Android updates opinion: It’s about more than just PR

Opinion from

C. Scott Brown

Last year, along with the launch of the Galaxy Note 20 series, Samsung announced that it would support the software for most of its phones for three years. Earlier this year, the company pushed its Android update guidelines even further. Now it offers three years of monthly support with a fourth year of quarterly security patches for almost every smartphone it makes.

After that policy change, Samsung’s first major phone launch was the Galaxy S21 line, which has sold incredibly well. There are many other reasons for this, but the promise of updates doesn’t hurt sales in any way.

Last week we received new guidelines for software support from Oppo and Vivo. Both companies will offer updates for three years – but each has limitations. Oppo, for example, only offers the guidelines for the Find X3 series, at least for now. Vivo is only changing the guidelines for its future flagships in the “X” series, which means no current Vivo phones will be supported for three years.

Connected: Samsung has raised the bar for Android updates

I don’t want to jump to conclusions, but it seems like these two companies are trying to earn PR goodwill by mimicking Samsung’s well-received Android update policy. But here’s the thing, folks: a good Android update policy should be a core aspect of a company’s product, not a strategic PR move.

Times have changed, as have Android updates

Since the smartphone boom of the 2010s, most manufacturers have stuck to the standard software support window of two years. This length of time was not an arbitrary decision. This two-year window came from the concept that people would buy a subsidized phone if they signed an agreement with a network operator. This agreement would last two years. When the agreement was closed, the user could sign a new two-year contract and get a new, heavily discounted phone.

See also: Family plans: which carrier is best for your family?

If most consumers only kept their phones for two years, there was little reason for OEMs to continue supporting them beyond that limit. This is one of the reasons most OEMs no longer offer Android updates beyond the two-year limit.

However, things have changed. Exclusive two-year contracts are a rarity these days. Even the idea of ​​buying your phone from your carrier is on a downward trend. There are over 50 million active unlocked cell phones in the US, according to the NPD. That number is increasing every year.

For some reason, OEMs can’t let go of the two-year update cycle they’ve had since the early 2010s.

Additionally, the average person holds on to their phone longer each year than before. However, many Android OEMs refuse to move with the times and expand their Android update guidelines. It was two years in 2010 and it will be two years now, Dagnabit!

This inability to move with the times will separate winners from losers in the increasingly breakneck wireless industry.

This is not about PR, but about customer loyalty

Samsung was smart enough to spot this trend. While it has been slow to catch on (its support history was pretty grim prior to 2018), it knows that consumers will no longer be satisfied with two years of support. It has been known that with a solid updating policy, the company will sell more phones and retain those customers for longer periods of time. Just take a look at Apple that offers 5 years of updates for iPhones. And if you didn’t know, Apple sells a lot of iPhones.

However, the Vivo and Oppo guidelines are clearly not based on this finding. These promises filled with reservations are only PR trend following. They saw Samsung take a step and customers and experts alike responded positively. They had a meeting and said, “Hey, we can jump on this train – but we can’t really commit ourselves fully.” This is hollow marketing and consumers will see through it.

Customers will know which companies really believe in offering extended support and which are emerging.

Think of Android updates as a branch of customer support. If I buy a product and something goes wrong, I can try to contact the company. If this call goes well – that is, if my problem is resolved quickly and efficiently – I will be happy and likely buy more products from this company. I will probably also share my positive experiences with friends and family to encourage them to do the same.

That’s what Android updates represent. They represent a customer’s continued satisfaction with their purchase. A company that offers a phone (or really a product) that has robust, long-term software support is more likely to make a customer’s future dollars. On the flip side, a company that offers weak or cautious support will not see those future dollars. As simple as that.

I sincerely hope to see a wave of changes in software support policies from Android OEMs soon. I just hope they look like Samsung’s and not Oppo or Vivo. These guidelines shouldn’t take up much of the fine print. If they do this, they will not present a real understanding of what consumers want – and that will inevitably backfire.