>> mention which model, yet the following mentions LineageOS on the
>> H-910 model:
>> 
>> https://xdaforums.com/t/official-lineageos-20-for-the-lg-v20.4618097/
>> https://xdaforums.com/t/closed-official-lineageos-21-for-the-lg-v20.4649861/
>> 
>> However, both note some significant failures of these OS versions in
>> handling all the hardware or proprietary libs used on my phone.
>> 
>> With the old Android 8.0.0 now on my phone, too many apps have
>> severed their usability by upping the minimum Android version they
>> require either to get installed, or to operate correctly.  I'm
>> losing too many apps because they require a higher Android version,
>> and there are some apps I can't get at all because their manifest
>> mandates a higher minimum Android version.  I'm loathe to buying a
>> pricey phone just to satisfy the requirements of these apps which
>> sometimes to be due to non-critical changes in functionality or
>> simply a different UI.
>> 
>> What other Android replacements (maybe getting me to v15) could I put
>> on this phone?  Unlike some ardent anti-Google users, I don't need a
>> de-Googled OS.  Tis why I was uninterested in GrapheneOS, plus they
>> seem geared to only Pixel phones.
>  
> In general, for any phone, your best bet is to search XDA Forums and
> see who has done a third party OS for your specific model number (and
> I mean number, ie not just the marketing name Samsung Galaxy Note N,
> but the number SM-GT1234).  

Why I mentioned it was the H910.  I don't remember why, but among the
unlocked models for the LG V20, I decided the AT&T model H910 was best.

> In your case it's this subforum:
> 
> https://xdaforums.com/f/lg-v20-roms-kernels-recoveries-other-developm.5874/
> 
> Unless there is a build for your specific model there's no point
> considering any OS because it won't run. 

Of what I read of attempts to root and unlock the LG V20 H910, and
replace the OS, there were problems afterward.  Was hoping someone knew
of a best method and replacement OS that didn't end up bricking the
phone, or losing hardware support (i.e., end up with a retarded phone).

> Many of those threads look like they're from 2019-21, even though
> they might have more recent posts.  So that's probably the kind of
> age of OSes that might be available.

Yeah, interest in rooting and OS replacement for the LG V20 faded back
around when LG dropped support in 2020.  The phone was introduced in Oct
2016, I got it sometime in 2019, managed to get 2 OS updates before LG
dropped it in 2020, and then LG left the smartphone market in July 2021
after 23 consecutive quarters of money loss in the mobile division.
There would never be any OS updates for this phone after they
discontinued support, and especially after they quit smartphones.  They
tried to sell off their mobile business, but no buyers.

> Be prepared for things not to work.  Porting a newer OS to an old
> device is comparatively easy, getting all the hardware to work
> reliably is a long slog.  You may find some components don't work -
> the threads should say this.
> 
>> One of the problem I've read about with the LG V20 is some models
>> cannot be rooted.  There are several unlocked models which were
>> factory unlocked by the carrier, like Verizon.  I have the H910
>> model unlocked by AT&T.  
> 
> Carrier unlock is not the same as bootloader unlocking.  Carrier unlock
> means you can use a different carrier's SIM card.  Bootloader unlock means
> you can use a different OS.  Many phones sold in the US have locked
> bootloaders, which means no OS replacement. Although if you have rooted then
> maybe your bootloader isn't locked.

In one of those forums, and in online guide articles, one of the first
steps to check was Developer Options had "Enable OEM unlock".  It's
there in my phone.  It is an early step, if not the first, in prepping
to replace the OS.  I don't just want to root the phone since the old
Android 8.0.0 would still cause problems or loss with many newer apps.
Rooting was just a preliminary step, not the end-all step.  Need to
replace the OS with something newer to move forward with app
compatibility.

When I attempt to enable the unlock, I get a warning "Warning: Device
protection features will not work on this device while this setting is
turned on."  Okay, something else to research: just what is device
protection.  LG describes this:

https://www.lg.com/us/support/help-library/lg-android-device-protection--20150103626155

For now, and until I decide to make this a test phone, I cancelled the
proposed changed, so the unlock remains disabled (the default).  From
what I've read, so far, that its bootloader is unlockable does not mean
it is a simple or even straightforward task.  One mistake, and it's
toast.

I'll go digging in the XDA forums some more, but the more I read the
more I see mention of hardware loss (i.e., hardware not supported or not
completely supported by the replacement OS).  Prognosis is not good.
New phones are just ridiculously overpriced, especially when trying to
find those that have 6-7 update lifecycles.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#148762

On Wed, 11 Jun 2025 08:46:26 -0500, VanguardLH wrote :


> For now, and until I decide to make this a test phone, I cancelled the
> proposed changed, so the unlock remains disabled (the default).  From
> what I've read, so far, that its bootloader is unlockable does not mean
> it is a simple or even straightforward task.  One mistake, and it's
> toast.

One suggestion for all those who contemplate rooting, not just for the OP,
is to run a decent program that reports accurately the various versions.

That way you can be sure that a proposed solution in XDA Developers works.

Here's a thread on all the known free adfree gsffree version reporters:
 *Tutorial: How to output Android system information to a text/pdf/html file*
 <https://xdaforums.com/t/tutorial-how-to-output-android-system-information-to-a-text-pdf-html-file.4737418/#post-90104315>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#148777

On 2025-06-11 15:46, VanguardLH wrote:
> New phones are just ridiculously overpriced, especially when trying to
> find those that have 6-7 update lifecycles.

Well, they will last longer. You have to decide if that is enough 
compensation for the high price. For me, no: I don't like to carry 
around such an expensive thing that I can drop or that can be stolen.

My current phone are a Motorola G52 or G62. I believe in the 200..300 € 
range.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#148780

On Thu, 12 Jun 2025 10:20:34 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote :


>> New phones are just ridiculously overpriced, especially when trying to
>> find those that have 6-7 update lifecycles.
> 
> Well, they will last longer. 

The battery, IMHO, is the biggest determinant of how long a phone lasts.

> You have to decide if that is enough 
> compensation for the high price. For me, no: I don't like to carry 
> around such an expensive thing that I can drop or that can be stolen.

I agree with those who assess that an inexpensive phone works just fine.
Mine, for example, was free, but I had to pay tax on about $180 MSRP.

So it cost me about $18 (roughly) plus I added an sdcard (for about $20).
 <https://i.postimg.cc/Xq5SpS4D/tmopromo02.jpg>
That was three years ago.

> My current phone are a Motorola G52 or G62. I believe in the 200..300 ¤ 
> range.

I think the $200 range is fine for an Android device, if you choose well.

Mine is 3 years old and still going strong - and its MSRP was around that.
Since my battery is a whopping 5AH, it is still going strong today.

The most recent security update was last month, but all Androids on the
Internet get security updates monthly forever if they have Android 10+.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#148782

"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

> On 2025-06-11 15:46, VanguardLH wrote:
>> New phones are just ridiculously overpriced, especially when trying to
>> find those that have 6-7 update lifecycles.
> 
> Well, they will last longer. You have to decide if that is enough 
> compensation for the high price. For me, no: I don't like to carry 
> around such an expensive thing that I can drop or that can be stolen.
> 
> My current phone are a Motorola G52 or G62. I believe in the 200..300 € 
> range.

What the average usable lifespan of lithium batteries in smart phones?
Since they are not user serviceable by design, the phone becomes useless
because the battery is not replacement, and batteries are chemical, so
they die, and lose capacity before then.  The battery doesn't
catastrophically and immediate die.  It loses capacity over time (can't
hold as many Coulombs).  Built in self destruction.  Lifespan could be 3
to 10 years.  10 years sounds like a long time, but not 3 years.  My car
is 23 years old, and still running very well and in great condition.

My ancient LG V20 has user-serviceable batteries.  It lasted this long
because I could replace the batteries.  I could even carry a spare
battery in my pocket for added up-time rather than lug around a power
bank or hunt and hope to find an outlet.  The LG V20 was introduced in
2016, and 9 years later I'm starting to ponder a replacement -- and
primarily due to the lack or discontinued support of an old Android
version by apps.

While I will use my old phone a little longer, I am looking at new
phones with new batteries will get updated many years into the future.
I'm not buying an old phone, and then realizing I've reached its end of
lifespan prematurely.  The Moto G52 and G62 came out 3 years ago.
Improvement in hardware has been incremental, and disappointing.
Meanwhile the door keeps moving with new OS versions.

For now, I've gone into the Play Store app to disable auto-updating on
all apps.  The only malevolent actions I've ever encountered on my phone
is the covert disabling of apps that, when updated, mandate a later
version of the OS than where they were working just fine before.  Alas,
some apps will disable themselves by ceasing to function if you don't
get their newer version, like no longer communicating with their server,
but then they aren't usable or installable unless I somehow got a newer
version of Android on my phone.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#148785

On 2025-06-12 20:58, VanguardLH wrote:
> "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2025-06-11 15:46, VanguardLH wrote:

...

> While I will use my old phone a little longer, I am looking at new
> phones with new batteries will get updated many years into the future.
> I'm not buying an old phone, and then realizing I've reached its end of
> lifespan prematurely.  The Moto G52 and G62 came out 3 years ago.
> Improvement in hardware has been incremental, and disappointing.
> Meanwhile the door keeps moving with new OS versions.

Sure, if I were purchasing now I would look at the most recent successor 
of the G62. I personally like Motorola, and the G62 has all the features 
I need. But I would choose a newer version. The newer the better, for 
longer support.

Soon the mandate to have replaceable batteries should come into effect 
in the EU, and that should change things.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#148788

On 6/12/25 4:06 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>On 2025-06-12 20:58, VanguardLH wrote:
>> "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 2025-06-11 15:46, VanguardLH wrote:
>
>...
>
>> While I will use my old phone a little longer, I am looking at new
>> phones with new batteries will get updated many years into the future.
>> I'm not buying an old phone, and then realizing I've reached its end of
>> lifespan prematurely.  The Moto G52 and G62 came out 3 years ago.
>> Improvement in hardware has been incremental, and disappointing.
>> Meanwhile the door keeps moving with new OS versions.
>
>Sure, if I were purchasing now I would look at the most recent successor 
>of the G62. I personally like Motorola, and the G62 has all the features 
>I need. But I would choose a newer version. The newer the better, for 
>longer support.

I worked for Motorola in the 1960's as a tech. At the time it was called the
 Motorola Western Military Division in Scottsdale AZ USA. There were 3
 Motorola plants in the Phoenix metro area. How things change, huh. And to
 think it all started from a car radio. 

I now return programming to normal scheduling...

>Soon the mandate to have replaceable batteries should come into effect 
>in the EU, and that should change things.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#148790

On Fri, 13 Jun 2025 00:57:57 -0000 (UTC), AJL wrote :


>>Sure, if I were purchasing now I would look at the most recent successor 
>>of the G62. I personally like Motorola, and the G62 has all the features 
>>I need. But I would choose a newer version. The newer the better, for 
>>longer support.
> 
> I worked for Motorola in the 1960's as a tech. At the time it was called the
>  Motorola Western Military Division in Scottsdale AZ USA. There were 3
>  Motorola plants in the Phoenix metro area. How things change, huh. And to
>  think it all started from a car radio. 
> 
> I now return programming to normal scheduling...

I worked with the Motorola do-or-die PowerPC project team in Scootsdale!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#148794

On 6/12/25 7:09 PM, Marion wrote:
>On Fri, 13 Jun 2025 00:57:57 -0000 (UTC), AJL wrote :
>
>
>>>Sure, if I were purchasing now I would look at the most recent successor 
>>>of the G62. I personally like Motorola, and the G62 has all the features 
>>>I need. But I would choose a newer version. The newer the better, for 
>>>longer support.
>> 
>> I worked for Motorola in the 1960's as a tech. At the time it was called the
>>  Motorola Western Military Division in Scottsdale AZ USA. There were 3
>>  Motorola plants in the Phoenix metro area. How things change, huh. And to
>>  think it all started from a car radio. 
>> 
>> I now return programming to normal scheduling...
>
>I worked with the Motorola do-or-die PowerPC project team in Scottsdale!

Small world. I was at Motorola from 1962 to 1968. Don't recognize PowerPC
 and since it has PC in the title I expect it was a little later. Some of
 the projects I worked on were Gyrodyne sub sonar, the Saturn 5 rocket radio
 gear, APS94 side looking radar, and several others I can't remember the
 names of. I did assembly line testing and troubleshooting. Resistors and
 capacitors were actually hand soldered onto boards in those days. Scary,
 huh. I got out of electronics after that and became a Phoenix cop. Good
 move that allowed me to completely retire at age 50. BTW to add to the off
 topic stuff I grew up just a few miles from that plant in Tempe...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#148795

AJL wrote:

> I was at Motorola from 1962 to 1968. Don't recognize PowerPC
> and since it has PC in the title I expect it was a little later.

Introduced in 1991, the contrived acronym would have you believe that 
"PC" stands for "Performance Computing" ...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#148805

On Fri, 13 Jun 2025 08:29:32 +0100, Andy Burns wrote :


>> I was at Motorola from 1962 to 1968. Don't recognize PowerPC
>> and since it has PC in the title I expect it was a little later.
> 
> Introduced in 1991, the contrived acronym would have you believe that 
> "PC" stands for "Performance Computing" ...

It was looooooooong ago, but it was a consortium effort between IBM &
Motorola to attempt to unseat Intel in the microprocessor market.

I was based out of Silicon Valley where the company would "slingshot" me
everywhere in the world to put out fires, and suddenly, for a period of
time when the project faltered, they'd slingshot me between Scottsdale & TJ
Watson (I had to work "undercover" in Poughkeepsie by not wearing a suit
and covering the equipment in sheets I bought at the local stores).

The project lasted until somewhere in the mid 2000's, when Apple killed it
off, so it was an interesting assemblage of big companies versus Intel.

Intel won.

Then they started slingshotting me to Haifa, where I saw the office
buildings with huge holes in the side that they didn't bother patching from
when rockets were fired from Lebanon.

Given what happened yesterday, some things never change....

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#148789

"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

> On 2025-06-12 20:58, VanguardLH wrote:
>> "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 2025-06-11 15:46, VanguardLH wrote:
> 
> ...
> 
>> While I will use my old phone a little longer, I am looking at new
>> phones with new batteries will get updated many years into the future.
>> I'm not buying an old phone, and then realizing I've reached its end of
>> lifespan prematurely.  The Moto G52 and G62 came out 3 years ago.
>> Improvement in hardware has been incremental, and disappointing.
>> Meanwhile the door keeps moving with new OS versions.
> 
> Sure, if I were purchasing now I would look at the most recent successor 
> of the G62. I personally like Motorola, and the G62 has all the features 
> I need. But I would choose a newer version. The newer the better, for 
> longer support.
> 
> Soon the mandate to have replaceable batteries should come into effect 
> in the EU, and that should change things.

The Mediatek Dimensity 7300 in the G86 (release expected this June)
comes close but not nearly as good as the Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3.
The Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite (Gen 4) is out this year in the newest
phones, and outperforms the Gen 3.

I looked at last year's models.  The improvements are incremental
between this year's and last year's models.  However, pricing is not
dramatic, so I might as well buy this year's model.

I don't want a carrier-provided or locked smart phone.  So, no buying
into cellular plans with locked phones.  That also means no getting a
trade-in on my old phone, but whenever I looked no one was buying 9-year
old phones.  They want last year's models to recondition and resell.
Plus, once I get the new phone, my old becomes available as an
experiment in rooting, boot unlocking, and a newer OS (to discover what
hardware no longer functions).  If it gets bricked, no big loss as I
would have already switched to a different primary phone.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#148792

"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

> On 2025-06-12 20:58, VanguardLH wrote:
>> "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 2025-06-11 15:46, VanguardLH wrote:
> 
> ...
> 
>> While I will use my old phone a little longer, I am looking at new
>> phones with new batteries will get updated many years into the future.
>> I'm not buying an old phone, and then realizing I've reached its end of
>> lifespan prematurely.  The Moto G52 and G62 came out 3 years ago.
>> Improvement in hardware has been incremental, and disappointing.
>> Meanwhile the door keeps moving with new OS versions.
> 
> Sure, if I were purchasing now I would look at the most recent successor 
> of the G62. I personally like Motorola, and the G62 has all the features 
> I need. But I would choose a newer version. The newer the better, for 
> longer support.
> 
> Soon the mandate to have replaceable batteries should come into effect 
> in the EU, and that should change things.

Yeah, I read about that a little while ago, and also hoped that phone
makers would be required to provide user-serviceable batteries.  After
all, for a phone to be water resistent does not mandate the battery
cannot be removable, just that the seal be more than just 2 plastic
shell halves that snap together.  The past argument was that
non-removable batteries afforded larger-sized batteries for longer
up-time.  Really?  Has anyone contested or verified that premise?
Versus, say, making the dimensions of the battery bigger, but thinner,
and attaching to the back plate to have a battery almost as big?  I've
even seen where you could buy a new back plate with an integral and much
bigger battery to significantly increase up-time.  Of course, that was
back in the heyday of smart phones that had replaceable batteries.

I think the EU's deadline is April 2027 for smart phone makers to come
up with new designs that permit user-serviceable batteries.  However,
I'm sure the definition of user-serviceable may not necessitate easy to
replace, just possible to replace.  "Easy" depends on expertise and
equipment.  It's easy to replace BGA chips if you have the equipment.

The EU requirements are a bit of gobblety-gook, as noted at:

https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2Feu-requires-all-phones-to-have-replaceable-batteries-v0-vgzc4grwdpdb1.jpeg%3Fwidth%3D667%26format%3Dpjpg%26auto%3Dwebp%26s%3D4f3c72ef414c9f9b405a92603b50bb002847b720
(I tried shortening the URL, but Reddit wants many args in their URLs.)
short URL: https://tinyurl.com/yc889pd2

By then, the smart phone makers might be introducing graphene batteries,
which are considered eco-safe, chemically inert, and sustainable.  But
that probably won't happen until the mid-2030's when EVs have moved to
graphene.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ko9V4i2HQ6o

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#148804

On 2025-06-13 04:28, VanguardLH wrote:
> "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> On 2025-06-12 20:58, VanguardLH wrote:
>>> "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 2025-06-11 15:46, VanguardLH wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> While I will use my old phone a little longer, I am looking at new
>>> phones with new batteries will get updated many years into the future.
>>> I'm not buying an old phone, and then realizing I've reached its end of
>>> lifespan prematurely.  The Moto G52 and G62 came out 3 years ago.
>>> Improvement in hardware has been incremental, and disappointing.
>>> Meanwhile the door keeps moving with new OS versions.
>>
>> Sure, if I were purchasing now I would look at the most recent successor
>> of the G62. I personally like Motorola, and the G62 has all the features
>> I need. But I would choose a newer version. The newer the better, for
>> longer support.
>>
>> Soon the mandate to have replaceable batteries should come into effect
>> in the EU, and that should change things.
> 
> Yeah, I read about that a little while ago, and also hoped that phone
> makers would be required to provide user-serviceable batteries.  After
> all, for a phone to be water resistent does not mandate the battery
> cannot be removable, just that the seal be more than just 2 plastic
> shell halves that snap together.  The past argument was that
> non-removable batteries afforded larger-sized batteries for longer
> up-time.  Really?  Has anyone contested or verified that premise?
> Versus, say, making the dimensions of the battery bigger, but thinner,
> and attaching to the back plate to have a battery almost as big?  I've
> even seen where you could buy a new back plate with an integral and much
> bigger battery to significantly increase up-time.  Of course, that was
> back in the heyday of smart phones that had replaceable batteries.
> 
> I think the EU's deadline is April 2027 for smart phone makers to come
> up with new designs that permit user-serviceable batteries.  However,
> I'm sure the definition of user-serviceable may not necessitate easy to
> replace, just possible to replace.  "Easy" depends on expertise and
> equipment.  It's easy to replace BGA chips if you have the equipment.

I remember that we could replace batteries on submersible watches. But 
you had to have it done at a repair shop if you wanted the watch to 
remain water tight. That's fine with me, if applied to phones.

...

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#148793

On Fri, 13 Jun 2025 01:06:00 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote :


> Sure, if I were purchasing now I would look at the most recent successor 
> of the G62. I personally like Motorola, and the G62 has all the features 
> I need. But I would choose a newer version. 

Hi Carlos,

I had a Motorola (I think it was the G2?) when Google was giving them away
for free (or for $100, I don't recall) and it was OK but it was my first
phone ever without the sd slot, so I checked and the G62 has the sd slot.

I think a phone with the biggest battery you can find plus an sd slot (and
possibly an aux port) are the three biggest things you can do for overall
years of life (plus, of course, a case and screen protector overlays).

Most Motorola slots are hybrid, but to strive to always add additional
value, I checked just now and the following Moto phones offer sd slots: 
 Motorola Moto G Stylus 2025
 Motorola Moto G Power 2025
 Motorola Moto G 2025
 Motorola Moto G34 5G
 Motorola Moto G85 5G (maybe not all versions though)

> The newer the better, for longer support.

I love the UK regulations (PSTI Act 2022 and the Product Security and
Telecommunications Infrastructure Regulations 2023 which goes into effect 
April 29, 2024 which required manufacturers to state, in writing, the
promised minimum length of time security updates will be provided, along
with an end date, in a clear, accessible, and transparent manner to
consumers.

Samsung promised 7 years (6 for the cheaper A-series phones).
Google belatedly promised 7 years for the Pixel.
Apple promised only 5 years.

To add value, I tried to look up Motorola's promised support, but it varies
from as low as only 2 years for the mid-range Moto G series and three years
for the Edge series.

I looked up the aforementioned G62 which launched with Android 12 and was
officially updated to Android 13. Motorola has stated it will not receive
Android 14 but Motorola promised in writing to the UK three years of
security updates. Motorola is legally obligated to declare this "three
years" for the G62 in its Statement of Compliance for products sold in the
UK.

While the phone will receive security updates for three years from its
release, major Android OS updates are a separate matter, and the G62's OS
upgrade path has concluded with Android 13.

I just compared it to the compliance statement on my 3-year old free
Samsung Galaxy A32-5G from April 2021. The Galaxy A32 5G launched with
Android 11. It received Android 12 and Android 13. It is not eligible for
Android 14 or newer major OS updates. The Galaxy A32 5G has been on a
quarterly security update schedule. This means it received security updates
roughly every three months. As of early 2025, it was still receiving
security patches (I just received a security update recently).

When you compare Motorola to Samsung, I'd take all that data into account.

> Soon the mandate to have replaceable batteries should come into effect 
> in the EU, and that should change things.

I love that the EU put the manufacturers' feet to the fire by forcing them
to certify their batteries (which goes into effect June 20th, 2025) and by
forcing them to make the batteries replaceable after February 18, 2027.

It's important to note that "user-replaceable" doesn't necessarily mean a
return to the easily swappable batteries of older phones (where you just
popped off a back cover). The EU 2023/1542 regulation states that a battery
is considered "readily removable" if it can be removed using commercially
available tools, without requiring specialized tools (unless provided for
free), thermal energy, or solvents. So, while it will likely involve
unscrewing components, it should be a process that an average user can
complete without extensive technical expertise.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#148791

On Thu, 12 Jun 2025 13:58:17 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

> What the average usable lifespan of lithium batteries in smart phones?

Most last a few years without degradation if they start out big enough.

> Since they are not user serviceable by design, the phone becomes useless
> because the battery is not replacement, and batteries are chemical, so
> they die, and lose capacity before then.  The battery doesn't
> catastrophically and immediate die.  It loses capacity over time (can't
> hold as many Coulombs).  Built in self destruction.  Lifespan could be 3
> to 10 years.  10 years sounds like a long time, but not 3 years.  My car
> is 23 years old, and still running very well and in great condition.

The key is to buy a phone with the biggest starting capacity you can get.

> My ancient LG V20 has user-serviceable batteries.  It lasted this long
> because I could replace the batteries.  I could even carry a spare
> battery in my pocket for added up-time rather than lug around a power
> bank or hunt and hope to find an outlet.  The LG V20 was introduced in
> 2016, and 9 years later I'm starting to ponder a replacement -- and
> primarily due to the lack or discontinued support of an old Android
> version by apps.

Soon the EU rules will require phone makers to make replaceable batteries.

> While I will use my old phone a little longer, I am looking at new
> phones with new batteries will get updated many years into the future.
> I'm not buying an old phone, and then realizing I've reached its end of
> lifespan prematurely.  The Moto G52 and G62 came out 3 years ago.
> Improvement in hardware has been incremental, and disappointing.
> Meanwhile the door keeps moving with new OS versions.

Nothing meaningful has changed in phone design in quite a few years.

> For now, I've gone into the Play Store app to disable auto-updating on
> all apps.  The only malevolent actions I've ever encountered on my phone
> is the covert disabling of apps that, when updated, mandate a later
> version of the OS than where they were working just fine before.  Alas,
> some apps will disable themselves by ceasing to function if you don't
> get their newer version, like no longer communicating with their server,
> but then they aren't usable or installable unless I somehow got a newer
> version of Android on my phone.

The new rules for Samsung A-series is 6 years of full OS updates nowadays.
(7 years for Samsung S-series and Pixels)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#148799

Gelato <gelato@.is.invalid> wrote:

> The key is to buy a phone with the biggest starting capacity you can get.

I did ... back 7 years ago when 64 GB internal was considered huge, and
uSD cards could expand by another 128 GB, or more.  Storage isn't a
problem even on my ancient phone.  I store very little on the phone.
It's the RAM that can affect performance, but I also don't keep many
apps running in the background.

> Soon the EU rules will require phone makers to make replaceable batteries.

"by 2027" (but when in that year is unclear).  Yet there are many
exemptions (e.g., wet environment exemption but must show the
non-removal need is for safety of the user) the phone makers might use
to dodge the bullet.  The battery regulation covers all battery-powered
products sold in the EU, and phones happen to be in the cross-hairs.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#148801

VanguardLH wrote:

> Gelato wrote:
>  
>> Soon the EU rules will require phone makers to make replaceable batteries.
> 
> "by 2027" (but when in that year is unclear). 
February (but I couldn't find a date).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.mobile.android

csiph-web