Quote:
Originally Posted by pl001
Thing is, security isn't a big deal on Android to begin with. There are no major security flaws on my phone, which still runs IceCreamSandwhich. There were no major security flaws when it ran GingerBread either. If you install pirated software from dubious sites, yeah, there may be a risk involved there, but it's not the responsibility of carriers to protect you from that kind of stupidity.
As much as I hate the way carriers operate in the US, this lawsuit is nothing more than petty whining. You don't have a "right" to the latest and greatest version of software. Does Best Buy owe me a Windows 8 upgrade on my XP laptop I bought 6 years ago? After all it still has good enough specs (barely) to handle it. The logic behind this is simply ridiculous. And if it succeeds, it will cost carriers money. Who do you think will ultimately pay for those increased costs?
|
1) the right isn't to the latest & greatest, it's to security. If there's a patch to XP that will fix the security holes then that's all you have a right to. Half the issue though is that carriers have modified Android to the point that users can't install standard updates. To continue your analogy, if Best Buy had modified XP to the point where you couldn't install Windows Updates from Microsoft then yes, maybe they would owe you an upgrade.
2) If it's done under a court order then the court could include the provision that the costs be borne by the carrier. Or not. So many courts kowtow to big business that it's likely not, but a lot depends on the persuasiveness of the lawyers.
3) Android has security flaws. The fact that they're not as bad as Windows' doesn't make them non-existent. In a way this is still 'security by obscurity'. Sure, Android is popular-but it's still not as big & easy a target as Windows-so which do you think hackers are going to go for first?