Motorola will NOT provide monthly security patches for the Z. Does that matter?

[YAYTech]

It regularly gets good reviews, though, so while it may not be a selling point to the masses, it's still a good thing for the user experience.

 

[anon(9072051)]

Ars sucks at reporting on this.

Better to report on it than to excuse it or give Moto a pass for old times' sake. I mean, if monthly updating is the only area in which Moto is taking a better-for-us approach to customer service and support, then maybe there's a reason to defend 'em. If not, then why bother?

 

[sangs]

This really is a whole lotta nothing to the masses people. You know how many times my parents have fretted about not having updates? Umm, that would be zero total. And they've never had anything happen to their phones. It makes for great forum discussion among a couple hundred people and that's about as far as the concern goes. Just like with the silly hand-wringing over carrier bloat. The masses don't care.

 

[Ry]

It regularly gets good reviews, though, so while it may not be a selling point to the masses, it's still a good thing for the user experience.

Doesn't translate into sales so it's not that relevant in the grand scheme of things.

 

[Ry]

Better to report on it than to excuse it or give Moto a pass for old times' sake. I mean, if monthly updating is the only area in which Moto is taking a better-for-us approach to customer service and support, then maybe there's a reason to defend 'em. If not, then why bother?

I hope they do the same thing for every phone they review going forward.

 

[Aquila]

I hope they do the same thing for every phone they review going forward.

This ^^ Almost every OEM fails in the exact same way, if we can call this failing, but no one gets called out for it but Moto and OnePlus.

 

[YAYTech]

Doesn't translate into sales so it's not that relevant in the grand scheme of things.

So the only thing relevant is... marketing? The top dogs in smartphones are Apple and Samsung. Both have an established reputation that they've built and protect, and market the crap out of. Reputation is a combination of consistent experience that people like, and hype. Just because something like supporting their products properly isn't easily turned into instant sales doesn't mean it doesn't play a role in building strong reputation that builds marketshare. Unless you think they should build on pure hype/marketing?

 

[Premium1]

The phone will receive the "monthly security patches", not "security patches, monthly". Not sure why that was ever really in doubt even though one website had said so. They have released security patches for their existing flagships, just not monthly.

I really don't get why people get worked up about whether they receive patches for theoretical exploits that have never been used in the wild every 4 weeks or a couple times a year. Unless you spend your days side loading shadey apps and browsing creepy websites on a rooted phone.

The x pure is on the may patch, and one of the big selling points was fast updates. Moto has really dropped off the last year or so with updates. If you want updates, don't buy a moto.

 

[Ry]

So the only thing relevant is... marketing? The top dogs in smartphones are Apple and Samsung. Both have an established reputation that they've built and protect, and market the crap out of. Reputation is a combination of consistent experience that people like, and hype. Just because something like supporting their products properly isn't easily turned into instant sales doesn't mean it doesn't play a role in building strong reputation that builds marketshare. Unless you think they should build on pure hype/marketing?

But sales and marketshare are essentially one in the same. Focus on what the 90% care about rather than the 10%, right?

 

[Ry]

The x pure is on the may patch, and one of the big selling points was fast updates. Moto has really dropped off the last year or so with updates. If you want updates, don't buy a moto.

OS updates and security patches: buy a Nexus.

Security patches: buy a Nexus or a BlackBerry.

That's pretty much it.

 

[Ry]

This ^^ Almost every OEM fails in the exact same way, if we can call this failing, but no one gets called out for it but Moto and OnePlus.

Call 'em all out. If Amadeo isn't as snarky on this with other OEMs, it's just elitist Amadeo being elitist Amadeo.

 

[YAYTech]

But sales and marketshare are essentially one in the same. Focus on what the 90% care about rather than the 10%, right?

Well, the 90% tend to care what others think about their smartphone. Perhaps this new attention to security in the media is going to shift whether people care. Don't want to get made fun of for having that phone the reviewers said was "insecure"...

 

[Ry]

Well, the 90% tend to care what others think about their smartphone. Perhaps this new attention to security in the media is going to shift whether people care. Don't want to get made fun of for having that phone the reviewers said was "insecure"...

Let's see if that happens.

 

[Ry]

I'm finding the indigannce over Moto's position on monthly updates really pathetic. People are acting like there's a handful of companies out there who have committed to monthly updates. Fact is there are none except for some nexus phones. It takes three months on average for Verizon to approve software. How the hell do you expect Motorola to commit to a monthly update regime given that restriction alone?? Pick on Samsung or any other hardware manufacturer. It's not just Moto and it is absolutely difficult to commit to merging changes to your custom Android branch every damn month. You critics are just ignorant Ars holes.

Posted via the Android Central App

Samsung's doing a great job on US carrier phones right now.

 

[Aquila]

I'm finding the indigannce over Moto's position on monthly updates really pathetic. People are acting like there's a handful of companies out there who have committed to monthly updates. Fact is there are none except for some nexus phones. It takes three months on average for Verizon to approve software. How the hell do you expect Motorola to commit to a monthly update regime given that restriction alone?? Pick on Samsung or any other hardware manufacturer. It's not just Moto and it is absolutely difficult to commit to merging changes to your custom Android branch every damn month. You critics are just ignorant Ars holes.

Posted via the Android Central App

Samsung & LG both promised monthly updates. Samsung has been doing it, LG has not. Blackberry has not promised them but has been doing them. HTC never committed, but lately they have been on top of it. Moto never made the promise and is way behind the other OEM's on updates. Moto's position makes sense from their point of view, but their position from a consumer who cares about the security updates is clearly unacceptable.

There is almost no difficulty involved with merging the changes, it's actually almost the exact same process to how they merge their several times a week AOSP test builds. There are probably resource requirements in testing updates that they don't want to invest in. If that's the case, they're making a judgement call on whether or not our dissatisfaction will cost them more in sales opportunity than it will cost to provide the updates. Since they're selling hardly any phones anyways, and as we've alluded, almost no buyers are buying with security updates as one of their top priorities, they're probably making the right call to be pragmatic. But it is still, again from a security standpoint, completely unacceptable.

To our other point, almost every OEM is failing in the exact same way and likely for the same reasons. So Moto isn't alone on this, except that Ars Technica called them out - so they need to be fair and call out all the other failures too.

 

[sydneycooper1979]

Moderator Side Note: Being hostile, throwing the insults and language out there isn't helpful. If you want to review the forum rules, here's a good link:*Community Rules & Guidelines - Mobile Nations Forums. If you have any questions about them, feel free to send me or any moderator a PM to discuss. Thanks!

 

[sydneycooper1979]

http://forums.mobilenations.com/rules-policies/500-community-rules-guidelines.html

 

[Mike Dee]

This really is a whole lotta nothing to the masses people. You know how many times my parents have fretted about not having updates? Umm, that would be zero total. And they've never had anything happen to their phones. It makes for great forum discussion among a couple hundred people and that's about as far as the concern goes. Just like with the silly hand-wringing over carrier bloat. The masses don't care.

That could be said for anything then. The masses don't care about amoled or shatter proof screens, wireless charging, app drawers, metal bodies...etc. etc.

Posted via the Android Central App

 

[Bankz111]

My God!!! What's up with this ars teknica website? First it was a downright hate and ridiculous review (even going as far as complaining about dumb things like carrier bloatware on a carrier phone) then came them bringing up security updates like its was some new sliced bread, and worse still, when news started coming that it was a lie, they climb up sorrow city to go fetch some more bad news to report about moto not offering security updates REGULARLY this time. I mean, What? What's next? That Motorola doesn't have a color option in green? even the verge wouldn't even stoop this low.

It seems they're deliberately working day and night to make sure that Motorola gets some bad press for something almost every other oem is guilty of.

Even going out of their way to report calamity after another calamity about moto.. Such a pathetic website tbh

 

[Premium1]

OS updates and security patches: buy a Nexus.

Security patches: buy a Nexus or a BlackBerry.

That's pretty much it.

Eh Samsung has really stepped it up with security updates lately as well.