From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

What matters is almost nobody knows the facts about Apple support.

I know it.
I knew it years ago.

When security researchers forced Apple to publicly admit what they support.

I'm intelligent.
I read what Apple was forced to admit. And I understood it.

But almost nobody on this newsgroup seems to have the slightest idea what Apple's full-support policy is, was, and always has been, for decades.

Apple's iOS full support is a *lot* shorter than most people "think" it is.
a. For iOS
b. For macOS

FACT:
1. iPhone 2G = 2.60 years of full support
2. iPhone 3G = 2.37 years of full support
3. iPhone 4 = 4.02 years of full support
4. iPhone 5 = 4.82 years of full support
5. iPhone 6 & iPhone 6 Plus = 4.00 years of full support
6. iPhone SE (1st generation) = 6.46 years of full support
7. iPhone 7 & iPhone 7 Plus = 5.99 years of full support
8. iPhone 8 & iPhone 8 Plus = 5.96 years of full support
9. iPhone X = 5.85 years of full support
10. iPhone XS & XS Max = 6.99 years of full support
11. iPhone XR = 6.89 years of full support
12. iPhone SE: (2nd Generation / 2020 and 3rd Generation / 2022)
13. iPhone 11 Series: (11, 11 Pro, 11 Pro Max)
14. iPhone 12 Series: (12, 12 mini, 12 Pro, 12 Pro Max)
15. iPhone 13 Series: (13, 13 mini, 13 Pro, 13 Pro Max)
16. iPhone 14 Series: (14, 14 Plus, 14 Pro, 14 Pro Max)
17. iPhone 15 Series: (15, 15 Plus, 15 Pro, 15 Pro Max)
18. iPhone 16 Series: (16, 16 Plus, 16 Pro, 16 Pro Max, 16e)
19. iPhone 17 Series: (17, 17 Pro, 17 Pro Max, 17e, iPhone Air)

Q: What is the average time for iPhone iOS full support over two decades?
A: About 4.89 years
--
Most people only know (brilliant) marketing propaganda. Not the facts.
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

On 3/25/26 11:30 AM, Maria Sophia wrote:

What matters is almost nobody knows the facts about Apple support.

I know it.
I knew it years ago.

When security researchers forced Apple to publicly admit what they support.

I'm intelligent.
I read what Apple was forced to admit. And I understood it.

But almost nobody on this newsgroup seems to have the slightest idea what Apple's full-support policy is, was, and always has been, for decades.

Apple's iOS full support is a *lot* shorter than most people "think" it is.
a. For iOS
b. For macOS

FACT:
1. iPhone 2G = 2.60 years of full support
2. iPhone 3G = 2.37 years of full support
3. iPhone 4 = 4.02 years of full support
4. iPhone 5 = 4.82 years of full support
5. iPhone 6 & iPhone 6 Plus = 4.00 years of full support
6. iPhone SE (1st generation) = 6.46 years of full support
7. iPhone 7 & iPhone 7 Plus = 5.99 years of full support
8. iPhone 8 & iPhone 8 Plus = 5.96 years of full support
9. iPhone X = 5.85 years of full support
10. iPhone XS & XS Max = 6.99 years of full support
11. iPhone XR = 6.89 years of full support
12. iPhone SE: (2nd Generation / 2020 and 3rd Generation / 2022)
13. iPhone 11 Series: (11, 11 Pro, 11 Pro Max)
14. iPhone 12 Series: (12, 12 mini, 12 Pro, 12 Pro Max)
15. iPhone 13 Series: (13, 13 mini, 13 Pro, 13 Pro Max)
16. iPhone 14 Series: (14, 14 Plus, 14 Pro, 14 Pro Max)
17. iPhone 15 Series: (15, 15 Plus, 15 Pro, 15 Pro Max)
18. iPhone 16 Series: (16, 16 Plus, 16 Pro, 16 Pro Max, 16e)
19. iPhone 17 Series: (17, 17 Pro, 17 Pro Max, 17e, iPhone Air)

Q: What is the average time for iPhone iOS full support over two decades?
A: About 4.89 years

That is total bullshit. Those first few years are not relevant looking forward. Start with line 6 and include up to line 11. You cannot go past
that because support has not ended.

You get 6.36 years.

Are you really that ignorant. Apparently. And where are the Mac OS data,
your item b.?
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

On 2026-03-25 08:30, Maria Sophia wrote:

What matters is almost nobody knows the facts about Apple support.

I know it.
I knew it years ago.

When security researchers forced Apple to publicly admit what they support.

I'm intelligent.
I read what Apple was forced to admit. And I understood it.

But almost nobody on this newsgroup seems to have the slightest idea what Apple's full-support policy is, was, and always has been, for decades.

Apple's iOS full support is a *lot* shorter than most people "think" it is.
a. For iOS
b. For macOS

FACT:
1. iPhone 2G = 2.60 years of full support

FACT: there was no iPhone 2G

I don't see any reason to continue exposing more of your bullshit if you
make that basic a mistake.
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Tom Elam <[email protected]> wrote:

On 3/25/26 11:30 AM, Maria Sophia wrote:

What matters is almost nobody knows the facts about Apple support.

I know it.
I knew it years ago.

When security researchers forced Apple to publicly admit what they support.

I'm intelligent.
I read what Apple was forced to admit. And I understood it.

But almost nobody on this newsgroup seems to have the slightest idea what Apple's full-support policy is, was, and always has been, for decades.

[...]

Q: What is the average time for iPhone iOS full support over two decades? A: About 4.89 years

That is total bullshit. Those first few years are not relevant looking forward. Start with line 6 and include up to line 11. You cannot go past
that because support has not ended.

You get 6.36 years.

Are you really that ignorant. Apparently. And where are the Mac OS data,
your item b.?

Arlen (Maria) sounds more and more bot-like each and every time
I stumble across one of his Apple-phobic blurts.
--
\|/
(((�))) - Mr �n!on, NPC

When we shake the ketchup bottle
At first none comes and then a lot'll.
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

On 3/25/26 12:54 PM, Alan wrote:

On 2026-03-25 08:30, Maria Sophia wrote:

What matters is almost nobody knows the facts about Apple support.

I know it.
I knew it years ago.

When security researchers forced Apple to publicly admit what they
support.

I'm intelligent.
I read what Apple was forced to admit. And I understood it.

But almost nobody on this newsgroup seems to have the slightest idea what
Apple's full-support policy is, was, and always has been, for decades.

Apple's iOS full support is a *lot* shorter than most people "think"
it is.
  a. For iOS
  b. For macOS

FACT:
  1. iPhone 2G = 2.60 years of full support

FACT: there was no iPhone 2G

I don't see any reason to continue exposing more of your bullshit if you make that basic a mistake.

Good catch Alan. There no iPhone 2 at all Arlen. The first numbered
iPhone was the 3G that was the next release after V.1, aka just iPhone.

Arlen is playing Don Quixote, and not doing a very good job.
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

[subject corrected]

Maria Sophia <[email protected]> wrote:

What matters is almost nobody knows the facts about Apple support.

I know it.
I knew it years ago.

You explicitly don't even know it *today*. lol.

When security researchers forced Apple to publicly admit what they support.

I'm intelligent.
I read what Apple was forced to admit. And I understood it.

It's time for your bed time. You're clearly tired and emotional.

But almost nobody on this newsgroup seems to have the slightest idea what Apple's full-support policy is, was, and always has been, for decades.

Apple's iOS full support is a *lot* shorter than most people "think" it is.
a. For iOS
b. For macOS

FACT:
1. iPhone 2G = 2.60 years of full support
2. iPhone 3G = 2.37 years of full support
3. iPhone 4 = 4.02 years of full support
4. iPhone 5 = 4.82 years of full support
5. iPhone 6 & iPhone 6 Plus = 4.00 years of full support
6. iPhone SE (1st generation) = 6.46 years of full support
7. iPhone 7 & iPhone 7 Plus = 5.99 years of full support
8. iPhone 8 & iPhone 8 Plus = 5.96 years of full support
9. iPhone X = 5.85 years of full support
10. iPhone XS & XS Max = 6.99 years of full support
11. iPhone XR = 6.89 years of full support
12. iPhone SE: (2nd Generation / 2020)

7 years full support (at least).

13. iPhone 11 Series: (11, 11 Pro, 11 Pro Max)

7 years full support (at least).

14. iPhone 12 Series: (12, 12 mini, 12 Pro, 12 Pro Max)

6 years full support (at least).

15. iPhone 13 Series: (13, 13 mini, 13 Pro, 13 Pro Max)
15a. SE 3rd Generation / 2022)
16. iPhone 14 Series: (14, 14 Plus, 14 Pro, 14 Pro Max)
17. iPhone 15 Series: (15, 15 Plus, 15 Pro, 15 Pro Max)
18. iPhone 16 Series: (16, 16 Plus, 16 Pro, 16 Pro Max, 16e)
19. iPhone 17 Series: (17, 17 Pro, 17 Pro Max, 17e, iPhone Air)

Q: What is the average time for iPhone iOS full support over two decades?
A: About 4.89 years

Yet again, I (and others) have to correct your workings. You've missed out
long standing models which have many years of support. So the average,
based on factual data, is nearer 5.5 years.

Given that's averaged over 20 years of iphones history, that's a fantastic support period.

If we only(!) go back a decade to the SE, the average jumps to about 6.5
years.

As the corrected subject states, this is exactly what is expected.

I dare you to post exactly the same post, but for Samsung and Pixel phones
on an android ng. Go on.
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

On 3/25/26 3:38 PM, Chris wrote:

I dare you to post exactly the same post, but for Samsung and Pixel phones
on an android ng. Go on.

I already did that and Arlen admitted Apple's support was much better
until Pixel and Samsung caught up to Apple with their very recent 7 year policy. Can't wait until we see how well those two Android makers live
up to their promise and if Apple responds with a tweak to iOS!
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Tom Elam wrote:

Q: What is the average time for iPhone iOS full support over two decades?
A: About 4.89 years

That is total bullshit. Those first few years are not relevant looking forward. Start with line 6 and include up to line 11. You cannot go past that because support has not ended.

You get 6.36 years.

Are you really that ignorant. Apparently. And where are the Mac OS data, your item b.?

Hi Tom,

I actually appreciate you doing the math on lines 6 through 11, because
you've reached the exact same number I did for that subset: 6.36 years.

Thanks for sticking to the topic because people who hate Apple for what
Apple is, are the ones who simply attack the messenger w/o addressing the message. And the message is that Apple's full iOS support is about 5 years
on average, but if you look only at the latter half of the iPhones that are
no longer in full support, as you asked me to do, indeed, that number
stretches to just over 6 years.

I agree with your math.
Why would I not?

Support" isn't a feeling; it's a binary state of being protected against
all known threats. Either the release has all CVEs in it. Or not.

Since I never disagree with a logically sensible statement, I'll agree that what you're saying is "if we ignore all the times Apple gave short support,
the average support is longer", which, we agree, would be 6.36 years.

I never disagree with a logically sensible statement or request, so I do
agree with you we need the same set of numbers for macOS & for the iPads.

So, as you requested, here's my FIRST PASS (which may be wrong!) at
figuring out how long each now-no-longer-fully-supported macOS release was.

Bear in mind, in the iOS case, we were looking at HARDWARE full support.
As a first pass for macOS, this below only looks at SOFTWARE full support.

1. MacBook (12", 2017)
Shipped for retail sale on June 5, 2017.
Last pre-macOS-14 release: macOS 13.6 on Sept 21, 2023.
2,300 days / 365 = 6.30 years for full macOS support.

2. MacBook Pro (13", 2017, 4 TB3 Ports)
Shipped for retail sale on June 5, 2017.
Last pre-macOS-14 release: macOS 13.6 on Sept 21, 2023.
2,300 days / 365 = 6.30 years for full macOS support.

3. iMac (Retina 5K, 27", 2017)
Shipped for retail sale on June 5, 2017.
Last pre-macOS-14 release: macOS 13.6 on Sept 21, 2023.
2,300 days / 365 = 6.30 years for full macOS support.

4. MacBook Air (Retina, 13", 2018)
Shipped for retail sale on Nov 7, 2018.
Last pre-macOS-15 release: macOS 14.7 on Sept 16, 2024.
2,140 days / 365 = 5.86 years for full macOS support.

5. MacBook Pro (15", 2018)
Shipped for retail sale on July 12, 2018.
Last pre-macOS-15 release: macOS 14.7 on Sept 16, 2024.
2,258 days / 365 = 6.19 years for full macOS support.

6. Mac mini (2018)
Shipped for retail sale on Nov 7, 2018.
Last pre-macOS-15 release: macOS 14.7 on Sept 16, 2024.
2,140 days / 365 = 5.86 years for full macOS support.

7. MacBook Pro (16", 2019)
Shipped for retail sale on Nov 13, 2019.
Last pre-macOS-26 release: macOS 15.7 on Sept 15, 2025.
2,133 days / 365 = 5.84 years for full macOS support.

8. iMac (Retina 5K, 27", 2019)
Shipped for retail sale on March 19, 2019.
Last pre-macOS-26 release: macOS 15.7 on Sept 15, 2025.
2,372 days / 365 = 6.50 years for full macOS support.

Q: Tentatively, so what's the average for full macOS support?
A: 0.89 years (but that's of the software, not the hardware).

I am not familiar with the entire Apple desktop line.
Here's a first pass at desktop support. Please fix where I err.

These are Intel Mac desktops that have lost Full Support as of today.

1. Mac mini (Early 2006)
Shipped for retail sale on Feb 28, 2006.
Last pre-OS-X-10.7 release: 10.6.8 on July 25, 2011.
1,973 days / 365 = 5.41 years for full macOS support.

2. iMac (24-inch, Late 2006)
Shipped for retail sale on Sept 6, 2006.
Last pre-OS-X-10.8 release: 10.7.5 on Oct 4, 2012.
2,219 days / 365 = 6.08 years for full macOS support.

3. iMac (20-inch, Mid 2007)
Shipped for retail sale on Aug 7, 2007.
Last pre-macOS-10.12 release: 10.11.6 on July 18, 2016.
3,268 days / 365 = 8.95 years for full macOS support.

4. iMac (24-inch, Early 2008)
Shipped for retail sale on April 28, 2008.
Last pre-macOS-10.12 release: 10.11.6 on July 18, 2016.
3,003 days / 365 = 8.23 years for full macOS support.

5. Mac mini (Early 2009)
Shipped for retail sale on March 3, 2009.
Last pre-macOS-10.12 release: 10.11.6 on July 18, 2016.
2,694 days / 365 = 7.38 years for full macOS support.

6. iMac (21.5-inch, Late 2009)
Shipped for retail sale on Oct 20, 2009.
Last pre-macOS-10.13 release: 10.12.6 on July 19, 2017.
2,829 days / 365 = 7.75 years for full macOS support.

7. Mac mini (Mid 2010)
Shipped for retail sale on June 15, 2010.
Last pre-macOS-10.14 release: 10.13.6 on July 9, 2018.
2,946 days / 365 = 8.07 years for full macOS support.

8. iMac (27-inch, Mid 2011)
Shipped for retail sale on May 3, 2011.
Last pre-macOS-10.14 release: 10.13.6 on July 9, 2018.
2,624 days / 365 = 7.19 years for full macOS support.

9. iMac (21.5-inch, Late 2012)
Shipped for retail sale on Nov 30, 2012.
Last pre-macOS-11 release: 10.15.7 on Sept 24, 2020.
2,855 days / 365 = 7.82 years for full macOS support.

10. Mac mini (Late 2012)
Shipped for retail sale on Oct 23, 2012.
Last pre-macOS-11 release: 10.15.7 on Sept 24, 2020.
2,893 days / 365 = 7.93 years for full macOS support.

11. iMac (27-inch, Late 2013)
Shipped for retail sale on Sept 24, 2013.
Last pre-macOS-12 release: 11.6 on Sept 13, 2021.
2,911 days / 365 = 7.98 years for full macOS support.

12. Mac Pro (Late 2013 "Trash Can")
Shipped for retail sale on Dec 19, 2013.
Last pre-macOS-13 release: 12.6 on Sept 12, 2022.
3,189 days / 365 = 8.74 years for full macOS support.

13. iMac (Retina 5K, 27-inch, Late 2014)
Shipped for retail sale on Oct 16, 2014.
Last pre-macOS-12 release: 11.6 on Sept 13, 2021.
2,524 days / 365 = 6.92 years for full macOS support.

14. Mac mini (Late 2014)
Shipped for retail sale on Oct 16, 2014.
Last pre-macOS-13 release: 12.6 on Sept 12, 2022.
2,888 days / 365 = 7.91 years for full macOS support.

15. iMac (21.5-inch, Late 2015)
Shipped for retail sale on Oct 13, 2015.
Last pre-macOS-13 release: 12.6 on Sept 12, 2022.
2,526 days / 365 = 6.92 years for full macOS support.

16. iMac (21.5-inch, 2017)
Shipped for retail sale on June 5, 2017.
Last pre-macOS-14 release: 13.6 on Sept 21, 2023.
2,300 days / 365 = 6.30 years for full macOS support.

17. iMac Pro (2017)
Shipped for retail sale on Dec 14, 2017.
Last pre-macOS-15 release: 14.7 on Sept 16, 2024.
2,468 days / 365 = 6.76 years for full macOS support.

18. Mac mini (2018)
Shipped for retail sale on Nov 7, 2018.
Last pre-macOS-15 release: 14.7 on Sept 16, 2024.
2,140 days / 365 = 5.86 years for full macOS support.

19. iMac (Retina 5K, 27-inch, 2019)
Shipped for retail sale on March 19, 2019.
Last pre-macOS-16 release: 15.7 on Sept 15, 2025.
2,372 days / 365 = 6.50 years for full macOS support.

20. Mac Pro (2019 "Cheese Grater")
Shipped for retail sale on Dec 10, 2019.
Last pre-macOS-16 release: 15.7 on Sept 15, 2025.
2,106 days / 365 = 5.77 years for full macOS support.

Using my method of overall history, the average full support for these
Intel Mac desktops is 7.26 years.

The best era seems to be 2007-2013 which is between 8 & 9 years.
The current era 2017-2019 seems to average only about 6.24 years.

Since this is my first pass ever at calculating the full-support period for Intel Mac desktops, please take a look at the numbers & correct if need be.
--
People can easily discuss facts if they understand the basic concepts.
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Tom Elam wrote:

FACT:
1. iPhone 2G = 2.60 years of full support

FACT: there was no iPhone 2G

I don't see any reason to continue exposing more of your bullshit if you
make that basic a mistake.

Good catch Alan. There no iPhone 2 at all. The first numbered
iPhone was the 3G that was the next release after V.1, aka just iPhone.

He is playing Don Quixote, and not doing a very good job.

Hi Gondolfo Elam,

Why do you listen to that garbage from Alan Baker, Gondolfo?

Please don't respond to Alan Baker because then the rest of us have to see
his garbage. Alan Baker is wrong on every single thing Alan Baker says.

You simply agreeing to Alan Baker just propagates his garbage forward.

Please stop responding to Alan Baker - or - if you're gonna respond, then
don't believe a word Alan Baker (or Snit) claims as they're always wrong.

While Apple's official marketing name in 2007 was simply "iPhone," the
device has been universally referred to as the "iPhone 2G" (& occasionally
the "iPhone 1") in both technical documentation and common parlance for
nearly two decades.

When the second model was released in 2008, Apple named it the iPhone 3G to highlight its new cellular capability. To differentiate the original model (which only ran on the slower 2G/EDGE network), the world, including
developers and tech journalists, labeled it the iPhone 2G.

Even the Wikipedia entry for the first-generation iPhone explicitly lists iPhone 2G as a recognized name (see cite below for proof).

Calling it the "iPhone 2G" is a standard industry practice.

Besides, dismissing a data set because of a name is a classic "red herring" fallacy since Alan Baker has no idea about anything, and he is simply
attacking the label to avoid discussing the 2.60-year support lifespan.

Does Alan Baker dispute the facts that this original iPhone was only fully supported for only 2.60 years. No. He doesn't even understand those facts.

All he can do is play his idiotically silly stupid games around semantics. Please Gondolfo Elam, please do not amplify Alan's meaningless trolls.

REFERENCE:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone_(1st_generation)>
"Sometimes retroactively referred to as the iPhone 2G[5] or iPhone 1[6]"
"iPhone 2G" redirects here; not to be confused with iPhone 3G."
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Tom Elam wrote:

On 3/25/26 3:38 PM, Chris wrote:

I dare you to post exactly the same post, but for Samsung and Pixel phones >> on an android ng. Go on.

I already did that and he admitted Apple's support was much better
until Pixel and Samsung caught up to Apple with their very recent 7 year policy. Can't wait until we see how well those two Android makers live
up to their promise and if Apple responds with a tweak to iOS!

Both Chris and Gondolfo Elam appear to want me to compare Apple's iPhone historical full support to that of the Samsung & Google iPhone competition.

I'm fine with that request (even as it's a bit of work to do on my part).

I don't defend Google or Samsung (or Microsoft) to the death.
I simply tell the facts the way the facts are.

I'm unbiased that way.

I never disagree with any logically sensible statement, where I don't
disagree with Gondalfo Elam's and Chris' jointly agreed assessment that, historically, both the main competitors (Samsung & Google) to the iPhone, sucked on full support. I'm sure they both suck. Samsung more than Google.

I've never run the math though.
And likely, neither have Gondolfo Elam or Chris run the math.

We all know that today, both offer a promised 7 years of full support.
While the iPhone offers only a paltry five years of promised full support.

In addition, all Android 10+ phone's core modules are patched monthly.
Forever. Which Apple simply can't compete with in terms of support.

But what is the historical full-support picture for those two brands?
I don't know.

We'd have to look at the competition to the iPhone to be fair to them.
While Samsung made phones in 2007 (like the SGH-F700), their first "real"
shot at the iPhone was the original Galaxy S, released three years after
the iPhone.

Under the same Strict CVE Parity rule we applied to Apple, where "Full
Support" means receiving the latest OS and all security patches, Samsung�s history is a veritable disaster compared to Apple�s early days. For the
first decade, Samsung was infamous for abandoning phones in under 2 years.

Here's my first pass at the data that Gondolfo & Chris just asked me for. (Please check it out to see if I made any errors as this is my 1st look.)

1. Samsung Galaxy S (The Original)
Shipped for retail sale on June 4, 2010.
Last Full-Parity release: Android 2.3.6 in Jan 2012.
585 days / 365 = 1.60 years for full support.

2. Samsung Galaxy S II
Shipped for retail sale on May 2, 2011.
Last Full-Parity release: Android 4.1.2 in April 2013.
708 days / 365 = 1.94 years for full support.

3. Samsung Galaxy S III
Shipped for retail sale on May 29, 2012.
Last Full-Parity release: Android 4.3 in Dec 2013.
560 days / 365 = 1.53 years for full support.

4. Samsung Galaxy S4
Shipped for retail sale on April 27, 2013.
Last Full-Parity release: Android 5.0.1 in April 2015.
730 days / 365 = 2.00 years for full support.

5. Samsung Galaxy S5
Shipped for retail sale on April 11, 2014.
Last Full-Parity release: Android 6.0.1 in April 2016.
731 days / 365 = 2.00 years for full support.

6. Samsung Galaxy S6 / S6 Edge
Shipped for retail sale on April 10, 2015.
Last Full-Parity release: Android 7.0 in Feb 2017.
672 days / 365 = 1.84 years for full support.

7. Samsung Galaxy S7 / S7 Edge
Shipped for retail sale on March 11, 2016.
Last Full-Parity release: Android 8.0 in May 2018.
791 days / 365 = 2.17 years for full support.

8. Samsung Galaxy S8 / S8+
Shipped for retail sale on April 21, 2017.
Last Full-Parity release: Android 9.0 in Feb 2019.
651 days / 365 = 1.78 years for full support.

9. Samsung Galaxy S9 / S9+
Shipped for retail sale on March 11, 2018.
Last Full-Parity release: Android 10 in Jan 2020.
671 days / 365 = 1.84 years for full support.

10. Samsung Galaxy S10 / S10+ / S10e
Shipped for retail sale on March 8, 2019.
Last Full-Parity release: Android 12 in Dec 2021.
1,018 days / 365 = 2.79 years for full support.

11. Samsung Galaxy S20 Series
Shipped for retail sale on March 6, 2020.
Last Full-Parity release: Android 13 in Nov 2022.
999 days / 365 = 2.74 years for full support.

12. Samsung Galaxy S21 / S21+ / S21 Ultra
Shipped for retail sale on Jan 29, 2021.
Last Full-Parity release: Jan 2026 Security Update.
1,831 days / 365 = 5.02 years for full support.
(Note: Completely abandoned by Samsung on Feb 3, 2026).

13. Samsung Galaxy S22 / S22+ / S22 Ultra
Shipped for retail sale on Feb 25, 2022.
Lost Full-Parity: Feb 3, 2026.
1,439 days / 365 = 3.94 years for full support (now quarterly).

If the data above is correct, the average Samsung main competitor to the
iPhone between 2010 and 2020 appears to have 2.48 years of FULL support.

That 2.48 years sucks compared to the iOS full support of 4.89 years.
But please check my math as I'm trying to apply the same rules to Samsung's iPhone competitive phones as I did to the iPhone itse4lf (Apple's rules).
a. Either a phone is fully patched with all known CVE's,
b. Or it's not.

Since Gondolfo & Chris asked for the Pixel, here's my first pass at that.

1. Google Pixel / Pixel XL
Shipped for retail sale on Oct 20, 2016.
Last Full-Parity release: Dec 2019 Security Patch.
1,137 days / 365 = 3.12 years for full support.

2. Google Pixel 2 / 2 XL
Shipped for retail sale on Oct 19, 2017.
Last Full-Parity release: Dec 2020 Security Patch.
1,168 days / 365 = 3.20 years for full support.

3. Google Pixel 3 / 3 XL
Shipped for retail sale on Oct 18, 2018.
Last Full-Parity release: Feb 2022 Security Patch.
1,208 days / 365 = 3.31 years for full support.

4. Google Pixel 4 / 4 XL
Shipped for retail sale on Oct 24, 2019.
Last Full-Parity release: Oct 2022 Security Patch.
1,096 days / 365 = 3.00 years for full support.

5. Google Pixel 5
Shipped for retail sale on Oct 15, 2020.
Last Full-Parity release: Feb 2024 Security Patch.
1,213 days / 365 = 3.32 years for full support.

6. Google Pixel 6 / 6 Pro
Shipped for retail sale on Oct 28, 2021.
Lost Full-Parity: July 2025 (Demoted to Quarterly Updates).
1,341 days / 365 = 3.67 years for full support.
(Note: Currently missing 66 March 2026 CVE fixes).

7. Google Pixel 7 / 7 Pro
Shipped for retail sale on Oct 13, 2022.
Lost Full-Parity: Feb 2026 (Demoted to Quarterly Updates).
1,208 days / 365 = 3.31 years for full support.
(Note: Currently missing 66 March 2026 CVE fixes).

If the data above is correct, the average Samsung main competitor to the
iPhone between 2016 and 2022 appears to have 3.28 years of FULL support.

Both Gondolfo Elam and Chris (and everyone else) should note that I don't
care what the answer is, since all I care about are making good
assessments.

It doesn't matter to me if Apple comes out ahead or not.
I just want to know what the answer is.

Apparently, all iPhones averaged 4.89 years of FULL support.
All Samsung iPhone competitors averaged much less, at 2.48 years.
The Pixel competition to the iPhone was in the middle, at 3.28 years.

Please remember I'm nothing like most of you who post to the Apple
newsgroups in that I don't defend any company to the death, no matter what.

I simply care about knowing what the correct answer is.
My assessment?
a. Apple full iOS support used to be much better than Android was.
b. But moving forward from today, Apple full iOS support is much worse.

Note: I could add the Google Nexus line to the list above. Should I?
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

On Thu, 26 Mar 2026 02:18:24 -0400, Maria Sophia wrote:

1. Samsung Galaxy S (The Original)
Shipped for retail sale on June 4, 2010.
Last Full-Parity release: Android 2.3.6 in Jan 2012.
585 days / 365 = 1.60 years for full support.

Thanks for these infos. But what does "Shipped for retail sale" mean?

The Galaxy S had been sold from 2010-06-04 - but in Singapore only.
2010-06-25 Malaysia and South Korea. 2010-07 in Germany. So these dates
are best case only, even if you could not buy the device at that time
yet?

13. Samsung Galaxy S22 / S22+ / S22 Ultra
Shipped for retail sale on Feb 25, 2022.
Lost Full-Parity: Feb 3, 2026.
1,439 days / 365 = 3.94 years for full support (now quarterly).

2022-02-25 was the S22 Ultra only - S22 and S22+ were not sold before
2022-03. So again best case, right?


I had bought a Motorola MOTO E (2nd gen) in 2015-05-20. It had been
released in 2015-02-02 with Android 5.0.2.

It was updated to 5.1.1 in 2015-04-24. But only some models, in some
countries, received an update to 6.0 in 2016-02.

At that time Motorola had been owned by Google. So I had expected for
some extended Android support for Google's own models - but I failed to notice that Google had not only bought Motorola in 2012-05, but sold to Lenovo
in 2014-10. So there have never been any updates for me.

According to your numbers that would have been 0.22 years?
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Martin �rautmann wrote:

On Thu, 26 Mar 2026 02:18:24 -0400, Maria Sophia wrote:

1. Samsung Galaxy S (The Original)
Shipped for retail sale on June 4, 2010.
Last Full-Parity release: Android 2.3.6 in Jan 2012.
585 days / 365 = 1.60 years for full support.

Thanks for these infos. But what does "Shipped for retail sale" mean?

Hi Martin,

I had never looked at Samsung nor Google when I was asked to compare to the iPhone, and I knew they both would come out worse but I didn't know how
much worse in terms of FULL support (as Apple defines FULL support).

No other OS vendor does things the way Apple does, so I already knew
Android doesn't even have the concept that Apple has of throwing a release
off the cliff the instant the next release ships. Only Apple does that.

Apple drops full support like kids drop a hot potato.

But I wanted the criteria to be truthful to the concept that Apple defined.
1. The first date is the first day that the phone is offered for sale
2. The last date is the last FULL operating system update

Every other OS vendor overlaps releases with FULL system updates.
Only Apple refuses to fully support more than a single release.

So it isn't easy to compare Apple's FULL support to that of Android.

The Galaxy S had been sold from 2010-06-04 - but in Singapore only. 2010-06-25 Malaysia and South Korea. 2010-07 in Germany. So these dates
are best case only, even if you could not buy the device at that time
yet?

As I said, I was trying to faithfully answer Chris' and Tom Elam's question where they could have done the research but they didn't want to do it.

So I did it.
But I asked people to doublecheck the numbers.

13. Samsung Galaxy S22 / S22+ / S22 Ultra
Shipped for retail sale on Feb 25, 2022.
Lost Full-Parity: Feb 3, 2026.
1,439 days / 365 = 3.94 years for full support (now quarterly).

2022-02-25 was the S22 Ultra only - S22 and S22+ were not sold before 2022-03. So again best case, right?

I had bought a Motorola MOTO E (2nd gen) in 2015-05-20. It had been
released in 2015-02-02 with Android 5.0.2.

It was updated to 5.1.1 in 2015-04-24. But only some models, in some countries, received an update to 6.0 in 2016-02.

At that time Motorola had been owned by Google. So I had expected for
some extended Android support for Google's own models - but I failed to notice
that Google had not only bought Motorola in 2012-05, but sold to Lenovo
in 2014-10. So there have never been any updates for me.

According to your numbers that would have been 0.22 years?

Thanks for doublechecking the numbers. It's important to get the right
numbers, where I don't care if they look good for Samsung or not.

You have to realize normal people aren't like Apple owners.
Normal people don't pray to the Apple God every day of their lives.

Normal people only care to know what the correct answer is.
Normal people don't try to defend the mothership to the death, no matter
what. Only Apple owners do that for some wacky unknown strange reason.

Since I'm normal in that regard, I only want to know what the answer is.
I'm not like Apple owners who make excuses because Apple hates them.

I just tried to get the numbers for Chris & Tom at their request.
To that end, I thank you for helping hone the Samsung figures.
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

On Thu, 26 Mar 2026 06:26:38 -0400, Maria Sophia wrote:

I had bought a Motorola MOTO E (2nd gen) in 2015-05-20. It had been
released in 2015-02-02 with Android 5.0.2.

It was updated to 5.1.1 in 2015-04-24. But only some models, in some
countries, received an update to 6.0 in 2016-02.

At that time Motorola had been owned by Google. So I had expected for
some extended Android support for Google's own models - but I failed to notice
that Google had not only bought Motorola in 2012-05, but sold to Lenovo
in 2014-10. So there have never been any updates for me.

According to your numbers that would have been 0.22 years?

Thanks for doublechecking the numbers. It's important to get the right numbers, where I don't care if they look good for Samsung or not.

You have to realize normal people aren't like Apple owners.
Normal people don't pray to the Apple God every day of their lives.

Normal people only care to know what the correct answer is.
Normal people don't try to defend the mothership to the death, no matter what. Only Apple owners do that for some wacky unknown strange reason.

Since I'm normal in that regard, I only want to know what the answer is.
I'm not like Apple owners who make excuses because Apple hates them.

I just tried to get the numbers for Chris & Tom at their request.
To that end, I thank you for helping hone the Samsung figures.

Motorola is not Samsung.

I never bothered to by phones, as expensive as an iPhone. But I had an
iPod touch once and was surprised, for how many years after they still
had provided system updates and upgrades.

--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

On 3/26/26 1:47 AM, Maria Sophia wrote:

While Apple's official marketing name in 2007 was simply "iPhone," the
device has been universally referred to as the "iPhone 2G" (& occasionally the "iPhone 1") in both technical documentation and common parlance for nearly two decades.

Another fail. There was no official 2G model.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_iPhone_models
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

On 3/26/26 2:18 AM, Maria Sophia wrote:

Tom Elam wrote:

On 3/25/26 3:38 PM, Chris wrote:

I dare you to post exactly the same post, but for Samsung and Pixel phones >>> on an android ng. Go on.

I already did that and he admitted Apple's support was much better
until Pixel and Samsung caught up to Apple with their very recent 7 year
policy. Can't wait until we see how well those two Android makers live
up to their promise and if Apple responds with a tweak to iOS!

Both Chris and Gondolfo Elam appear to want me to compare Apple's iPhone historical full support to that of the Samsung & Google iPhone competition.

I'm fine with that request (even as it's a bit of work to do on my part).

I don't defend Google or Samsung (or Microsoft) to the death.
I simply tell the facts the way the facts are.

I'm unbiased that way.

I never disagree with any logically sensible statement, where I don't disagree with Gondalfo Elam's and Chris' jointly agreed assessment that, historically, both the main competitors (Samsung & Google) to the iPhone, sucked on full support. I'm sure they both suck. Samsung more than Google.

I've never run the math though.
And likely, neither have Gondolfo Elam or Chris run the math.

We all know that today, both offer a promised 7 years of full support.
While the iPhone offers only a paltry five years of promised full support.

In addition, all Android 10+ phone's core modules are patched monthly. Forever. Which Apple simply can't compete with in terms of support.

But what is the historical full-support picture for those two brands?
I don't know.

We'd have to look at the competition to the iPhone to be fair to them.
While Samsung made phones in 2007 (like the SGH-F700), their first "real" shot at the iPhone was the original Galaxy S, released three years after
the iPhone.

Under the same Strict CVE Parity rule we applied to Apple, where "Full Support" means receiving the latest OS and all security patches, Samsung¢s history is a veritable disaster compared to Apple¢s early days. For the first decade, Samsung was infamous for abandoning phones in under 2 years.

Here's my first pass at the data that Gondolfo & Chris just asked me for. (Please check it out to see if I made any errors as this is my 1st look.)

1. Samsung Galaxy S (The Original)
Shipped for retail sale on June 4, 2010.
Last Full-Parity release: Android 2.3.6 in Jan 2012.
585 days / 365 = 1.60 years for full support.

2. Samsung Galaxy S II
Shipped for retail sale on May 2, 2011.
Last Full-Parity release: Android 4.1.2 in April 2013.
708 days / 365 = 1.94 years for full support.

3. Samsung Galaxy S III
Shipped for retail sale on May 29, 2012.
Last Full-Parity release: Android 4.3 in Dec 2013.
560 days / 365 = 1.53 years for full support.

4. Samsung Galaxy S4
Shipped for retail sale on April 27, 2013.
Last Full-Parity release: Android 5.0.1 in April 2015.
730 days / 365 = 2.00 years for full support.

5. Samsung Galaxy S5
Shipped for retail sale on April 11, 2014.
Last Full-Parity release: Android 6.0.1 in April 2016.
731 days / 365 = 2.00 years for full support.

6. Samsung Galaxy S6 / S6 Edge
Shipped for retail sale on April 10, 2015.
Last Full-Parity release: Android 7.0 in Feb 2017.
672 days / 365 = 1.84 years for full support.

7. Samsung Galaxy S7 / S7 Edge
Shipped for retail sale on March 11, 2016.
Last Full-Parity release: Android 8.0 in May 2018.
791 days / 365 = 2.17 years for full support.

8. Samsung Galaxy S8 / S8+
Shipped for retail sale on April 21, 2017.
Last Full-Parity release: Android 9.0 in Feb 2019.
651 days / 365 = 1.78 years for full support.

9. Samsung Galaxy S9 / S9+
Shipped for retail sale on March 11, 2018.
Last Full-Parity release: Android 10 in Jan 2020.
671 days / 365 = 1.84 years for full support.

10. Samsung Galaxy S10 / S10+ / S10e
Shipped for retail sale on March 8, 2019.
Last Full-Parity release: Android 12 in Dec 2021.
1,018 days / 365 = 2.79 years for full support.

11. Samsung Galaxy S20 Series
Shipped for retail sale on March 6, 2020.
Last Full-Parity release: Android 13 in Nov 2022.
999 days / 365 = 2.74 years for full support.

12. Samsung Galaxy S21 / S21+ / S21 Ultra
Shipped for retail sale on Jan 29, 2021.
Last Full-Parity release: Jan 2026 Security Update.
1,831 days / 365 = 5.02 years for full support.
(Note: Completely abandoned by Samsung on Feb 3, 2026).

13. Samsung Galaxy S22 / S22+ / S22 Ultra
Shipped for retail sale on Feb 25, 2022.
Lost Full-Parity: Feb 3, 2026.
1,439 days / 365 = 3.94 years for full support (now quarterly).

If the data above is correct, the average Samsung main competitor to the iPhone between 2010 and 2020 appears to have 2.48 years of FULL support.

That 2.48 years sucks compared to the iOS full support of 4.89 years.
But please check my math as I'm trying to apply the same rules to Samsung's iPhone competitive phones as I did to the iPhone itse4lf (Apple's rules).
a. Either a phone is fully patched with all known CVE's,
b. Or it's not.

Since Gondolfo & Chris asked for the Pixel, here's my first pass at that.

1. Google Pixel / Pixel XL
Shipped for retail sale on Oct 20, 2016.
Last Full-Parity release: Dec 2019 Security Patch.
1,137 days / 365 = 3.12 years for full support.

2. Google Pixel 2 / 2 XL
Shipped for retail sale on Oct 19, 2017.
Last Full-Parity release: Dec 2020 Security Patch.
1,168 days / 365 = 3.20 years for full support.

3. Google Pixel 3 / 3 XL
Shipped for retail sale on Oct 18, 2018.
Last Full-Parity release: Feb 2022 Security Patch.
1,208 days / 365 = 3.31 years for full support.

4. Google Pixel 4 / 4 XL
Shipped for retail sale on Oct 24, 2019.
Last Full-Parity release: Oct 2022 Security Patch.
1,096 days / 365 = 3.00 years for full support.

5. Google Pixel 5
Shipped for retail sale on Oct 15, 2020.
Last Full-Parity release: Feb 2024 Security Patch.
1,213 days / 365 = 3.32 years for full support.

6. Google Pixel 6 / 6 Pro
Shipped for retail sale on Oct 28, 2021.
Lost Full-Parity: July 2025 (Demoted to Quarterly Updates).
1,341 days / 365 = 3.67 years for full support.
(Note: Currently missing 66 March 2026 CVE fixes).

7. Google Pixel 7 / 7 Pro
Shipped for retail sale on Oct 13, 2022.
Lost Full-Parity: Feb 2026 (Demoted to Quarterly Updates).
1,208 days / 365 = 3.31 years for full support.
(Note: Currently missing 66 March 2026 CVE fixes).

If the data above is correct, the average Samsung main competitor to the iPhone between 2016 and 2022 appears to have 3.28 years of FULL support.

Both Gondolfo Elam and Chris (and everyone else) should note that I don't care what the answer is, since all I care about are making good
assessments.

It doesn't matter to me if Apple comes out ahead or not.
I just want to know what the answer is.

Apparently, all iPhones averaged 4.89 years of FULL support.
All Samsung iPhone competitors averaged much less, at 2.48 years.
The Pixel competition to the iPhone was in the middle, at 3.28 years.

Please remember I'm nothing like most of you who post to the Apple
newsgroups in that I don't defend any company to the death, no matter what.

I simply care about knowing what the correct answer is.
My assessment?
a. Apple full iOS support used to be much better than Android was.
b. But moving forward from today, Apple full iOS support is much worse.

Note: I could add the Google Nexus line to the list above. Should I?

OMG! Apple went to ~6 year support long before Samsung's very recent 7
year promise.

Once again your poor logic and arithmetic skills are on display.
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

On 3/26/26 4:03 AM, Martin Τrautmann wrote:

On Thu, 26 Mar 2026 02:18:24 -0400, Maria Sophia wrote:

1. Samsung Galaxy S (The Original)
Shipped for retail sale on June 4, 2010.
Last Full-Parity release: Android 2.3.6 in Jan 2012.
585 days / 365 = 1.60 years for full support.

Thanks for these infos. But what does "Shipped for retail sale" mean?

The Galaxy S had been sold from 2010-06-04 - but in Singapore only. 2010-06-25 Malaysia and South Korea. 2010-07 in Germany. So these dates
are best case only, even if you could not buy the device at that time
yet?

13. Samsung Galaxy S22 / S22+ / S22 Ultra
Shipped for retail sale on Feb 25, 2022.
Lost Full-Parity: Feb 3, 2026.
1,439 days / 365 = 3.94 years for full support (now quarterly).

2022-02-25 was the S22 Ultra only - S22 and S22+ were not sold before 2022-03. So again best case, right?

I had bought a Motorola MOTO E (2nd gen) in 2015-05-20. It had been
released in 2015-02-02 with Android 5.0.2.

It was updated to 5.1.1 in 2015-04-24. But only some models, in some countries, received an update to 6.0 in 2016-02.

At that time Motorola had been owned by Google. So I had expected for
some extended Android support for Google's own models - but I failed to notice
that Google had not only bought Motorola in 2012-05, but sold to Lenovo
in 2014-10. So there have never been any updates for me.

According to your numbers that would have been 0.22 years?

I had that vintage of Moto too. Very disappointing. Me next phone was
the iPhone 6s, and I never looked back.
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

On 3/26/26 6:26 AM, Maria Sophia wrote:

Martin Ôrautmann wrote:

On Thu, 26 Mar 2026 02:18:24 -0400, Maria Sophia wrote:

1. Samsung Galaxy S (The Original)
Shipped for retail sale on June 4, 2010.
Last Full-Parity release: Android 2.3.6 in Jan 2012.
585 days / 365 = 1.60 years for full support.

Thanks for these infos. But what does "Shipped for retail sale" mean?

Hi Martin,

I had never looked at Samsung nor Google when I was asked to compare to the iPhone, and I knew they both would come out worse but I didn't know how
much worse in terms of FULL support (as Apple defines FULL support).

No other OS vendor does things the way Apple does, so I already knew
Android doesn't even have the concept that Apple has of throwing a release off the cliff the instant the next release ships. Only Apple does that.

Apple drops full support like kids drop a hot potato.

But I wanted the criteria to be truthful to the concept that Apple defined.
1. The first date is the first day that the phone is offered for sale
2. The last date is the last FULL operating system update

Every other OS vendor overlaps releases with FULL system updates.
Only Apple refuses to fully support more than a single release.

So it isn't easy to compare Apple's FULL support to that of Android.

The Galaxy S had been sold from 2010-06-04 - but in Singapore only.
2010-06-25 Malaysia and South Korea. 2010-07 in Germany. So these dates
are best case only, even if you could not buy the device at that time
yet?

As I said, I was trying to faithfully answer Chris' and Tom Elam's question where they could have done the research but they didn't want to do it.

So I did it.
But I asked people to doublecheck the numbers.

13. Samsung Galaxy S22 / S22+ / S22 Ultra
Shipped for retail sale on Feb 25, 2022.
Lost Full-Parity: Feb 3, 2026.
1,439 days / 365 = 3.94 years for full support (now quarterly).

2022-02-25 was the S22 Ultra only - S22 and S22+ were not sold before
2022-03. So again best case, right?


I had bought a Motorola MOTO E (2nd gen) in 2015-05-20. It had been
released in 2015-02-02 with Android 5.0.2.

It was updated to 5.1.1 in 2015-04-24. But only some models, in some
countries, received an update to 6.0 in 2016-02.

At that time Motorola had been owned by Google. So I had expected for
some extended Android support for Google's own models - but I failed to notice
that Google had not only bought Motorola in 2012-05, but sold to Lenovo
in 2014-10. So there have never been any updates for me.

According to your numbers that would have been 0.22 years?

Thanks for doublechecking the numbers. It's important to get the right numbers, where I don't care if they look good for Samsung or not.

You have to realize normal people aren't like Apple owners.
Normal people don't pray to the Apple God every day of their lives.

Normal people only care to know what the correct answer is.
Normal people don't try to defend the mothership to the death, no matter what. Only Apple owners do that for some wacky unknown strange reason.

Since I'm normal in that regard, I only want to know what the answer is.
I'm not like Apple owners who make excuses because Apple hates them.

I just tried to get the numbers for Chris & Tom at their request.
To that end, I thank you for helping hone the Samsung figures.

It's Android people who pray to the Android god for an update. Apple's
updates are regular and predictable. You know when Apple starts seeding updates, and can predict a release. With Android you wait, and wait, and
wait, hoping your phone version gets the next OS or security update.
Samsung and Pixel are the exceptions, not the rule.


--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Tom Elam wrote:

Note: I could add the Google Nexus line to the list above. Should I?

OMG! Apple went to ~6 year support long before Samsung's very recent 7
year promise.

Once again your poor logic and arithmetic skills are on display.

Hi Tom,

I never disagree with any logically stated viewpoint.

If we look at historical full support for iOS, it's better than historical
full support for Android competitors to the iPhone, nobody disagrees.

As I had stated many times, I'm not a religious zealot.
I don't defend the mothership to the death, no matter what.

I just tell it like it is.

Apple iOS support used to be much better than Android competitor's support.
But today, the Android competitors FULL support is better than Apple's.

a. Galaxy S = 7 years, 7 updates (8 Android versions, in toto)
b. iPHone = 5 years, no specified number of updates

In addition, all Android 10+ phones core modules update monthly. Forever.
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Tom Elam wrote:

On 3/26/26 1:47 AM, Maria Sophia wrote:

While Apple's official marketing name in 2007 was simply "iPhone," the
device has been universally referred to as the "iPhone 2G" (& occasionally >> the "iPhone 1") in both technical documentation and common parlance for
nearly two decades.

Another fail. There was no official 2G model. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_iPhone_models

If all you can do is argue meaningless semantics, then we can assume the
main point hit home, and you're just struggling to cope with the facts.

Tom Elam wrote:

FACT:
1. iPhone 2G = 2.60 years of full support

FACT: there was no iPhone 2G

I don't see any reason to continue exposing more of your bullshit if you
make that basic a mistake.

Good catch Alan. There no iPhone 2 at all. The first numbered
iPhone was the 3G that was the next release after V.1, aka just iPhone.

He is playing Don Quixote, and not doing a very good job.

Why do you listen to that garbage from Alan Baker.

Please don't respond to Alan Baker because then the rest of us have to see
his garbage. Alan Baker is wrong on every single thing Alan Baker says.

You simply agreeing to Alan Baker just propagates his garbage forward.

Please stop responding to Alan Baker - or - if you're gonna respond, then
don't believe a word Alan Baker (or Snit) claims as they're always wrong.

While Apple's official marketing name in 2007 was simply "iPhone," the
device has been universally referred to as the "iPhone 2G" (& occasionally
the "iPhone 1") in both technical documentation and common parlance for
nearly two decades.

When the second model was released in 2008, Apple named it the iPhone 3G to highlight its new cellular capability. To differentiate the original model (which only ran on the slower 2G/EDGE network), the world, including
developers and tech journalists, labeled it the iPhone 2G.

Even the Wikipedia entry for the first-generation iPhone explicitly lists iPhone 2G as a recognized name (see cite below for proof).

Calling it the "iPhone 2G" is a standard industry practice.

Besides, dismissing a data set because of a name is a classic "red herring" fallacy since Alan Baker has no idea about anything, and he is simply
attacking the label to avoid discussing the 2.60-year support lifespan.

Does Alan Baker dispute the facts that this original iPhone was only fully supported for only 2.60 years. No. He doesn't even understand those facts.

All he can do is play his idiotically silly stupid games around semantics. Please do not amplify Alan's meaningless trolls.

REFERENCE:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone_(1st_generation)>
"Sometimes retroactively referred to as the iPhone 2G[5] or iPhone 1[6]"
"iPhone 2G" redirects here; not to be confused with iPhone 3G."
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Tom Elam wrote:

I just tried to get the numbers for Chris & Tom at their request.
To that end, I thank you for helping hone the Samsung figures.

It's Android people who pray to the Android god for an update. Apple's updates are regular and predictable. You know when Apple starts seeding updates, and can predict a release. With Android you wait, and wait, and wait, hoping your phone version gets the next OS or security update.
Samsung and Pixel are the exceptions, not the rule.

Hi Tom,

I mainly care about the facts. I don't care about the emotions as much.
The security, overall, between iOS and Android devices is about the same.

As for "waiting for updates", I get your emotion as you consider an update
the next major release, but both platforms have stagnated over the years.

A new iOS update might have more emojis, but it's not something to pine
for. Neither is a new Android update, and, in fact, with Google getting
more and more like Apple by locking down the phone, you don't want it.

Still, it may be a red herring for us to discuss FULL support differences
given that the current support for both iPhones and Android phones results
in the same security overall.

This is paradoxical, don't you think?
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Martin �rautmann wrote:

I just tried to get the numbers for Chris & Tom at their request.
To that end, I thank you for helping hone the Samsung figures.

Motorola is not Samsung.

I never bothered to by phones, as expensive as an iPhone. But I had an
iPod touch once and was surprised, for how many years after they still
had provided system updates and upgrades.

I Martin,

My mistake for not discussing Motorola. I was responding to your comments
about the S22 Ultra, and S22+ and Galaxy S but I didn't respond to the Moto
E (2nd gen) (nor did I respond to the Nexus) so I was not complete.

I think all of us, though, would agree that Android FULL support, if we
count all the $39.99 phones, is worse than that of Apple in many ways, but what's interesting is that the iPhone is not more protected than Android if
we look at overall security.

There isn't a security researcher on the planet who wo9uld claim the iPhone
is more secure today, at this very moment, than the Android phone of today.

So in a way, it's a red herring for us to discuss FULL support differences given that the support for both iPhones and Android phones results in the
same security overall.

This is paradoxical, don't you think?
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

On 3/26/26 11:52 AM, Maria Sophia wrote:

Still, it may be a red herring for us to discuss FULL support differences given that the current support for both iPhones and Android phones results
in the same security overall.

So you finally admit that your long string of claiming Samsung's 7 years
of support claim for some of it's models is really no better to the
average person than Apple's support for all it's models.
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

On 3/26/26 11:52 AM, Maria Sophia wrote:

Tom Elam wrote:

Note: I could add the Google Nexus line to the list above. Should I?

OMG! Apple went to ~6 year support long before Samsung's very recent 7
year promise.

Once again your poor logic and arithmetic skills are on display.

Hi Tom,

I never disagree with any logically stated viewpoint.

If we look at historical full support for iOS, it's better than historical full support for Android competitors to the iPhone, nobody disagrees.

As I had stated many times, I'm not a religious zealot.
I don't defend the mothership to the death, no matter what.

I just tell it like it is.

Apple iOS support used to be much better than Android competitor's support. But today, the Android competitors FULL support is better than Apple's.

a. Galaxy S = 7 years, 7 updates (8 Android versions, in toto)
b. iPHone = 5 years, no specified number of updates

In addition, all Android 10+ phones core modules update monthly. Forever.

You did it again. Not "the Android competitors" but "two Android
competitors". Stop your lying please!

Based on Apple's ten year history it's not 5 years, it's more like 5-6
years. And Apple has advanced the hardware so fast that full updates
past 6 years are problematical.

Why are you so hung up on "full" updates anyway?
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Tom Elam <[email protected]> wrote:

[...]

You did it again. Not "the Android competitors"
but "two Android competitors". Stop your lying please!

[...]

It's Arlen...
--
^�^. Sn!pe, bird-brain. My pet rock Gordon just is.
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Maria Sophia <[email protected]> wrote:

Tom Elam wrote:

On 3/25/26 3:38 PM, Chris wrote:

I dare you to post exactly the same post, but for Samsung and Pixel phones >>> on an android ng. Go on.

I already did that and he admitted Apple's support was much better
until Pixel and Samsung caught up to Apple with their very recent 7 year
policy. Can't wait until we see how well those two Android makers live
up to their promise and if Apple responds with a tweak to iOS!

Both Chris and Gondolfo Elam appear to want me to compare Apple's iPhone historical full support to that of the Samsung & Google iPhone competition.

I'm fine with that request (even as it's a bit of work to do on my part).

It would be useful to know what your source of data was.

I don't defend Google or Samsung (or Microsoft) to the death.
I simply tell the facts the way the facts are.

I'm unbiased that way.

Sure...

I never disagree with any logically sensible statement, where I don't disagree with Gondalfo Elam's and Chris' jointly agreed assessment that, historically, both the main competitors (Samsung & Google) to the iPhone, sucked on full support. I'm sure they both suck. Samsung more than Google.

I've never run the math though.
And likely, neither have Gondolfo Elam or Chris run the math.

We all know that today, both offer a promised 7 years of full support.

Which is all we have; a promise. Given this is almost 100% longer than
they've ever managed before, let's see how it actually pans outout before crowing about how amazing it is.

While the iPhone offers only a paltry five years of promised full support.

Yet your data shows that they have always surpassed it in the last 10
years. For *all* phones. In recent years, 7 seems the norm.

<snip useful datapoints >

If the data above is correct, the average Samsung main competitor to the iPhone between 2010 and 2020 appears to have 2.48 years of FULL support.

Which is why I moved to iphone. I was buying androids with promised support which never materialised and vendors didn't care.

If the data above is correct, the average Samsung main competitor to the iPhone between 2016 and 2022 appears to have 3.28 years of FULL support.

Both Gondolfo Elam and Chris (and everyone else) should note that I don't care what the answer is, since all I care about are making good
assessments.

It doesn't matter to me if Apple comes out ahead or not.
I just want to know what the answer is.

Apparently, all iPhones averaged 4.89 years of FULL support.
All Samsung iPhone competitors averaged much less, at 2.48 years.
The Pixel competition to the iPhone was in the middle, at 3.28 years.

Please remember I'm nothing like most of you who post to the Apple
newsgroups in that I don't defend any company to the death, no matter what.

I simply care about knowing what the correct answer is.

Great.

My assessment?
a. Apple full iOS support used to be much better than Android was.

Correct.

b. But moving forward from today, Apple full iOS support is much worse.

You're literally contradicting yourself.

--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Tom Elam wrote:

On 3/26/26 11:52 AM, Maria Sophia wrote:

Tom Elam wrote:

Note: I could add the Google Nexus line to the list above. Should I?

OMG! Apple went to ~6 year support long before Samsung's very recent 7
year promise.

Once again your poor logic and arithmetic skills are on display.

Hi Tom,

I never disagree with any logically stated viewpoint.

If we look at historical full support for iOS, it's better than historical >> full support for Android competitors to the iPhone, nobody disagrees.

As I had stated many times, I'm not a religious zealot.
I don't defend the mothership to the death, no matter what.

I just tell it like it is.

Apple iOS support used to be much better than Android competitor's support. >> But today, the Android competitors FULL support is better than Apple's.

a. Galaxy S = 7 years, 7 updates (8 Android versions, in toto)
b. iPHone = 5 years, no specified number of updates

In addition, all Android 10+ phones core modules update monthly. Forever.

You did it again. Not "the Android competitors" but "two Android competitors". Stop your lying please!

Based on Apple's ten year history it's not 5 years, it's more like 5-6 years. And Apple has advanced the hardware so fast that full updates
past 6 years are problematical.

Why are you so hung up on "full" updates anyway?

Hi Tom,

I never disagree with any logically defensible statement of fact, Tom.

Thanks for noticing that not all Android phones compete with the iPhone,
even as all Android phones run more software than any iPhone ever made.

For people considering between an iPhone and an Android phone, it's a
strange world because it's not really the phone they're considering.

The ecosystems are as different as being in prison is from being inside
your own home where you're allowed to have your own furniture installed.

Apple locks you into a prison "for your safety". Android does not.
And yet, neither has more safety than the other. Which is paradoxical.

I never said Apple's historical support wasn't longer than Android's.
What's longer is Samsung's NEW support policy for Galaxy S phones.

That's just a fact.
You don't have to like that fact, but it's still a fact either way.

What will be interesting in a decade is to look back in time to now.
And see whether that better support resulted in fewer software holes.

Time will tell.
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Tom Elam wrote:

On 3/26/26 11:52 AM, Maria Sophia wrote:

Still, it may be a red herring for us to discuss FULL support differences
given that the current support for both iPhones and Android phones results >> in the same security overall.

So you finally admit that your long string of claiming Samsung's 7 years
of support claim for some of it's models is really no better to the
average person than Apple's support for all it's models.

Hi Tom,

I'll "finally admit" anything if you claim it using logically sensible language, as I don't defend any mothership to the death, no matter what.

What I have always shown is that the security between Android and iOS is
about the same, and that's why I claim Apple marketing lied to you.

I stand by those comments because the security on iOS is no better than
Android out of the box (although Android clearly can be hardened better).

As for the 7 years of support, that's just a fact, Tom.
You can't dispute a fact just because you don't like that fact.

FACT:
For new S-models (which compete with the iPhone), Samsung promised in
writing to the UK authorities 7 years and 7 additional major updates.

FACT:
Google Play system update will update the core modules for all Android 10+ phones on the Internet, forever. (Except mine, because I turned it off.)

It's understandable that you don't like those facts, but you not liking
facts that Apple can't match doesn't mean that those facts are wrong, Tom.

It just means you don't like them.
And that's OK.

Some day, Apple may catch up to the support Samsung S phones get today.
You'll like that! :)
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Chris wrote:

We all know that today, both offer a promised 7 years of full support.

Which is all we have; a promise. Given this is almost 100% longer than they've ever managed before, let's see how it actually pans outout before crowing about how amazing it is.

Hi Chris,

I never disagree with any logically sensible statement, no matter who says
it, so I agree with you that a written promise is just that. A promise.

a. Samsung promised the UK 7 years of full support (& 7 major upgrades).
b. Apple promised the UK 5 years of full support (unknown # of upgrades).

However, I strongly suspect there are legal strings attached to both.
The UK's Consumer Rights Act 2015 requires that goods must:
a. Match their description
b. Be of satisfactory quality
c. Last a reasonable length of time

If a company publicly commits to a specific support window, that becomes
part of the "description" where failing to meet it could expose them to:
a. Regulatory scrutiny
b. Complaints upheld by claims courts
c. Potential claims for repair, replacement, or partial refund

So while you're right that a promise is still a promise, it's not empty.
Once submitted, it becomes a binding representation from Apple & Samsung.
.

While the iPhone offers only a paltry five years of promised full support.

Yet your data shows that they have always surpassed it in the last 10
years. For *all* phones. In recent years, 7 seems the norm.

I am not on this newsgroup to promote one manufacturer over another, Chris.
I'm here simply to state a logically sensible fact-based evidence-based viewpoint, so I will never disagree that historically, full support has
been longer for the iPhone than it has been for the Android competition.

What I didn't do, until you and Tom asked me to do, was look at the data.
The reason I didn't do it is I felt that it wouldn't prove anything
different from what I had already assumed would be the case. And it didn't.

The iPhone full support, while shorter than almost anyone here has ever
claimed it would be, was still LONGER than the full support of Galaxy and
Pixel completion to the iPhone. Nobody expected a different answer, right?

Did you expect a different answer to result from the data?
I didn't.

I expected iPhone support to be longer than Galaxy S-series & Pixel
support, although I was surprised Pixel support was longer than Galaxy S support (although Pixels came later in the game when support improved).

Support has been improving yearly for the phones that compete with the
iPhone, such that the promised full support period is longer than iPhone's.

If the data above is correct, the average Samsung main competitor to the
iPhone between 2010 and 2020 appears to have 2.48 years of FULL support.

Which is why I moved to iphone. I was buying androids with promised support which never materialised and vendors didn't care.

While I don't disagree with the understanding that you had that Android
full support was shorter than that of the iPhone, the paradoxical "where
are the aliens?" moment occurs when you ask "where are the bugs?".

As we've discussed many times in the past, the number of vulnerabilities on
iOS & Android are about the same, even as they fluctuate from year to year.

So it's paradoxical that the "longer full support" of iOS doesn't result in fewer vulnerabilities.

That's something to ponder.
If we can answer why, that would mean we understand a lot more than most.

b. But moving forward from today, Apple full iOS support is much worse.

You're literally contradicting yourself.

Chris,

I've asked you to stop being like Alan Baker saying "nah uh" and "wrong" without giving me a chance to understand what you think is a contradiction.

So far, EVERY SINGLE TIME you've "explained" your complaints, it turned out that I said "the sky is blue" & you interpreted that to me I said "it will never rain".

If you're gonna act just like Snit or Snipe or Alan or Joerg do, then there
is absolutely no possibility of an adult conversation happening with you.

Since you feel that facts contradict themselves, what facts are you
speaking of that you claim contradict themselves?

I can't respond to an amorphous claim by you that everything is wrong,
when you can't state what you mean, and, so far, when you do, we found out every single time that you fabricated that I said something I didn't say.

State what you think is a contradiction.

Just like I stated it's a paradox that Apple's support has been longer than that of Samsung competitors, & yet, the vulnerabilities are about the same.

That's not a contradiction.
That's a paradox.

It's a moment to pause to learn more about the dynamic just as it is when
we hear Apple say they locked us in a prison "for our safety" and yet,
there is no added safety. That paradox is more easily explained though.

Apple simply lied.
If they had locked us in that prison "for our safety", we would be safer.

And yet, we're not safer.
Because Apple locked us inside for a completely different reason.

They used "safety" as a socially acceptable excuse.
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

a Maria Sophia <[email protected]> wrote:

Chris wrote:

We all know that today, both offer a promised 7 years of full support.

Which is all we have; a promise. Given this is almost 100% longer than
they've ever managed before, let's see how it actually pans outout before
crowing about how amazing it is.

Hi Chris,

I never disagree with any logically sensible statement, no matter who says it, so I agree with you that a written promise is just that. A promise.

a. Samsung promised the UK 7 years of full support (& 7 major upgrades).
b. Apple promised the UK 5 years of full support (unknown # of upgrades).

The statements are valid internationally, not just the UK.

However, I strongly suspect there are legal strings attached to both.

You suspect wrong.

The UK's Consumer Rights Act 2015 requires that goods must:
a. Match their description
b. Be of satisfactory quality
c. Last a reasonable length of time

Lol. Wrong. That last one should be "fit for purpose". You should stick to things you understand.

Under satisfactory quality there is a provision for expected lifetime of
goods, but it isn't hard and fast nor is it dependent on a manufacturer's claim. There's a blanket view that in England & Wales the limit is six
years and Scotland is five.

If a company publicly commits to a specific support window, that becomes
part of the "description" where failing to meet it could expose them to:
a. Regulatory scrutiny
b. Complaints upheld by claims courts
c. Potential claims for repair, replacement, or partial refund

Maybe and would have to be on a large scale plus be a significant misrepresentation (like the VW dieselgate emissions fraud). More likely to
sit under the "quality" provisions rather than "description".

So while you're right that a promise is still a promise, it's not empty.
Once submitted, it becomes a binding representation from Apple & Samsung.

Nope. You're simply hoping this is the case.

The facts remain: a) Samsung/Google have never supported their *flagship* phones for more than 4 years, b) Apple has supported *all* phones released
in the last 10 years for at least six years. Actions speak louder than
words.
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Chris wrote:

a Maria Sophia <[email protected]> wrote:

Chris wrote:

We all know that today, both offer a promised 7 years of full support. >>>

Which is all we have; a promise. Given this is almost 100% longer than
they've ever managed before, let's see how it actually pans outout before >>> crowing about how amazing it is.

Hi Chris,

I never disagree with any logically sensible statement, no matter who says >> it, so I agree with you that a written promise is just that. A promise.

a. Samsung promised the UK 7 years of full support (& 7 major upgrades).
b. Apple promised the UK 5 years of full support (unknown # of upgrades).

The statements are valid internationally, not just the UK.

However, I strongly suspect there are legal strings attached to both.

You suspect wrong.

The UK's Consumer Rights Act 2015 requires that goods must:
a. Match their description
b. Be of satisfactory quality
c. Last a reasonable length of time

Lol. Wrong. That last one should be "fit for purpose". You should stick to things you understand.

Under satisfactory quality there is a provision for expected lifetime of goods, but it isn't hard and fast nor is it dependent on a manufacturer's claim. There's a blanket view that in England & Wales the limit is six
years and Scotland is five.

If a company publicly commits to a specific support window, that becomes
part of the "description" where failing to meet it could expose them to:
a. Regulatory scrutiny
b. Complaints upheld by claims courts
c. Potential claims for repair, replacement, or partial refund

Maybe and would have to be on a large scale plus be a significant misrepresentation (like the VW dieselgate emissions fraud). More likely to sit under the "quality" provisions rather than "description".

So while you're right that a promise is still a promise, it's not empty.
Once submitted, it becomes a binding representation from Apple & Samsung.

Nope. You're simply hoping this is the case.

Hi Chris,

I'm not a lawyer, but clearly I own excellent comprehensive skills.
Since we're discussing legality, we have to keep to the letter of the law.

Under the UK's Product Security and Telecommunications Infrastructure
(PSTI) Act, companies selling connected devices must publicly declare a "defined support period." To comply, Apple filed a regulatory document
stating that the iPhone 15 Pro Max will receive "a minimum of five years"
of security updates from its first supply date (September 22, 2023).
<https://www.comparedial.com/news/apple-guarantees-a-minimum-of-5-years-of-security-updates-for-iphones-in-accordance-with-uk-legislation-483>

Note that this doesn't say "full" updates. Only "security updates".
But let's be generous to Apple and assume it's full updates also.

As far as I can tell, legally, it applies ONLY in the UK.
But practically, it almost certainly affects the entire world.
Even as this obligation does not automatically extend to other countries.

But we can assume it would be a public-relations disaster if Apple decided
to give the UK 5 years of "security updates" and the USA "full support".

But note the truth hidden behind the legal language.
Apple never committed to *full* operating system support!
Only "security updates".

Some OS vendors give "security updates" for decades, Chris.

The facts remain: a) Samsung/Google have never supported their *flagship* phones for more than 4 years, b) Apple has supported *all* phones released
in the last 10 years for at least six years. Actions speak louder than
words.

Since we're delving into legalities, it's important for people reading this thread to understand that using "security updates" as a legal term is
almost meaningless, particularly when uttered out of the mouth of Tim Cook.

Every operating system vendor issues a random "security update", Chris.
1. October 25, 2001 Windows XP released & XP support ended in April 2014
2. Yet Microsoft patched WannaCry SMB vulnerability in May 2017
3. And Microsoft patched a wormable RDP flaw (BlueKeep) in May 2019

Given that May 14, 2019 (Service Pack 3 with May 2019 security update)
Windows XP received security patches for 17 years and 9 months after its original release. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_XP>

Let's compare with iOS where, as far as I can tell, iOS 12 has the longest example that I can find (maybe you can find a longer release window?).

Windows:
1. Windows XP was released on October 25, 2001
2. The last known security update was released on May 14, 2019
3. That is 6,421 days, or 17.59 years of security updates after release

iOS:
1. iOS 12 was released on September 17, 2018
2. The last known security update was iOS 12.5.7 on January 23, 2023
3. That is 1,589 days, or 4.35 years of security updates after release

In both cases above, that was a patch, but it was not a full patch.
It was just a random "security update", which all OS vendors perform.

Since I don't defend any mothership to the death, no matter what, I only
care about the correct answer, where this is the best I can find for iOS.

1. iOS 9 was released on September 16, 2015
2. The last known security update was iOS 9.3.6, released on July 22, 2019
3. That is 1,406 days, or 3.85 years of security updates after release

1. iOS 10 was released on September 13, 2016
2. The last known security update was iOS 10.3.4, released on July 22, 2019
3. That is 1,042 days, or 2.85 years of security updates after release

1. iOS 14 was released on September 16, 2020
2. The last known security update was iOS 14.8.1 on October 26, 2021
3. That is 405 days, or 1.11 years of security updates after release
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

I don't defend any mothership to the death, no matter what, because I only care to correctly understand how long Apple's support truly is from facts.

Apple's FULL security-update behavior for *full* iOS support
a. Longest full iOS support: 6.99 years (iPhone XS / XS Max)
b. Shortest full iOS support: 2.37 years (iPhone 3G)
c. Average full iOS support: 5.10 years
d. Typical full iOS support: ~4-6 years depending on model

Even if we take the *best possible scenario* for the length of Apple iOS operating system support, it's still dismally short compared to Windows.

Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: How long after release does Apple still provide "security updates"?
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2026 15:13:00 -0400
Message-ID: <10q6krt$jv7$[email protected]>

Microsoft Windows is the king of support in terms of overall time duration:
1. Windows XP was released on October 25, 2001
2. The last known security update was released on May 14, 2019
3. That is 6,421 days, or 17.59 years of security updates after release

Apple's real security-update behavior for *any* security patch:
a. iOS average: 1.6 years
b. macOS average: 2.8 years

Note "security update" is the longest possible given it's not full support.

This is why Apple's UK "5-year security update" claim may be legally compliant but practically almost meaningless since "security update" is not "full update". .
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

On 2026-03-27 13:18, Maria Sophia wrote:

I don't defend any mothership to the death, no matter what, because I only care to correctly understand how long Apple's support truly is from facts.

Apple's FULL security-update behavior for *full* iOS support
a. Longest full iOS support: 6.99 years (iPhone XS / XS Max)
b. Shortest full iOS support: 2.37 years (iPhone 3G)
c. Average full iOS support: 5.10 years
d. Typical full iOS support: ~4-6 years depending on model

Even if we take the *best possible scenario* for the length of Apple iOS operating system support, it's still dismally short compared to Windows.

Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: How long after release does Apple still provide "security updates"?
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2026 15:13:00 -0400
Message-ID: <10q6krt$jv7$[email protected]>

Microsoft Windows is the king of support in terms of overall time duration: 1. Windows XP was released on October 25, 2001
2. The last known security update was released on May 14, 2019
3. That is 6,421 days, or 17.59 years of security updates after release

Why are you only looking at ONE version of Windows?

Apple's real security-update behavior for *any* security patch:
a. iOS average: 1.6 years
b. macOS average: 2.8 years

Note "security update" is the longest possible given it's not full support.

This is why Apple's UK "5-year security update" claim may be legally compliant
but practically almost meaningless since "security update" is not "full update". .

--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

On 3/27/26 4:18 PM, Maria Sophia wrote:

I don't defend any mothership to the death, no matter what, because I only care to correctly understand how long Apple's support truly is from facts.

Apple's FULL security-update behavior for *full* iOS support
a. Longest full iOS support: 6.99 years (iPhone XS / XS Max)
b. Shortest full iOS support: 2.37 years (iPhone 3G)
c. Average full iOS support: 5.10 years
d. Typical full iOS support: ~4-6 years depending on model

Even if we take the *best possible scenario* for the length of Apple iOS operating system support, it's still dismally short compared to Windows.

Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: How long after release does Apple still provide "security updates"?
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2026 15:13:00 -0400
Message-ID: <10q6krt$jv7$[email protected]>

Microsoft Windows is the king of support in terms of overall time duration: 1. Windows XP was released on October 25, 2001
2. The last known security update was released on May 14, 2019
3. That is 6,421 days, or 17.59 years of security updates after release

Apple's real security-update behavior for *any* security patch:
a. iOS average: 1.6 years
b. macOS average: 2.8 years

Note "security update" is the longest possible given it's not full support.

This is why Apple's UK "5-year security update" claim may be legally compliant
but practically almost meaningless since "security update" is not "full update". .

Microsoft typically offered mainstream (their term) support for about 5
years and extended for another 5 or so, but it varied widely by release.
That is exactly the Windows 10 timing, but critics claim precedent was
broken. Resistance to Windows 11 for some is predicated on the
requirement for a Microsoft account and the fact that a Microsoft
engineer allegedly stated that Windows 10 would be the last version.

Your XP dates are not correct. Windows XP was supported for a bit over
12 years, not 17.8. Released in October 2001, official mainstream
support ended on April 14, 2009, with final extended support ending on
April 8, 2014. The May 2019 update is an outlier. In fact, you claimed
that an iPhone 6 update that came out this January was an update!
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Tom Elam wrote:

This is why Apple's UK "5-year security update" claim may be legally compliant
but practically almost meaningless since "security update" is not "full update". .

Microsoft typically offered mainstream (their term) support for about 5 years and extended for another 5 or so, but it varied widely by release. That is exactly the Windows 10 timing, but critics claim precedent was broken. Resistance to Windows 11 for some is predicated on the
requirement for a Microsoft account and the fact that a Microsoft
engineer allegedly stated that Windows 10 would be the last version.

Your XP dates are not correct. Windows XP was supported for a bit over
12 years, not 17.8. Released in October 2001, official mainstream
support ended on April 14, 2009, with final extended support ending on
April 8, 2014. The May 2019 update is an outlier. In fact, you claimed
that an iPhone 6 update that came out this January was an update!

Hi Tom,

Thanks for trying to take a stab at the Microsoft Windows XP "support",
where I was clear that "full support" is not the same as "support".

A lot of the Apple posters to this newsgroup have gotten that wrong.
So it's normal for people on this newsgroup to make that mistake.

Full support, in Apple's own words, is when every known security hole is
fixed (and there are other things, but we're mostly talking security).

Support is when a random arbitrary security hole is fixed.
Thats' what I was talkinga bout for Windows XP.

Microsoft fixed a security hole almost 18 years after WinXP released.
Now, I would NEVER claim that's full support, as you have noticed.

But a *lot* of Apple posters would claim that's full support.
But it's not.

So we agree fully.
You understand the difference between full support & support.

But most posters to this newsgroup have absolutely no clue.
So far, only -hh has shown any understanding of the difference.

And maybe you.
But nobody else.

And certainly Chris has shown zero indication he understand it.
But I do thank you for showing an indication you understand it.
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

On 2026-03-25 23:18, Maria Sophia wrote:

Tom Elam wrote:

On 3/25/26 3:38 PM, Chris wrote:

I dare you to post exactly the same post, but for Samsung and Pixel phones >>> on an android ng. Go on.

I already did that and he admitted Apple's support was much better
until Pixel and Samsung caught up to Apple with their very recent 7 year
policy. Can't wait until we see how well those two Android makers live
up to their promise and if Apple responds with a tweak to iOS!

Both Chris and Gondolfo Elam appear to want me to compare Apple's iPhone

"Gondolfo Elam"?

Is that one of those insults you claim you were never going to engage in?
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

On 2026-03-26 08:52, Maria Sophia wrote:

Tom Elam wrote:

Note: I could add the Google Nexus line to the list above. Should I?

OMG! Apple went to ~6 year support long before Samsung's very recent 7
year promise.

Once again your poor logic and arithmetic skills are on display.

Hi Tom,

I never disagree with any logically stated viewpoint.

If we look at historical full support for iOS, it's better than historical full support for Android competitors to the iPhone, nobody disagrees.

As I had stated many times, I'm not a religious zealot.
I don't defend the mothership to the death, no matter what.

I just tell it like it is.

Apple iOS support used to be much better than Android competitor's support. But today, the Android competitors FULL support is better than Apple's.

a. Galaxy S = 7 years, 7 updates (8 Android versions, in toto)
b. iPHone = 5 years, no specified number of updates

So you compare one cherry-picked Android phone...

...against ALL iPhones ever.

Got it.

In addition, all Android 10+ phones core modules update monthly. Forever.

But those core modules do not comprise the entire OS...
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2