As a point of comparison, Microsoft ships its OS across a variety of manufacturers and largely keeps it maintained across them (give or take some exceptions like enterprise environments & the like).

Even unlocked Android phones purchased independently of carriers have inconsistent lengths of support, so it doesn’t seem to be entirely a result of carriers, so…What happened here?

  • mcforest@kbin.social
    11·
    1 year ago

    But your answer could be interpreted as “a FOSS OS can never maintained for a big variety of hardware over a long life cycle” which would be totally wrong. Android’s driver situation might be shit but that has nothing to do with an “open system” vs a “closed system”. My knowledge regarding this topic is not deep enough to give a perfect answer but I think other posts here sound more plausible.

    • ElPussyKangaroo@lemmy.world
      1·
      1 year ago

      I don’t wanna sound too defensive but I did say this

      That takes considerable effort, although if they chose to focus on a select few devices every year, they’d be able to do so.

      I agree that I can reword it to make that clear, but I don’t think, nor do I hope anyone will make that conclusion about FOSS…

      • mcforest@kbin.social
        1·
        1 year ago

        That sentence is completely correct from my point of view and has nothing to do with Foss. That’s an issue for Windows as well as Linux and Android. I think the difference is that that for the former two driver developers just take the extra effort to support hardware long term. So I think you’re right that a little rewording would help.