> It's annoying that the media continues to incorrectly spin Android's security updates problem as somehow caused by its open ecosystem
That isn't "spin". Android's ecosystem is (largely) controlled by the phone carriers in this context. Their "open" system is a fractured jumble of closed systems with indifferent maintainers.
If Google took it up, Apple's method here would be a solution. Were Google to force carriers into supporting security updates on Google's terms, we wouldn't see this kind of issue.
Nobody making the Android/iPhone comparison in this context cares about "openness". That's largely a foregone conclusion on both devices. They care about the effective and timely distribution of security updates.
> GNU/Linux distros are free open source software, and don't suffer from these sorts of update problems.
Why on earth would NPR compare Linux distributions (which the general public has basically never heard of) to smartphones? It might be "more accurate", but it's not an accessible comparison.
> That isn't "spin". [then some correct statements, but not relevant to spin]
See also my other comment about words having false connotations, regardless of intent.
> Nobody making the Android/iPhone comparison in this context cares about "openness".
I don't know why you just assert this so nonchalantly. Clearly some people care, because they keep repeatedly associating closed systems with security update mechanisms, even though we have plenty of open systems with relatively good security update mechanisms. That is in fact my whole point; other people keep veering off on a tangent.
> it's not an accessible comparison.
What is "accessible" is very transient, dependent on the environment and cultural background. Those of us who are interested in balance and accuracy, have to make it accessible. Not doing so is irresponsible.
That isn't "spin". Android's ecosystem is (largely) controlled by the phone carriers in this context. Their "open" system is a fractured jumble of closed systems with indifferent maintainers.
If Google took it up, Apple's method here would be a solution. Were Google to force carriers into supporting security updates on Google's terms, we wouldn't see this kind of issue.
Nobody making the Android/iPhone comparison in this context cares about "openness". That's largely a foregone conclusion on both devices. They care about the effective and timely distribution of security updates.
> GNU/Linux distros are free open source software, and don't suffer from these sorts of update problems.
Why on earth would NPR compare Linux distributions (which the general public has basically never heard of) to smartphones? It might be "more accurate", but it's not an accessible comparison.