[MistahMan]

Hello,

As I understand it, Android 8 is no longer supported. Is it possible to update to a more recent version on this phone?

Thanks

[conite]

Hello,

As I understand it, Android 8 is no longer supported. Is it possible to update to a more recent version on this phone?

Thanks

No.

[Alfista83]

Hello,

As I understand it, Android 8 is no longer supported. Is it possible to update to a more recent version on this phone?

Thanks

No need to. Enjoy it as is.

[MistahMan]

No need to. Enjoy it as is.

I want to but I was concerned about apps no longer working on it.

[nevilleadaniels]

I want to but I was concerned about apps no longer working on it.

No problems here on british variant k2 qwerty

[MistahMan]

No problems here on british variant k2 qwerty

Cool. Thank you.

[SteinwayTransitCorp]

I want to but I was concerned about apps no longer working on it.

You have a long way to go with apps not working, Marshmallow is just starting to run into the APPS not updating any longer. Started about a year ago.

[conite]

You have a long way to go with apps not working, Marshmallow is just starting to run into the APPS not updating any longer. Started about a year ago.

A lot of enterprise apps, including BlackBerry's, don't (or shortly won't) support anything lower than Android 9.

[MistahMan]

A lot of enterprise apps, including BlackBerry's, don't (or shortly won't) support anything lower than Android 9.

I see Facebook's app is already 9 or higher.

[bh7171]

Google is giving new features to Android going back to version 6 just after the new year.

[the_boon]

Google is giving new features to Android going back to version 6 just after the new year.

Why do they even bother if using those is a hacker's dream lol

[conite]

Why do they even bother if using those is a hacker's dream lol

Because Google's interest lies in the use of the ecosystem.

[spARTacus]

I'd agree with that. The cost to push some updates to some of the old Android versions is probably less than the value that can be harvested from the opportunity from the tons of users that are still on those old Android versions, if they take the updates. I suspect Google and various entities won't push all types of updates to old Android versions, just certain ones. I'd have to guess that all of it is fairly calculated.

[the_boon]

I'd agree with that. The cost to push some updates to some of the old Android versions is probably less than the value that can be harvested from the opportunity from the tons of users that are still on those old Android versions, if they take the updates. I suspect Google and various entities won't push all types of updates to old Android versions, just certain ones. I'd have to guess that all of it is fairly calculated.

The general consensus on CB is that anyone still using a Priv today is asking to have their data harvested. Whether Google sends some kind of update for it or not.

[conite]

The general consensus on CB is that anyone still using a Priv today is asking to have their data harvested. Whether Google sends some kind of update for it or not.

Why do you make up nonsense like that?

The general consensus with all security experts, and those who are security conscious, is that one tries to minimise his/her exposure - an important element of which is to use a currently supported device.

[spARTacus]

I think the general consensus is that everyone is getting some aspects of their data harvested nowadays, regardless of what device they are using, regardless of if it is up to date or not, and at least partially also regardless of it they want data harvested or not.

[conite]

I think the general consensus is that everyone is getting some aspects of their data harvested nowadays, regardless of what device they are using, regardless of if it is up to date or not, and at least partially also regardless of it they want data harvested or not.

There is a vast difference between sharing data with those whom you have a relationship with, and those who steal it without your knowledge for unknown (generally nefarious) reasons.

[spARTacus]

Sure, and most people aren't really aware that they are "in a relationship" with so many entities, and that aspects of their data is being "shared". Most that are aware have probably never bothered to wonder about just what they are sharing and/or how they could try to control such. It would be interesting to know what is still being "shared" even when all attempts to control such are as tightly locked down as can be.

For those using an old device that is not regularly patched or maybe not using apps that have more granular control over privacy (ie: for where there is greater opportunity for other apps to try to "steal data"), in reality that probably isn't "stealing", because the relationship probably permits for it as part of "sharing".

[conite]

Sure, and most people aren't really aware that they are "in a relationship" with so many entities, and that aspects of their data is being "shared". Most that are aware have probably never bothered to wonder about just what they are sharing and/or how they could try to control such. It would be interesting to know what is still being "shared" even when all attempts to control such are as tightly locked down as can be.

For those using an old device that is not regularly patched or maybe not using apps that have more granular control over privacy (ie: for where there is greater opportunity for other apps to try to "steal data"), in reality that probably isn't "stealing", because the relationship probably permits for it as part of "sharing".

Your relationship, for instance, with Google is knowable, largely controllable, has legal standing, is governed by a privacy policy, is supported by industry-leading data protections and firewalls, is overseen by a large number of security and state enforcement actors, and offers huge benefits (quid pro quo - in terms of a vast array of exceptional apps).

I find it generally irritating when some compare a company like Google to the CCP or some belligerent hacker.

[max80]

Your relationship, for instance, with Google is knowable, largely controllable, has legal standing, is governed by a privacy policy

I can't stop laughing

[Chuck Finley69]

I can't stop laughing

How so?

[conite]

I can't stop laughing

Laugh all you want, but compare it to your standing with the CCP.

You also left out the rest of my statement.

[max80]

Google doesn't give a f**k about users privacy (as FB and other big corp), and being a monopolist with its OS there is no real chance for users to understand what (and not "if") data are begin stolen.
I simply don't trust in Android and I curse every day the BB managers that destroyed everything.

[conite]

Google doesn't give a f**k about users privacy (as FB and other big corp), and being a monopolist with its OS there is no real chance for users to understand what (and not "if") data are begin stolen.
I simply don't trust in Android and I curse every day the BB managers that destroyed everything.

BlackBerry didn't "let" BB10 be destroyed. The complete lack of customers did that after developers all decided that they weren't interested in a third platform to support (see Microsoft Windows Mobile).

As far as Google is concerned, the rest of my post above affords consumer protections regardless of what Google 'cares about". But you can be damn sure Google doesn't want its firewalls to be breached, as that would take a huge chunk out of its revenues.

[Chuck Finley69]

Google doesn't give a f**k about users privacy (as FB and other big corp), and being a monopolist with its OS there is no real chance for users to understand what (and not "if") data are begin stolen.
I simply don't trust in Android and I curse every day the BB managers that destroyed everything.

BlackBerry Limited was and is no different. There wasn’t any different privacy stance in technology since the internet began that I’m aware of. It only exists commercially viable through shared connections, human and machine, by it’s own nature.