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

Groups > comp.mobile.android > #155244 > unrolled thread

What makes each of us want to replace a mobile device nowadays

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

Contents

  What makes each of us want to replace a mobile device nowadays Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-08-24 17:14 +0200
    Re: What makes each of us want to replace a mobile device nowadays Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-24 17:59 +0100
      Re: What makes each of us want to replace a mobile device nowadays Ch1ffr3punk <ch1ffr3punk@gmail.com> - 2026-08-24 17:06 +0000
      Re: What makes each of us want to replace a mobile device nowadays Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2026-08-25 10:51 +1200
        Re: What makes each of us want to replace a mobile device nowadays Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-08-25 03:31 +0200
          Re: What makes each of us want to replace a mobile device nowadays Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-25 10:56 +0100
            Re: What makes each of us want to replace a mobile device nowadays Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-25 12:23 +0100
              Re: What makes each of us want to replace a mobile device nowadays Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-25 18:43 +0100
                Re: What makes each of us want to replace a mobile device nowadays ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) - 2026-08-25 17:49 +0000
          Re: What makes each of us want to replace a mobile device nowadays "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-08-25 14:35 +0200
            Re: What makes each of us want to replace a mobile device nowadays Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-08-25 16:26 +0200
        Re: What makes each of us want to replace a mobile device nowadays Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-25 09:35 +0100
    Re: What makes each of us want to replace a mobile device nowadays badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> - 2026-08-24 17:54 +0000
      Re: What makes each of us want to replace a mobile device nowadays "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-08-24 20:49 +0200
        Re: What makes each of us want to replace a mobile device nowadays Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2026-08-25 10:49 +1200
          Re: What makes each of us want to replace a mobile device nowadays "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-08-25 01:59 +0200
            Re: What makes each of us want to replace a mobile device nowadays Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2026-08-25 12:48 +1200
              Re: What makes each of us want to replace a mobile device nowadays "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-08-25 14:27 +0200
    Re: What makes each of us want to replace a mobile device nowadays Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> - 2026-08-24 22:00 +0100
      Re: What makes each of us want to replace a mobile device nowadays Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2026-08-25 10:46 +1200
    Re: What makes each of us want to replace a mobile device nowadays "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-08-25 02:00 +0200
    Re: What makes each of us want to replace a mobile device nowadays Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2026-08-25 03:47 +0200
    Re: What makes each of us want to replace a mobile device nowadays Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2026-08-25 13:47 +0000

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#155244 — What makes each of us want to replace a mobile device nowadays

Now that both Android & iOS development has plateaued, what are the key
factors that make any of us want to replace our current mobile device?

1. Battery loses capacity & it's too hard to replace so we buy a new phone
2. Storage is stressed but if it can't be replaced, we buy a 'bigger' phone
3. Hardware is damaged & it's too expensive to fix (e.g., cracked screen)
4. Device doesn't do what we want it to do (e.g., bigger camera perhaps?)
5. OEM stops full updates of the entire device (so the user becomes scared)
6. ?

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#155249

On 24/08/2026 16:14, Maria Sophia wrote:
> Now that both Android & iOS development has plateaued, what are the key
> factors that make any of us want to replace our current mobile device?
> 
> 1. Battery loses capacity & it's too hard to replace so we buy a new phone
> 2. Storage is stressed but if it can't be replaced, we buy a 'bigger' phone
> 3. Hardware is damaged & it's too expensive to fix (e.g., cracked screen)
> 4. Device doesn't do what we want it to do (e.g., bigger camera perhaps?)
> 5. OEM stops full updates of the entire device (so the user becomes scared)
> 6. ?

6. Dump android and iOS for something where you have control and the 
device doesn't spy on you. Probably the only viable device at present is 
a Fairphone 6 with e/OS.

Thinking about it, this should be at the top of the list. :-)

-- 
Jeff

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

#155251

Jeff Layman wrote:
> On 24/08/2026 16:14, Maria Sophia wrote:
> > Now that both Android & iOS development has plateaued, what are the key
> > factors that make any of us want to replace our current mobile device?
> > 
> > 1. Battery loses capacity & it's too hard to replace so we buy a new phone
> > 2. Storage is stressed but if it can't be replaced, we buy a 'bigger' phone
> > 3. Hardware is damaged & it's too expensive to fix (e.g., cracked screen)
> > 4. Device doesn't do what we want it to do (e.g., bigger camera perhaps?)
> > 5. OEM stops full updates of the entire device (so the user becomes scared)
> > 6. ?
> 
> 6. Dump android and iOS for something where you have control and the
> device doesn't spy on you. Probably the only viable device at present is
> a Fairphone 6 with e/OS.
> 
> Thinking about it, this should be at the top of the list. :-)
>
 
https://plugos.net/plugmate should be on the list... :-)

-- 
https://oc2mx.net

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

#155277

On 2026-08-24 16:59:57 +0000, Jeff Layman said:

> On 24/08/2026 16:14, Maria Sophia wrote:
>> Now that both Android & iOS development has plateaued, what are the key
>> factors that make any of us want to replace our current mobile device?
>> 
>> 1. Battery loses capacity & it's too hard to replace so we buy a new phone
>> 2. Storage is stressed but if it can't be replaced, we buy a 'bigger' phone
>> 3. Hardware is damaged & it's too expensive to fix (e.g., cracked screen)
>> 4. Device doesn't do what we want it to do (e.g., bigger camera perhaps?)
>> 5. OEM stops full updates of the entire device (so the user becomes scared)
>> 6. ?
> 
> 6. Dump android and iOS for something where you have control and the 
> device doesn't spy on you. Probably the only viable device at present 
> is a Fairphone 6 with e/OS.
> 
> Thinking about it, this should be at the top of the list. :-)

"e/OS" is simply yet another version of Android. Since Google makes 
Android, the supposed "de-Googled" e/OS is simply impossible idiotic 
nonense conning the gullible tin foil hat brigade - by deffinition, 
Google will always be part of any Android version.

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

#155288

Your Name wrote:
>> 6. Dump android and iOS for something where you have control and the 
>> device doesn't spy on you. Probably the only viable device at present 
>> is a Fairphone 6 with e/OS.
>> 
>> Thinking about it, this should be at the top of the list. :-)
> 
> "e/OS" is simply yet another version of Android. Since Google makes 
> Android, the supposed "de-Googled" e/OS is simply impossible idiotic 
> nonense conning the gullible tin foil hat brigade - by deffinition, 
> Google will always be part of any Android version.

While that's OT, it's simply not true, so the record needs correction.
  *Android is an open-source operating system project (AOSP)*

While Google develops and maintains AOSP, Google does not own every
Android-derived operating system, nor does an Android-derived OS
necessarily contain Google's proprietary services.

In particular, /e/OS is deliberately built from AOSP and removes Google's
proprietary components. The /e/OS project describes itself as a "fully
deGoogled mobile operating system," replacing Google's services with its
own/open alternatives.

The important distinction is:

AOSP = Google's open-source Android codebase.

Google Mobile Services (GMS) = Google's proprietary package of
services/apps, including things such as Google Play Services and the Play
Store.

/e/OS = Android/AOSP-derived, but designed to operate without GMS and
Google's normal tracking/service infrastructure.

So saying "Google makes Android, therefore Google must always be part of
any Android version" is roughly analogous to saying that because Linux was
originally created by Linus Torvalds, every Linux distribution must contain
something owned or controlled by Linus Torvalds. 

The ancestry doesn't imply that.

There is, however, a legitimate criticism buried underneath that perhaps
/e/OS isn't an entirely independent operating-system architecture.

For sure, it remains Android-derived and applications written for Android
are generally what make it useful. But that's very different from:

     "Google will always be part of any Android version."

That statement is simply false.

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

#155297

On 25/08/2026 02:31, Maria Sophia wrote:
> Your Name wrote:
>>> 6. Dump android and iOS for something where you have control and the
>>> device doesn't spy on you. Probably the only viable device at present
>>> is a Fairphone 6 with e/OS.
>>>
>>> Thinking about it, this should be at the top of the list. :-)
>>
>> "e/OS" is simply yet another version of Android. Since Google makes
>> Android, the supposed "de-Googled" e/OS is simply impossible idiotic
>> nonense conning the gullible tin foil hat brigade - by deffinition,
>> Google will always be part of any Android version.
> 
> While that's OT, it's simply not true, so the record needs correction.
>    *Android is an open-source operating system project (AOSP)*
> 
> While Google develops and maintains AOSP, Google does not own every
> Android-derived operating system, nor does an Android-derived OS
> necessarily contain Google's proprietary services.
> 
> In particular, /e/OS is deliberately built from AOSP and removes Google's
> proprietary components. The /e/OS project describes itself as a "fully
> deGoogled mobile operating system," replacing Google's services with its
> own/open alternatives.
> 
> The important distinction is:
> 
> AOSP = Google's open-source Android codebase.
> 
> Google Mobile Services (GMS) = Google's proprietary package of
> services/apps, including things such as Google Play Services and the Play
> Store.
> 
> /e/OS = Android/AOSP-derived, but designed to operate without GMS and
> Google's normal tracking/service infrastructure.
> 
> So saying "Google makes Android, therefore Google must always be part of
> any Android version" is roughly analogous to saying that because Linux was
> originally created by Linus Torvalds, every Linux distribution must contain
> something owned or controlled by Linus Torvalds.

I don't think that the analogy here is correct. Torvalds created Linux 
from the start. It was not a commercial enterprise. Google developed 
Android, after purchasing it from the creators, and continues to 
maintain it.

Perhaps a better analogy would be Google and Chromium/Chrome. To quote 
from the wiki, "Chromium is a free and open-source web browser project, 
primarily developed and maintained by Google". So perhaps it could be 
said that it is equivalent to AOSP. As of about two years ago (and again 
quoting from the wiki) "The Chromium browser codebase contains over 36 
million source lines of code, excluding comments and blank lines". 
That's rather a lot of code for anyone to check.

There are quite a few differences between the free and open-source 
Chromium, and Google's Chrome. Probably the most important is the 
tracking that Google built into Chrome.

Now, and maybe this is a step too far, there are a number of "Android" 
OSs which claim to have removed Google's "spyware" (you can use your own 
name!) from Android. If AOSP is clean, why is there a necessity to 
remove anything? Or is it a similar situation to Chromium? If Chromium 
is a FOSS browser, why has it been deemed necessary for someone to build 
"UnGoogled Chromium"? Well, we know that it's to remove all 
Google-specific web services. So are there any services in Android that 
we don't know about, and companies like Graphene and Lineage 
weren't/aren't able to find? How would we know?

This is completely OT, but it shows that if it /can/ be done, someone 
will try to do it!
<https://www.techspot.com/news/113581-aliexpress-silently-running-audio-browser-fingerprint-track-device.html>

Until recently, GrapheneOS was only available for Pixels. I always 
thought it odd that the *only* phone a deGoogled Android OS was 
available for was a phone made by Google! Never mind the software; what 
about the hardware? What about firmware updates? How would you know that 
some chip inside a Pixel isn't calling home once a month? From 
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_(operating_system)#Privacy_and_GDPR_compliance>:

"Two years later, in 2021, researcher Douglas Leith, using a sort of 
data interception, showed that several data are sent from Android device 
to Google's servers, even when the phone is sleeping (IDLE) with no 
Google account registered into it."

By the way, that was with a Pixel! Oh, and it wasn't calling home once a 
month - it was every few minutes. (See 
<https://www.tomsguide.com/news/android-ios-data-collection>)
> The ancestry doesn't imply that.
> 
> There is, however, a legitimate criticism buried underneath that perhaps
> /e/OS isn't an entirely independent operating-system architecture.
> 
> For sure, it remains Android-derived and applications written for Android
> are generally what make it useful. But that's very different from:
> 
>       "Google will always be part of any Android version."
> 
> That statement is simply false.

I'm afraid you would never be able to prove that it wasn't false without 
spending a vast amount of time and effort examining /every/ bit of code 
in Android, both FOSS and proprietary.

-- 
Jeff

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

#155298

(Fup-To comp.mobile.android, given I don't see this being relevant to
iPhones)

On 2026-08-25, Jeff Layman wrote:

> On 25/08/2026 02:31, Maria Sophia wrote:
[...]
>> For sure, it remains Android-derived and applications written for Android
>> are generally what make it useful. But that's very different from:
>>
>>       "Google will always be part of any Android version."
>>
>> That statement is simply false.
>
> I'm afraid you would never be able to prove that it wasn't false
> without spending a vast amount of time and effort examining /every/
> bit of code in Android, both FOSS and proprietary.

I don't think so, you just need to make the case that it's possible to
do so. And, as far as "Google" means Google's service and Google's
proprietary code, and not FLOSS code copyrighted or paid for by Google,
it should be possible to do so.

This, logically, is sufficient to prove that.

<https://enwp.org/Modus_tollens> for what's at least very similar,
although I think this is more by way of
<https://enwp.org/Reductio_ad_absurdum>.

-- 
Nuno Silva

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

#155313

On 25/08/2026 12:23, Nuno Silva wrote:
> (Fup-To comp.mobile.android, given I don't see this being relevant to
> iPhones)
> 
> On 2026-08-25, Jeff Layman wrote:
> 
>> On 25/08/2026 02:31, Maria Sophia wrote:
> [...]
>>> For sure, it remains Android-derived and applications written for Android
>>> are generally what make it useful. But that's very different from:
>>>
>>>        "Google will always be part of any Android version."
>>>
>>> That statement is simply false.
>>
>> I'm afraid you would never be able to prove that it wasn't false
>> without spending a vast amount of time and effort examining /every/
>> bit of code in Android, both FOSS and proprietary.
> 
> I don't think so, you just need to make the case that it's possible to
> do so. And, as far as "Google" means Google's service and Google's
> proprietary code, and not FLOSS code copyrighted or paid for by Google,
> it should be possible to do so.
> 
> This, logically, is sufficient to prove that.
> 
> <https://enwp.org/Modus_tollens> for what's at least very similar,
> although I think this is more by way of
> <https://enwp.org/Reductio_ad_absurdum>.

Oddly enough, I was looking up Reductio ad absurdum a couple of days 
ago. I came to the conclusion that I don't understand Logic - at least 
how it is explained in <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum>

The Modus tollens was even worse. I looked at the examples and this one 
puzzled me:

     If the dog detects an intruder, the dog will bark.
     The dog did not bark.
     Therefore, no intruder was detected by the dog.

It states: "Supposing that the premises are both true (the dog will bark 
if it detects an intruder, and does indeed not bark), it logically 
follows that no intruder has been detected. This is a valid argument 
since it is not possible for the conclusion to be false if the premises 
are true."

What if the dog detected the intruder, but the intruder killed the dog 
before it could bark? It detected the intruder but it did not bark 
because it could not. The first two premises are still true; where does 
that leave the conclusion?

To return to the comment about understanding someone else's code, this 
article about decompiling is perhaps of relevance 
<https://blog.david-reid.com/decompiling/>

If it's a matter of TL:DR, just look at the penultimate paragraph:
"There are over 1500 functions in the decompiled code and so I'm not 
sure that all of them are going to need this level of detailed work. I 
am basically interested in the RF messaging but have come to realise 
that unless I can figure out what's going on I have no chance of 
understanding the RF messages - which means I need to unpick a lot more 
of the decompiled code than I had hoped to."
And if there are umpteen million lines of code? Would AI be able to do it?

-- 
Jeff

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

#155314

Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> wrote or quoted:
>The Modus tollens was even worse. I looked at the examples and this one 
>puzzled me:
>     If the dog detects an intruder, the dog will bark.
>     The dog did not bark.
>     Therefore, no intruder was detected by the dog.
>It states: "Supposing that the premises are both true (the dog will bark 
. . .
>What if the dog detected the intruder, but the intruder killed the dog 
>before it could bark?

  Then the premise "If the dog detects an intruder, the dog will bark."
  was no true. But the Modus supposed it was true.

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

#155302

On 2026-08-25 03:31, Maria Sophia wrote:
> Your Name wrote:
>>> 6. Dump android and iOS for something where you have control and the
>>> device doesn't spy on you. Probably the only viable device at present
>>> is a Fairphone 6 with e/OS.
>>>
>>> Thinking about it, this should be at the top of the list. :-)
>>
>> "e/OS" is simply yet another version of Android. Since Google makes
>> Android, the supposed "de-Googled" e/OS is simply impossible idiotic
>> nonense conning the gullible tin foil hat brigade - by deffinition,
>> Google will always be part of any Android version.
> 
> While that's OT, it's simply not true, so the record needs correction.
>    *Android is an open-source operating system project (AOSP)*
> 
> While Google develops and maintains AOSP, Google does not own every
> Android-derived operating system, nor does an Android-derived OS
> necessarily contain Google's proprietary services.
> 
> In particular, /e/OS is deliberately built from AOSP and removes Google's
> proprietary components. The /e/OS project describes itself as a "fully
> deGoogled mobile operating system," replacing Google's services with its
> own/open alternatives.
> 
> The important distinction is:
> 
> AOSP = Google's open-source Android codebase.
> 
> Google Mobile Services (GMS) = Google's proprietary package of
> services/apps, including things such as Google Play Services and the Play
> Store.
> 
> /e/OS = Android/AOSP-derived, but designed to operate without GMS and
> Google's normal tracking/service infrastructure.
> 
> So saying "Google makes Android, therefore Google must always be part of
> any Android version" is roughly analogous to saying that because Linux was
> originally created by Linus Torvalds, every Linux distribution must contain
> something owned or controlled by Linus Torvalds.
> 
> The ancestry doesn't imply that.
> 
> There is, however, a legitimate criticism buried underneath that perhaps
> /e/OS isn't an entirely independent operating-system architecture.
> 
> For sure, it remains Android-derived and applications written for Android
> are generally what make it useful. But that's very different from:
> 
>       "Google will always be part of any Android version."
> 
> That statement is simply false.

Are there phones directly sold with e/OS?

Is it possibly to *easily* change a phone to e/OS?

What does e/OS in order to install apps, what service does it use?

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

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

#155305

Carlos E.R. wrote:
> Are there phones directly sold with e/OS?
> 
> Is it possibly to *easily* change a phone to e/OS?
> 
> What does e/OS in order to install apps, what service does it use?

Hi Carlos,

I didn't bring up e/OS where all I did was explain that it could be
de-googled, as even my unrooted phone is degoogled to a good degree.

However, your question is valid, so I looked it up to answer that.

Apparently Murena sells brand-new and refurbished carrier-unlocked
smartphones that come with /e/OS pre-installed out of the box.
 <https://murena.com/products/smartphones/>
On that listing, I see Pixels in addition to Fairphone & their own brand.

If you can unlock your bootloader, apparently you can flash it yourself
but apparently you have to have a Pixel, Motorola, Fairphone or Xiaomi.
 <https://doc.e.foundation/os/installer>

For apps, apparently /e/OS uses a native app store called App Lounge.
 <https://doc.e.foundation/os/apps/app-lounge>

What's interesting is App Lounge pulls apps anonymously directly from the
Google Play Store repository much like Aurora Store does, which is nice.

We can use Bit Warden to figure out what trackers are in those apps.

/e/OS also comes with an open-source reimplementation of Google Play
Services called "microG" which tricks apps into working by acting as a
privacy-friendly middleman, blocking Google from tracking personal data.

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

#155296

On 24/08/2026 23:51, Your Name wrote:
> On 2026-08-24 16:59:57 +0000, Jeff Layman said:
> 
>> On 24/08/2026 16:14, Maria Sophia wrote:
>>> Now that both Android & iOS development has plateaued, what are the key
>>> factors that make any of us want to replace our current mobile device?
>>>
>>> 1. Battery loses capacity & it's too hard to replace so we buy a new phone
>>> 2. Storage is stressed but if it can't be replaced, we buy a 'bigger' phone
>>> 3. Hardware is damaged & it's too expensive to fix (e.g., cracked screen)
>>> 4. Device doesn't do what we want it to do (e.g., bigger camera perhaps?)
>>> 5. OEM stops full updates of the entire device (so the user becomes scared)
>>> 6. ?
>>
>> 6. Dump android and iOS for something where you have control and the
>> device doesn't spy on you. Probably the only viable device at present
>> is a Fairphone 6 with e/OS.
>>
>> Thinking about it, this should be at the top of the list. :-)
> 
> "e/OS" is simply yet another version of Android. Since Google makes
> Android, the supposed "de-Googled" e/OS is simply impossible idiotic
> nonense conning the gullible tin foil hat brigade - by deffinition,
> Google will always be part of any Android version.

Apologies! Wrong phone and wrong OS. :-(

It should have been PinePhone Pro running Sailfish OS (so definitely OT 
for this NG!).

-- 
Jeff

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

#155257

Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> wrote:
> Now that both Android & iOS development has plateaued, what are the key
> factors that make any of us want to replace our current mobile device?
> 
> 1. Battery loses capacity & it's too hard to replace so we buy a new phone
> 2. Storage is stressed but if it can't be replaced, we buy a 'bigger' phone
> 3. Hardware is damaged & it's too expensive to fix (e.g., cracked screen)
> 4. Device doesn't do what we want it to do (e.g., bigger camera perhaps?)
> 5. OEM stops full updates of the entire device (so the user becomes scared)
> 6. ?
> 

For me it’s probably a combination of 1 and 3. Often times the cellular
company also provides an incentive where it makes sense to upgrade to a new
phone rather than repair it. 

A couple other reasons you could add to your list are:
6. Device gets lost.
7. Most used apps stop working with older OS. 

Both those reasons have happened either to me or family members. 

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

#155261

On 2026-08-24 19:54, badgolferman wrote:
> Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> wrote:
>> Now that both Android & iOS development has plateaued, what are the key
>> factors that make any of us want to replace our current mobile device?
>>
>> 1. Battery loses capacity & it's too hard to replace so we buy a new phone
>> 2. Storage is stressed but if it can't be replaced, we buy a 'bigger' phone
>> 3. Hardware is damaged & it's too expensive to fix (e.g., cracked screen)
>> 4. Device doesn't do what we want it to do (e.g., bigger camera perhaps?)
>> 5. OEM stops full updates of the entire device (so the user becomes scared)
>> 6. ?
>>
> 
> For me it’s probably a combination of 1 and 3. Often times the cellular
> company also provides an incentive where it makes sense to upgrade to a new
> phone rather than repair it.
> 
> A couple other reasons you could add to your list are:
> 6. Device gets lost.
> 7. Most used apps stop working with older OS.
> 
> Both those reasons have happened either to me or family members.

And to me.

I went for a swim with the phone in my pocket. Instant death. It is a 
variant of "6".

Apps demand a more recent OS, and they don't install or they refuse to 
work. Remember that the huge majority of users use the Play Store and 
official methods.

A variant of '5' is that security updates stop coming, and banking app 
complains. It is not that the user becomes scared.

Device has a bug. This could be a variant of "4". For instance, one 
phone stopped recognizing the SD card.


-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

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

#155276

On 2026-08-24 18:49:01 +0000, Carlos E.R. said:
> On 2026-08-24 19:54, badgolferman wrote:
>> Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> wrote:
>>> Now that both Android & iOS development has plateaued, what are the key
>>> factors that make any of us want to replace our current mobile device?
>>> 
>>> 1. Battery loses capacity & it's too hard to replace so we buy a new phone
>>> 2. Storage is stressed but if it can't be replaced, we buy a 'bigger' phone
>>> 3. Hardware is damaged & it's too expensive to fix (e.g., cracked screen)
>>> 4. Device doesn't do what we want it to do (e.g., bigger camera perhaps?)
>>> 5. OEM stops full updates of the entire device (so the user becomes scared)
>>> 6. ?
>> 
>> For me it’s probably a combination of 1 and 3. Often times the cellular
>> company also provides an incentive where it makes sense to upgrade to a new
>> phone rather than repair it.
>> 
>> A couple other reasons you could add to your list are:
>> 6. Device gets lost.
>> 7. Most used apps stop working with older OS.
>> 
>> Both those reasons have happened either to me or family members.
> 
> And to me.
> 
> I went for a swim with the phone in my pocket. Instant death. It is a 
> variant of "6".
> 
> Apps demand a more recent OS, and they don't install or they refuse to 
> work. Remember that the huge majority of users use the Play Store and 
> official methods.
> 
> A variant of '5' is that security updates stop coming, and banking app 
> complains. It is not that the user becomes scared.
> 
> Device has a bug. This could be a variant of "4". For instance, one 
> phone stopped recognizing the SD card.

Could be the phone with a dirty / worn socket.

Could be the SD card itself being dirty / worn ... SD cards, like USB 
sticks, do not last forever.

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

#155281

On 2026-08-25 00:49, Your Name wrote:
> On 2026-08-24 18:49:01 +0000, Carlos E.R. said:
>> On 2026-08-24 19:54, badgolferman wrote:


>> Device has a bug. This could be a variant of "4". For instance, one 
>> phone stopped recognizing the SD card.
> 
> Could be the phone with a dirty / worn socket.
> 
> Could be the SD card itself being dirty / worn ... SD cards, like USB 
> sticks, do not last forever.

Nope, was not the case. Phone was almost new, that is, a year old. No 
dirt anywhere. One day the SD was not seen after a reboot.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

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

#155285

On 2026-08-24 23:59:19 +0000, Carlos E.R. said:
> On 2026-08-25 00:49, Your Name wrote:
>> On 2026-08-24 18:49:01 +0000, Carlos E.R. said:
>>> On 2026-08-24 19:54, badgolferman wrote:
>>> 
>>> Device has a bug. This could be a variant of "4". For instance, one 
>>> phone stopped recognizing the SD card.
>> 
>> Could be the phone with a dirty / worn socket.
>> 
>> Could be the SD card itself being dirty / worn ... SD cards, like USB 
>> sticks, do not last forever.
> 
> Nope, was not the case. Phone was almost new, that is, a year old. No 
> dirt anywhere. One day the SD was not seen after a reboot.

Sounds like the SD card most likely went kaput. They don't last forever 
and some makes are worse than others. Same with USB sticks - I've got 
one that simply stopped working in anything, while another even older 
one still works fine.

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

#155301

On 2026-08-25 02:48, Your Name wrote:
> On 2026-08-24 23:59:19 +0000, Carlos E.R. said:
>> On 2026-08-25 00:49, Your Name wrote:
>>> On 2026-08-24 18:49:01 +0000, Carlos E.R. said:
>>>> On 2026-08-24 19:54, badgolferman wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Device has a bug. This could be a variant of "4". For instance, one 
>>>> phone stopped recognizing the SD card.
>>>
>>> Could be the phone with a dirty / worn socket.
>>>
>>> Could be the SD card itself being dirty / worn ... SD cards, like USB 
>>> sticks, do not last forever.
>>
>> Nope, was not the case. Phone was almost new, that is, a year old. No 
>> dirt anywhere. One day the SD was not seen after a reboot.
> 
> Sounds like the SD card most likely went kaput. They don't last forever 
> and some makes are worse than others. Same with USB sticks - I've got 
> one that simply stopped working in anything, while another even older 
> one still works fine.
> 

It didn't. I tried it on another device, worked fine. Did tests on it, 
no problem.

Forget it, that phone developed a bug that made the card not accessible. 
Absolute certainty.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

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

#155271

Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> writes:

> Now that both Android & iOS development has plateaued, what are the key
> factors that make any of us want to replace our current mobile device?
>
> 1. Battery loses capacity & it's too hard to replace so we buy a new phone
> 2. Storage is stressed but if it can't be replaced, we buy a 'bigger' phone
> 3. Hardware is damaged & it's too expensive to fix (e.g., cracked screen)
> 4. Device doesn't do what we want it to do (e.g., bigger camera perhaps?)
> 5. OEM stops full updates of the entire device (so the user becomes scared)
> 6. ?

Previous two times it was 1.

Last time it was 5 (android 10). This time it is likely to be 1.

I am not sure 'scared' is the right word, maybe cautious, risk averse.

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

#155274

On 2026-08-24 21:00:29 +0000, Richmond said:
> Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> writes:
>> 
>> Now that both Android & iOS development has plateaued, what are the key
>> factors that make any of us want to replace our current mobile device?
>> 
>> 1. Battery loses capacity & it's too hard to replace so we buy a new phone
>> 2. Storage is stressed but if it can't be replaced, we buy a 'bigger' phone
>> 3. Hardware is damaged & it's too expensive to fix (e.g., cracked screen)
>> 4. Device doesn't do what we want it to do (e.g., bigger camera perhaps?)
>> 5. OEM stops full updates of the entire device (so the user becomes scared)
>> 6. ?
> 
> Previous two times it was 1.
> 
> Last time it was 5 (android 10). This time it is likely to be 1.
> 
> I am not sure 'scared' is the right word, maybe cautious, risk averse.


7.  Never needed a mobile phone, so never had one at all.  :-p

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

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

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

csiph-web