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

Groups > alt.comp.microsoft.windows > #1908 > unrolled thread

What is Microsoft's WRITTEN promise on how long it patches Windows 10 and Windows 11 components (all three types)?

Back to article view | Back to alt.comp.microsoft.windows

Contents

  What is Microsoft's WRITTEN promise on how long it patches Windows 10 and Windows 11 components (all three types)? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2023-01-26 17:14 +0000
    Re: What is Microsoft's WRITTEN promise on how long it patches Windows 10 and Windows 11 components (all three types)? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2023-01-26 13:02 -0500
      Re: What is Microsoft's WRITTEN promise on how long it patches Windows 10 and Windows 11 components (all three types)? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2023-01-26 19:17 +0100
        Re: What is Microsoft's WRITTEN promise on how long it patches Windows 10 and Windows 11 components (all three types)? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2023-01-26 14:07 -0500
          Re: What is Microsoft's WRITTEN promise on how long it patches Windows 10 and Windows 11 components (all three types)? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2023-01-26 20:38 +0100
            Re: What is Microsoft's WRITTEN promise on how long it patches Windows 10 and Windows 11 components (all three types)? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2023-01-26 14:49 -0500
              Re: What is Microsoft's WRITTEN promise on how long it patches Windows 10 and Windows 11 components (all three types)? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2023-01-26 21:13 +0000
                Re: What is Microsoft's WRITTEN promise on how long it patches Windows 10 and Windows 11 components (all three types)? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2023-01-26 16:45 -0500
                  Re: What is Microsoft's WRITTEN promise on how long it patches Windows 10 and Windows 11 components (all three types)? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2023-01-26 16:46 -0500
                    Re: What is Microsoft's WRITTEN promise on how long it patches Windows 10 and Windows 11 components (all three types)? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2023-01-27 03:05 +0000
                  Re: What is Microsoft's WRITTEN promise on how long it patches Windows 10 and Windows 11 components (all three types)? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2023-01-27 17:59 +0000
                  Re: What is Microsoft's WRITTEN promise on how long it patches Windows 10 and Windows 11 components (all three types)? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2023-01-27 15:39 +0000
              Re: What is Microsoft's WRITTEN promise on how long it patches Windows 10 and Windows 11 components (all three types)? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2023-01-27 12:59 +0100
                Re: What is Microsoft's WRITTEN promise on how long it patches Windows 10 and Windows 11 components (all three types)? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2023-01-27 15:51 +0000
      Re: What is Microsoft's WRITTEN promise on how long it patches Windows 10 and Windows 11 components (all three types)? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2023-01-26 21:02 +0000
        Re: What is Microsoft's WRITTEN promise on how long it patches Windows 10 and Windows 11 components (all three types)? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2023-01-26 16:45 -0500
          Re: What is Microsoft's WRITTEN promise on how long it patches Windows 10 and Windows 11 components (all three types)? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2023-01-27 02:58 +0000

#1908 — What is Microsoft's WRITTEN promise on how long it patches Windows 10 and Windows 11 components (all three types)?

Reference URLs are requested... which everyone may benefit from having.

Does anyone know, off hand, where Microsoft posts, in writing, 
its "promise" for how long Microsoft fully supports Windows 10/11 
with all the security holes it is aware of and has been able to patch?

Note that Windows is not a monolith - so there may be multiple timelines:
a. Release patches (e.g., promised in writing zero-day bugfix support)
b. Core modules (e.g., the underlying core operating system components)
c. Default apps (e.g., the Chrome browser, Windows Defender, etc.)

The reason I ask is that I am comparing longevity of release support 
between the three platforms I use most, namely Windows, IOS & Android.

Bear in mind there may be no end-of-life written promise, e.g., it turns 
out almost all of Android is updated, essentially, forever, as a result.

And, support may be complicated by the fact that it lasts forever, as in 
the case with the Android and Windows default browser (but not on iOS).

Rest assured, there is much nuance involved... but at the same time, a lot 
of (clueless?) people _think_ support is longer/shorter than it really is.

Because they fall prey to assumptions (fueled by clever advertising).

It may be, for example, that much of Windows is also updated forever, 
(forever being defined narrowly here as there being no EOL fixed date).

For example, the default Windows web browser (currently Edge) may have no 
stated EOL, and perhaps the default core Windows modules likewise may have 
no stated EOL date (e.g., how long will Microsoft support the powershell?).

So I don't expect the correct answer to be easy to ascertain, and, worse, I 
don't expect many people to even understand the complexity of the answer.

With all that cross-platform caveating having been performed... 

Here is what I've been able to compile, so far, for the components:

Google:
a. Android patch times vary by manufacturer, e.g., 5 years for Samsung:
   <https://news.samsung.com/global/samsung-sets-the-new-standard-with-four-generations-of-os-upgrades-to-ensure-the-most-up-to-date-and-more-secure-galaxy-experience>
b. Android core components are updated by Google, essentially, forever:
   <https://blog.esper.io/what-is-project-mainline/>
c. Android key apps (e.g., the default web browser) have no stated EOL:
   <https://opensource.google/projects/chromium/>

Apple:
a. iOS/macOS is ONLY for a _single_ latest release (macOS 13 & iOS 16 only)
 <https://support.apple.com/guide/depoyment/about-software-updates-depc4c80847a>
b. This apparently includes core modules
 <https://hothardware.com/news/apple-admits-only-fully-patches-security-flaws-in-latest-os-releases>
c. This apparently includes key apps
 <https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/10/apple-clarifies-security-update-policy-only-the-latest-oses-are-fully-patched/>

Microsoft: 
 <???Windows patches????>
 <???Windows core modules???>
 <???Windows key apps, such as the default browser app???>

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1909

In article <tqucdm$2fq19$1@news.mixmin.net>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:

> Reference URLs are requested... which everyone may benefit from having.
> 
> Does anyone know, off hand, where Microsoft posts, in writing, 
> its "promise" for how long Microsoft fully supports Windows 10/11 
> with all the security holes it is aware of and has been able to patch?

<https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle/faq/windows>


> Google:
> a. Android patch times vary by manufacturer, e.g., 5 years for Samsung:

only on select samsung models. other manufacturers are much less.


> b. Android core components are updated by Google, essentially, forever:

nothing is forever, including android.

> Apple:
> a. iOS/macOS is ONLY for a _single_ latest release (macOS 13 & iOS 16 only)

false. apple just updated ios 12 for decade old iphones that can't run
ios 13 or later, along with the previous ios 15 and the current ios 16.

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

#1910

On 2023-01-26 19:02, nospam wrote:
> In article <tqucdm$2fq19$1@news.mixmin.net>, Andy Burnelli
> <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
> 
>> Reference URLs are requested... which everyone may benefit from having.
>>
>> Does anyone know, off hand, where Microsoft posts, in writing,
>> its "promise" for how long Microsoft fully supports Windows 10/11
>> with all the security holes it is aware of and has been able to patch?
> 
> <https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle/faq/windows>

:-)

>> Google:
>> a. Android patch times vary by manufacturer, e.g., 5 years for Samsung:
> 
> only on select samsung models. other manufacturers are much less.

How can we know what models?

-- 
Cheers,
        Carlos E.R.

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

#1911

In article <k3fudkFcjfcU1@mid.individual.net>, Carlos E. R.
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

> >> Google:
> >> a. Android patch times vary by manufacturer, e.g., 5 years for Samsung:
> > 
> > only on select samsung models. other manufacturers are much less.
> 
> How can we know what models?

it should say on samsung's site. my guess is the flagship models.

there's very little incentive to offer 5 years of support on a $100
phone, which will be obsolete long before 5 years. the midrange could
go either way, but probably won't be 5 years.

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

#1912

On 2023-01-26 20:07, nospam wrote:
> In article <k3fudkFcjfcU1@mid.individual.net>, Carlos E. R.
> <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> 
>>>> Google:
>>>> a. Android patch times vary by manufacturer, e.g., 5 years for Samsung:
>>>
>>> only on select samsung models. other manufacturers are much less.
>>
>> How can we know what models?
> 
> it should say on samsung's site. my guess is the flagship models.
> 
> there's very little incentive to offer 5 years of support on a $100
> phone, which will be obsolete long before 5 years. the midrange could
> go either way, but probably won't be 5 years.

Fair enough.

I just don't remember seeing this mentioned when buying a Samsung (for 
other people). Had I known this I would have sought more.

A list from them would be nice. Would save time.

-- 
Cheers,
        Carlos E.R.

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

#1913

In article <k3g353FcjfcU2@mid.individual.net>, Carlos E. R.
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

> >>
> I just don't remember seeing this mentioned when buying a Samsung (for 
> other people). Had I known this I would have sought more.
> 
> A list from them would be nice. Would save time.

<https://news.samsung.com/global/samsung-sets-the-new-standard-with-four-
generations-of-os-upgrades-to-ensure-the-most-up-to-date-and-more-secure-
galaxy-experience>
  Eligible Galaxy devices with four generations of One UI and five
  years of security updates include:
 
  - Galaxy S Series: Galaxy S22, S22+, S22 Ultra as well as Galaxy S21,
  S21+, S21 Ultra, S21 FE and upcoming S series devices
  - Galaxy Z Series: Galaxy Z Fold3, Galaxy Z Flip3 and upcoming Z
  series devices
  - Galaxy A Series: upcoming select A series devices
  - Galaxy Tablets: Galaxy Tab S8, S8+, S8 Ultra and upcoming Tab S
  series devices

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

#1915

nospam wrote:

> <https://news.samsung.com/global/samsung-sets-the-new-standard-with-four-
> generations-of-os-upgrades-to-ensure-the-most-up-to-date-and-more-secure-
> galaxy-experience>
>   Eligible Galaxy devices with four generations of One UI and five
>   years of security updates include:
>  
>   - Galaxy S Series: Galaxy S22, S22+, S22 Ultra as well as Galaxy S21,
>   S21+, S21 Ultra, S21 FE and upcoming S series devices
>   - Galaxy Z Series: Galaxy Z Fold3, Galaxy Z Flip3 and upcoming Z
>   series devices
>   - Galaxy A Series: upcoming select A series devices
>   - Galaxy Tablets: Galaxy Tab S8, S8+, S8 Ultra and upcoming Tab S
>   series devices

That's old. 
In the Apple newsgroup nospam was aware of newer 2023 information
where Samsung unilaterally _extended_ support to most older models.

The URLs are in the thread proving iOS has the absolute _shortest_ support
lifecycle of all the five common consumer operating systems extent today.

 *Even macOS support is tremendously _shorter_ than is Windows support.*
 <https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/10/apple-clarifies-security-update-policy-only-the-latest-oses-are-fully-patched/>

Despite Apple's brazen lies to the contrary, as exposed by security teams.

If you don't believe me, read this before you refute the facts:
 <https://hothardware.com/news/apple-admits-only-fully-patches-security-flaws-in-latest-os-releases>

The motto for iOS should be something like: 
         *Apple... the _shortest_ support life in the industry*

Again, read the facts before you refute what turns out to be the facts:
 <https://support.apple.com/guide/depoyment/about-software-updates-depc4c80847a/web>

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

#1916

In article <tquqdd$2i2r9$1@news.mixmin.net>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:

> 
> > <https://news.samsung.com/global/samsung-sets-the-new-standard-with-four-
> > generations-of-os-upgrades-to-ensure-the-most-up-to-date-and-more-secure-
> > galaxy-experience>
> >   Eligible Galaxy devices with four generations of One UI and five
> >   years of security updates include:
> >  
> >   - Galaxy S Series: Galaxy S22, S22+, S22 Ultra as well as Galaxy S21,
> >   S21+, S21 Ultra, S21 FE and upcoming S series devices
> >   - Galaxy Z Series: Galaxy Z Fold3, Galaxy Z Flip3 and upcoming Z
> >   series devices
> >   - Galaxy A Series: upcoming select A series devices
> >   - Galaxy Tablets: Galaxy Tab S8, S8+, S8 Ultra and upcoming Tab S
> >   series devices
> 
> That's old. 

no it's not. it's what's on samsung's site right now, dated february
2023, and includes 'upcoming devices' in the classifications. 

there is a samsung event next week on feb 1, so expect to add the
galaxy s23 to the list.

> where Samsung unilaterally _extended_ support to most older models.

they did not.

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

#1918

In article <260120231645127489%nospam@nospam.invalid>, nospam
<nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> > > <https://news.samsung.com/global/samsung-sets-the-new-standard-with-four-
> > > generations-of-os-upgrades-to-ensure-the-most-up-to-date-and-more-secure-
> > > galaxy-experience>
> > >   Eligible Galaxy devices with four generations of One UI and five
> > >   years of security updates include:
> > >  
> > >   - Galaxy S Series: Galaxy S22, S22+, S22 Ultra as well as Galaxy S21,
> > >   S21+, S21 Ultra, S21 FE and upcoming S series devices
> > >   - Galaxy Z Series: Galaxy Z Fold3, Galaxy Z Flip3 and upcoming Z
> > >   series devices
> > >   - Galaxy A Series: upcoming select A series devices
> > >   - Galaxy Tablets: Galaxy Tab S8, S8+, S8 Ultra and upcoming Tab S
> > >   series devices
> > 
> > That's old. 
> 
> no it's not. it's what's on samsung's site right now, dated february
> 2023, and includes 'upcoming devices' in the classifications. 

oops. feb 2022. 

> there is a samsung event next week on feb 1, so expect to add the
> galaxy s23 to the list.
> 
> > where Samsung unilaterally _extended_ support to most older models.
> 
> they did not.

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

#1920

nospam wrote:

>> no it's not. it's what's on samsung's site right now, dated february
>> 2023, and includes 'upcoming devices' in the classifications. 
> 
> oops. feb 2022.

The fact remains iOS has the _shortest_ update lifespan of all modern OSs.
That's just a fact. 

Only a fool disputes facts.
(That's why they're fools.)

What you fail to grasp is that Apple, Google, and Microsoft will all fix a
bug in an older release when that bug is heinous enough - but you fail to
grasp that fixing a bug in a ten year old release is not fixing all of
them.

It's a fact that _intelligent_ people can grasp, by the way, but not you.

Apple only fixes all known bugs in the _single_ current release.
That's just a fact, nospam. 

You dispute that fact - but that's why I said nobody but a fool does that.
I also said Android is broken into layers which are updated differently.

Your brain can't comprehend that Android updates by layers.
Android is not a monolith like iOS is.

When the iOS monolith dies, the _entire_ set of Apple-provided layers die.
Your feeble brain can't comprehend what a monolith is compared to layers.

Most of what's in those Android layers are updated forever, nospam.
(Forever has been defined here as there is no EOL date, and, perhaps more
importantly, _all_ those forever layers are donated to the Open Source
community - just in case forever is only ten or twenty years to start
with).

The point is you do not understand how Android updates, nospam.
You don't even understand how iOS updates.

Your brain won't allow you to understand, but the fact remains a fact:
 *iOS has the _shortest_ update lifespan of all common operating systems*

That's just a fact.
Prove me wrong. 

But you can't.
Because you don't understand how Android & iOS update.

Read _this_ before you reply please:
 <https://hothardware.com/news/apple-admits-only-fully-patches-security-flaws-in-latest-os-releases>

HINT: Apple lied.

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

#1922

nospam wrote:

>> where Samsung unilaterally _extended_ support to most older models.
> 
> they did not.

This is an important post because it elucidates the depravity of nospam.

What is wrong with your brain, nospam?
Why do you brazenly deny what everyone else already knows to be true?

Who does that?
Only fools, right?

Why nospam, do you deny that which is well known to everyone else?
 *Samsung�s fantastic software update policy will soon welcome new members*
 <https://www.sammobile.com/news/samsung-galaxy-s23-series-four-years-android-os-upgrades/>
 Last updated: January 25th, 2023 at 15:16 UTC+01:00

Do you never read the news, nospam?
Do you know absolutely _nothing_ about Samsung updates, nospam?

It's OK that you're ignorant - but then why are you so _confident_ when you 
deny facts that everyone who does read the news already knows, nospam?

Who does that?

It seems you outright deny anything that you simply don't happen to like.
 "[In 2023, Samsung] even extended the new long term update promise 
  to devices launched in 2021."

Will you now admit you are wrong, nospam?

  *You have all the confidence in the world in your own ignorance*, 
  *nospam, but now that you've been shown to be wrong, do you own*
  *the confidence to admit it?*

That's an important question which _defines_ your character, nospam.

Rest assured, my facts are never wrong(1), and your statements almost 
always are, because I'm held to a standard of truth and credibility.

You don't give a shit about your credibility, nospam.
You simply deny any fact that you simply don't like.

Like you just did.

Will you ever admit that you're wrong, nospam?
 *Updating the "wrong - by badgolferman" thread from May 29, 2019*
 <https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/Pg9fi_sV3CU/m/SxefvG-lAAAJ>
-- 
(1) Bear in mind I can make a mistake - but I don't say facts without 
already having read the references and _understanding_ what they say.
And if I ever do make a factual mistake (which is extremely rare as a 
result of my attention to accurate detail), I openly admit that mistake.
(see reference above)

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

#1924

nospam wrote:

>> where Samsung unilaterally _extended_ support to most older models.
> 
> they did not.

This is an important post because it elucidates the depravity of nospam.

What is wrong with your brain, nospam?
Why do you brazenly deny what everyone else already knows to be true?

Who does that?
Only fools, right?

Why nospam, do you deny that which is well known to everyone else?
 *Samsung�s fantastic software update policy will soon welcome new members*
 <https://www.sammobile.com/news/samsung-galaxy-s23-series-four-years-android-os-upgrades/>
 Last updated: January 25th, 2023 at 15:16 UTC+01:00

Do you never read the news, nospam?
Do you know absolutely _nothing_ about Samsung updates, nospam?

It's OK that you're ignorant - but then why are you so _confident_ when you
deny facts that everyone who does read the news already knows, nospam?

Who does that?

It seems you outright deny anything that you simply don't happen to like.
 "[In 2023, Samsung] even extended the new long term update promise 
  to devices launched in 2021."

Will you now admit you are wrong, nospam?

  *You have all the confidence in the world in your own ignorance*, 
  *nospam, but now that you've been shown to be wrong, do you own*
  *the confidence to admit it?*

That's an important question which _defines_ your character, nospam.

Rest assured, my facts are never wrong(1), and your statements almost
always are, because I'm held to a standard of truth and credibility.

You don't give a shit about your credibility, nospam.
You simply deny any fact that you simply don't like.

Like you just did.

Will you ever admit that you're wrong, nospam?
 *Updating the "wrong - by badgolferman" thread from May 29, 2019*
 <https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/Pg9fi_sV3CU/m/SxefvG-lAAAJ>
-- 
(1) Bear in mind I can make a mistake - but I don't say facts without
already having read the references and _understanding_ what they say.
And if I ever do make a factual mistake (which is extremely rare as a 
result of my attention to accurate detail), I openly admit that mistake.
(see reference above)

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

#1921

On 2023-01-26 20:49, nospam wrote:
> In article <k3g353FcjfcU2@mid.individual.net>, Carlos E. R.
> <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> 
>>>>
>> I just don't remember seeing this mentioned when buying a Samsung (for
>> other people). Had I known this I would have sought more.
>>
>> A list from them would be nice. Would save time.
> 
> <https://news.samsung.com/global/samsung-sets-the-new-standard-with-four-
> generations-of-os-upgrades-to-ensure-the-most-up-to-date-and-more-secure-
> galaxy-experience>
>    Eligible Galaxy devices with four generations of One UI and five
>    years of security updates include:
>   
>    - Galaxy S Series: Galaxy S22, S22+, S22 Ultra as well as Galaxy S21,
>    S21+, S21 Ultra, S21 FE and upcoming S series devices
>    - Galaxy Z Series: Galaxy Z Fold3, Galaxy Z Flip3 and upcoming Z
>    series devices
>    - Galaxy A Series: upcoming select A series devices
>    - Galaxy Tablets: Galaxy Tab S8, S8+, S8 Ultra and upcoming Tab S
>    series devices

Thanks. Saved.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

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

#1925

Carlos E.R. wrote:

>>    - Galaxy S Series: Galaxy S22, S22+, S22 Ultra as well as Galaxy S21,
>>    S21+, S21 Ultra, S21 FE and upcoming S series devices
>>    - Galaxy Z Series: Galaxy Z Fold3, Galaxy Z Flip3 and upcoming Z
>>    series devices
>>    - Galaxy A Series: upcoming select A series devices
>>    - Galaxy Tablets: Galaxy Tab S8, S8+, S8 Ultra and upcoming Tab S
>>    series devices
> 
> Thanks. Saved.

Things have changed... 

It didn't used to be this way, but iOS support is far inferior nowadays.
 *In 2022, We Loved: Samsung Doing Updates*
 <https://www.droid-life.com/2022/12/29/in-2022-we-loved-samsung-doing-updates/>

It used to be iOS support was longer than Android, but that's now gone.
 *Samsung's fantastic software update policy will soon welcome new members*
 <https://www.sammobile.com/news/samsung-galaxy-s23-series-four-years-android-os-upgrades/>

What nospam is working off of is _old_ news, where that's dated 2023 above.

When you understand that iOS is a monolith, and when you understand that 
patching a _single_ but is not an entire update cycle, then you can begin 
to comprehend _why_ iOS support has fallen to the _lowest_ among OSs.

Much like nospam, most people don't understand that iOS is a monolith.
Android is layered. Only some of those layers are manufacturer dependent.

People like nospam who don't understand how operating systems update will 
never be able to understand that it's the totality of the layers that 
comprise support. Not just a single layer.

Likely, nospam is aware iOS is a monolith - so - perhaps nospam feels 
Android is also a monolith - but that would be wrong. 

Samsung fundamentally updates only one of the main three layers for five 
years while Google updates the two dozen core modules forever.

The third Android layer, that of key apps, is also updated essentially 
forever, while iOS, being a monolith, has all that dying at the same time.

And that's about five years.
Same as Samsung's _shortest_ layer!

I realize nospam doesn't own the intelligent to comprehend what that means, 
but it shows that the _shortest_ support for Samsungs is as long as the 
absolute _longest_ support for iOS for a full patch layer.

And yet, there are two more layers in Android which update forever
(as defined as there being no EOL & it's all open sourced anyway).

Hence, it's even further incomprehensible to people like nospam who can't 
comprehend facts that those other two _much longer_ supported layers are 
why it's correct to make the astute and correct observation that

 *The support for iOS is much shorter than it is for these Samsungs*

Current information:
 *Samsung Galaxy Android 13 Update Info (2023)*
 <https://www.gottabemobile.com/samsung-galaxy-android-13-update-info/>

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

#1914

nospam wrote:

>> a. Android patch times vary by manufacturer, e.g., 5 years for Samsung:
> 
> only on select samsung models. other manufacturers are much less.

Samsung recently expanded their written promise to models built _before_ 
they made that written promise of five years of _full_ hotfix support.

What's interesting is your claim since the beginning of time that iOS/macOS 
updated longer than others turned out a lie (or ignorance on your part).
 *Much like Steve's FCC-coverage maps, EVERYTHING iKooks claimed*
 *about iOS releases over the years - has been wrong!*
 <https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/DjOHklSfWq0>

Fancy that.
 *It turns out iOS has the _shortest_ support period of all common OSs!*

>> b. Android core components are updated by Google, essentially, forever:
> 
> nothing is forever, including android.

We defined "forever" so please read for comprehension next time you respond 
that you _hate_ that most of Android is updated essentially forever.
 <https://www.hexnode.com/blogs/android-project-mainline-everything-you-need-to-know/>

You are ignorant of how iOS and macOS update, nospam (see thread above).
You're even more ignorant of how Android updates, nospam.

Ever since project mainline (core modules) & treble (for Qualcomm 
firmware), the vast majority of Android is now updated forever.
 <https://www.xda-developers.com/android-project-mainline-modules-explanation/>

You are so used to the laughably primitive iOS monolith, you can't fathom 
that an operating system can be updated asynchronously without direct
involvement from the carriers and the manufacturers, nospam.
 <https://source.android.com/docs/core/ota/modular-system>

Here are just _some_ of the dozens of core Android modules updated forever.

>> Apple:
>> a. iOS/macOS is ONLY for a _single_ latest release (macOS 13 & iOS 16 only)
> 
> false. apple just updated ios 12 for decade old iphones that can't run
> ios 13 or later, along with the previous ios 15 and the current ios 16.

Everything you've claimed about iOS/macOS releases, nospam, was wrong.
 <https://hothardware.com/news/apple-admits-only-fully-patches-security-flaws-in-latest-os-releases>

Fancy that.

There are only two possibilities for _why_ you were so wrong for so long.
a. You were ignorant of how Apple truly updates iOS & macOS, or, 
b. You lied.

There are no other options.
Read this for comprehension please:
 <https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/10/apple-clarifies-security-update-policy-only-the-latest-oses-are-fully-patched/>

Even so, the fact iOS has the _shortest_ support period of all modern
consumer operating systems today, the question still remains valid.

What is Microsoft's _written_ promise to support Windows' three components:
a. Security patches
b. Core modules
c. Key apps (e.g., the default web browser)

The emphasis of the question is to obtain URLs for each of those answers
so that we learn more from this thread than we ever knew before it.
-- 
Posted out of the goodness of my heart to disseminate useful information
which, in this case, is to respond to nospam's comments about releases.

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

#1917

In article <tqupo0$2hva3$1@news.mixmin.net>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:

> 
> >> a. Android patch times vary by manufacturer, e.g., 5 years for Samsung:
> > 
> > only on select samsung models. other manufacturers are much less.

..

>  *It turns out iOS has the _shortest_ support period of all common OSs!*

it turns out that apple just released an update for iphones as far back
as 2013. that's *10* years ago (actually, 9.5 years, since the relevant
phones were released towards the end of 2013). 

you're claiming 5 years of support for samsung.

last time i checked, 10 is bigger than 5. it's actually *double*. 

> >> b. Android core components are updated by Google, essentially, forever:
> > 
> > nothing is forever, including android.
> 
> We defined "forever" 

who is 'we' and why does that definition override the existing
definition that's been in place, for, uh, forever ?

have you informed merriam-webster, oxford, random house, american
heritage and the various other dictionary companies about your newly
updated definition? i'm sure they would like to know about it.

have you also re-defined 'shortest' ?

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

#1919

nospam wrote:

>>  *It turns out iOS has the _shortest_ support period of all common OSs!*
> 
> it turns out that apple just released an update for iphones as far back
> as 2013. that's *10* years ago (actually, 9.5 years, since the relevant
> phones were released towards the end of 2013). 

What you uneducated low-IQ iKooks fail to grasp, nospam, is EVERYONE
releases a critical patch every once in a while to a decade-old OS.

Google does it.
Microsoft does it.
Yes, even Apple does it.

The fact that they all release a _single_ patch to an old release is a
known fact that you can't grasp doesn't mean what you _think_ it means.

Your low-IQ uneducated brain thinks a _single_ heinous bug being fix
is, somehow, in your kindergarten mindset, all known bugs in that release.

It's not.
Nobody but you uneducated low-IQ iKooks would even _think_ of such a thing.

> you're claiming 5 years of support for samsung.

Which is the _same_ as the current support for iOS 16 devices, nospam.
Again, your kindergarten brain can't grasp simple facts such as that.

What your little brain can't figure out is the part about Android (and
Windows) not being primitive monolithic releases such as iOS is.

Why do you think it's so important that Google created project mainline?
HINT: You have no clue. Why not? Because you think monolithic only.

Why do you think it's so important that Google updates the Chrome browser?

You don't realize when iOS dies, _everything_ dies.

 *That means iOS has the _shortest_ life of _any_ modern operating system.*

It's all due to the monolith that your low-IQ brain can't seem to grasp.

> 
> last time i checked, 10 is bigger than 5. it's actually *double*.

You don't get it because you don't own the IQ to understand that iOS is
updated as a monolith while _all_ the other operating systems are layered.

That means iOS has the _shortest_ lifespan of all modern operating systems.
The reason is the monolith, nospam. 

You can't grasp that most of Android is updated forever.
And yet, _all_ of iOS just dies after about five years.

I don't expect you to grasp this distinction between updating a monolith
and updating a layered system, but the adults on this ng can handle that.

The fact remains iOS has the _shortest_ support lifespan of all modern OSs.
 
> have you also re-defined 'shortest' ?

What you don't grasp, nospam, because your low IQ won't allow you to
understand, is that when a _monolith_ dies, *EVERYTHING* dies.

That means iOS has the _shortest_ support lifespan of all modern OSs.
It's just a fact.

The fact you _hate_ this fact doesn't change that it's still a fact.
All the intelligent people on this newsgroup will _understand_ that fact.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | alt.comp.microsoft.windows

csiph-web