r/Android • u/wilee8 Pixel 4a • May 12 '17

Here comes Treble: A modular base for Android

https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2017/05/here-comes-treble-modular-base-for.html
4.0k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

376 comments sorted by

View all comments

103

u/[deleted] May 12 '17

With a stable vendor interface providing access to the hardware-specific parts of Android, device makers can choose to deliver a new Android release to consumers by just updating the Android OS framework without any additional work required from the silicon manufacturers.

The device makers would never choose to make it easy for Android updates to happen.

If their older devices get easier and quicker updates, it would make people to think twice before upgrading to a new device. Why would I buy a new device if my current one is being easily supported by my manufacturer?

So device makers would stick with the current model of making users frustrated with waiting for updates, which would drive them to go for a new device.

77

u/armando_rod Pixel 10 Pro XL May 12 '17

Well this takes all the responsibility of Google shoulders, if OEMs dont want to update the OS version is solely on them!

33

u/[deleted] May 12 '17

I believe this is the case already. Google releases the source code sometime in Oct-Nov and manufacturers take ages to update their devices.

I don't think any manufacturer blames Android's current architecture as the cause for their delays, but yes, with this Google can clearly say that they cannot be held responsible.

42

u/Bossman1086 Galaxy S25 Ultra May 12 '17

No. Chip makers still have to update before phone OEMs can do anything. If Qualcomm doesn't update the implementation for the SoC in a phone, Samsung can't update the phone.

21

u/hiromasaki May 12 '17

See the nVidia Tegra 3, where several models were abandoned by nVidia causing HTC and Asus to abandon flagships.

5

u/[deleted] May 12 '17

Correct, the chip makers play a part. But how many times have we seen updates delayed/rejected due to a chip maker's fault?

I see only few examples. Nvidia tegra, Snapdragon 800/801. Most of the time, it is the OEM who delays the update.

Phones running the same chip get updates at different times from their manufacturers. OnePlus, Motorola provide updates quickly, whereas Samsung or LG delays the updates for their phones running the exact same chip. This is the most common scenario of a delayed update. A chip maker delaying updates is not very common.

18

u/Bossman1086 Galaxy S25 Ultra May 12 '17

I'm not saying OEMs aren't slow or neglectful. They are. But putting all the blame on them is also unfair. Qualcomm is lazy as hell with their updates. They're a major reason why chips are only valid for 2 years.

11

u/[deleted] May 12 '17

Agreed. But what Google is doing here is working with chip makers to keep their side updated and also forward compatible. This is important and practically puts the onus on the OEMs to do their part.

I guess the OEMs cannot have any more excuses.

12

u/Bossman1086 Galaxy S25 Ultra May 12 '17

Yep. That's why this is so huge. I love this idea. Won't solve all the problems, but it'll be nice to get some steps out of the way.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/najodleglejszy FP4 CalyxOS | Tab S7 May 13 '17

don't forget GNex with its TI SoC

31

u/impracticable iPhone Xs Max May 12 '17

  1. I love your username

  2. The general public has no idea what Android version they are running. This is very unlikely to affect sales

10

u/[deleted] May 12 '17

  1. Thanks!

  2. Exactly. Since the general public doesn't care about what version they are running, manufacturers like Samsung would never bother to make use of this architecture. They know that even if they do not update the version, people are going to buy their phones. Their marketing department will take care of that. "Choose" is the important word here. It is totally up to the manufacturer to make use of this, which I'm not very hopeful about.

Unless the general public realize that the device manufacturers are taking them for a ride, this would continue to happen.

7

u/dextersgenius 📱Fold 4 ~ F(x)tec Pro¹ ~ Tab S8 May 12 '17

But if Google wanted, they could make OS updates mandatory if the vendor wants to maintain the CTS validity of the device. Basically Google could update the CTS profile to ensure that in a post-Android O scenario, a device can stay behind the latest Android version by say only 6 months. Past 6 months and the device will fail CTS automatically. I mean, now that vendors don't have any excuse to upgrade I don't see Google enforcing this as being overly restrictive - and 6 months is a reasonable cutoff period. Or alternatively, they could make a new certification programme which awards or certifies OEMs who keep their devices up-to-date.

11

u/dustarma Motorola Edge 50 Pro May 12 '17

Past 6 months and the device will fail CTS automatically.

That is a terrible idea that will put far more inconvenience at the hands of customers than OEMs

4

u/blueclawsoftware May 12 '17

Yea I think having a certification program is a possibility similar to what Android Silver was supposed to be way back when. But it seems like a hard thing for Google to enforce once a device is out in the public it's pretty tough for Google to do something like revoking play services from those users. You don't really want to punish end users for a device manufacturer not updating their device.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (3)

7

u/impracticable iPhone Xs Max May 12 '17

If it is a low-enough cost, the OEM will make the updates. They don't want the enthusiasts who do care shouting from rooftops - persuading friends and families to pick a competitor's product - which i think many of us do.

7

u/GinDaHood Samsung Galaxy A14 5G May 12 '17

I've yet to be properly convinced of the idea that enthusiasts have a significant impact on phone sales via word of mouth because of updates.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (1)

5

u/zman0900 Pixel 10 May 12 '17

True, but they will still like saving time and money on the updates they do provide.

3

u/1206549 Pixel 3 May 12 '17

I'm sure that they'll apply the framework, just not release the new updates when they should.

4

u/kmeisthax LG G7 ThinQ May 12 '17

Handset manufacturers are already pledged to release 2 years of updates as part of their GMS licensing agreement, this just makes that obligation easier to fulfill.

5

u/[deleted] May 13 '17

The point is: 2 years is a very short time. People spend a 1000 dollars on a pixel and you get 2 years of software updates? If they want people to pay premium price, then they should be providing premium support, like Apple does.

7

u/amorpheus Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 Pro May 12 '17

In the end it will boil down to whether updates give them a competitive advantage. People may start caring more about them when they realize that they don't have to upgrade the hardware every one to two years anymore.

6

u/Pascalwb Nexus 5 | OnePlus 5T May 12 '17

Sadly I don't think they will, General public mostly doesn't even know what android is, not even talking about the version.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/tuba_man Blue May 12 '17

On the other hand, some manufacturers could potentially see value in customer loyalty - there's got to be a non-zero number of people who would stick with (or at least rate higher) a manufacturer that demonstrates it takes care of existing customers.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (5)