
There's a dark side to 7 years of Android updates, and we're already starting to see it
News that the Pixel 8 series won't get Android 16's new Battery Health feature has stirred more outrage than you'd expect for such a mundane addition. Then again, perhaps it's because it's so seemingly rudimentary that it's hard to fathom why older Pixels can't or won't receive a heads-up on how healthy their battery is.
Whatever the reason, it's not a great look for a smartphone series that prides itself on trailblazing long-term handset support. I wouldn't blame you for wondering whether seven years of promised updates are all they're cracked up to be. But as we've said before, long-term support doesn't necessarily guarantee access to every little feature — a readily apparent reality, even for phones barely a couple of years old.
In some sense, this is a problem of expectation management. By promising the earth, brands have set consumers up for inevitable disappointment. When you see a feature hyped up for Android 16, One UI 8, Oxygen OS, or what have you, but it's missing when the update finally rolls around to your older handset, you're bound to be annoyed. This is especially true when a missing feature 'feels' like it should work, or worse, can be proven to work on an older model.
Could Google have better communicated why the Pixel 8 won't support the new battery health feature? Absolutely. But is it feasible for every brand to detail every missing or diluted feature for every phone over their five, six, or seven-year lifecycle? Of course not.
Do 7 years of updates still matter even if features are withheld from older devices?
0 votes
Of course
NaN %
Nope
NaN %
Hardware ages faster than software
Rita El Khoury / Android Authority
Unfortunately, smartphones can't always receive predictable, 'just works' updates like laptops and PCs. Under the hood, there's a range of bespoke hardware, each with quite varying capabilities, making maintaining new features for old hardware more of a hassle and less economical. From your phone's graphics chip and modem to the ICs that charge your battery, various aspects of phone design change year by year, meaning that backporting features is not a given. Even Apple couldn't bring Apple Intelligence to the iPhone 15 just a year after its launch.
It's likely a similar case with Google's Battery Health feature — it probably depends on a newer chip that older Pixels lack. Looking ahead, the Tensor G5 inside the Pixel 10 is expected to support ray-tracing, and we certainly can't expect Google to bring that feature back to older phones that don't sport the necessary hardware. Still, there are plenty of hardware-dependent upgrades that can be ported between handsets, ranging from the camera to AI, and more.
Google has helped phone software run for longer at the expense of low-level hardware updates.
Thankfully, Google has made Android feature upgrades easier in recent years by isolating low-level code, allowing more features to be updated independently of the Linux kernel. OS upgrades should be able to include new camera processing capabilities, updates to audio/video codecs, and even AI features for their full seven years, for example. As long as it can interface with existing hardware, support is possible.
However, abstraction has a limit; some features can't be patched in without more work, even if there's underlying hardware support. For example, Android 14's low-latency camera APIs almost certainly require a low-level kernel update, as did the flashlight brightness API and Memory-Tagging-Extension support in Android 13.
Joe Maring / Android Authority
Unfortunately, Google's move to a three-year kernel upgrade cycle with the Longevity GRF program means that low-level upgrades might become even more spaced out, especially for brands that rely on third-party processors. In other words, features that require a brand new software interface with low-level hardware are even less likely to arrive in future OS upgrades than those that make 'simple' software changes.
While seven years of updates means we can keep our handsets running longer, the trade-off is that the rules for kernel updates are a bit more relaxed, meaning some features can go AWOL from older phones. Thankfully, most user-facing OS features should be able to dodge this issue, but there are no guarantees over such a long period of time, especially in innovative areas like AI.
How to sell more phones in the age of long support
C. Scott Brown / Android Authority
Galaxy S25 Ultra (left) and Galaxy S24 Ultra
The less talked about dark side of seven-year update pledges is their economic viability. Even if a $799-$1,199 phone feels like it should buy seven years of updates, you can bet no one's squirrelling away cash in a developer fund to cover engineer salaries in 2032. Much like the social security balancing act, the R&D and sale of new handsets almost certainly support developing features and updates for existing models.
Ironically, the promise of long-term support also boosts the resale market — yet brands see little to no profit from second-hand sales, even as they tout sustainability as a core value. As such, there's a delicate balancing act: keep old phones relevant without cannibalizing new sales and choking off the funding that powers future updates.
No one's squirrelling away engineer salaries for 2032, long-term updates require new sales.
Though 'planned obsolescence' tends to spark outrage, it seems inevitable that Apple, Google, and Samsung must reserve some features to attract new customers. At what point can a brand fairly say, 'Hey, you want the new stuff, you have to buy the new phone?' Ideally, I'd say features should keep coming until the hardware can't keep up, but with sluggish innovation, that's more idealistic than realpolitik. Even so, omitting One UI 7 features from the two-year-old Galaxy S23 series seems punitively short.
Fair support and subtle arm-twisting for an upgrade seem incompatible — but honestly, you probably can't have one without the other.
Between expectation management, hardware limitations, and the economic reality, delivering seven years of updates is a far darker business than the marketing suggests. I suspect we'll see plenty more stories like the Pixel Battery Health fiasco as the upgrade counter ticks on. In the end, it's a timeless reminder: buy a phone for what it does today, not for what it might do tomorrow.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
ThreatLocker Chosen for 2025 Inc. 5000 List of America's Fastest-Growing Private Companies
Cyber Hero® Team Orlando, Florida, Aug. 12, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- ThreatLocker® Chosen for the 2025 Inc. 5000 List of America's Fastest-Growing Private Companies ORLANDO, Fla., Aug. 12, 2025 – ThreatLocker® today announced its inclusion on the annual Inc. 5000 list, the most prestigious ranking of the fastest-growing private companies in America. In addition to ranking in the top 8% on the national list, ThreatLocker is No. 7 in the Orlando metro area, No. 47 in the state of Florida and No. 10 in the security industry in the U.S. The list provides a data-driven snapshot of the most successful companies within the economy's most dynamic segment: its independent, entrepreneurial businesses. 'Earning a spot on the Inc. 5000 underscores how central Zero Trust has become in cybersecurity,' said ThreatLocker CEO and Co-founder Danny Jenkins. 'Our proactive approach is essential in an era where cyberattacks are more frequent, more sophisticated, and more disruptive than ever. That's why we're growing so quickly.' This year's Inc. 5000 honorees have demonstrated exceptional growth while navigating economic uncertainty, inflationary pressure, and a fluctuating labor market. Among the top 500 companies on the list, the median three-year revenue growth rate reached 1,552 percent, and those companies have collectively added more than 48,678 jobs to the U.S. economy over the past three years. For the full list, company profiles, and a searchable database by industry and location, visit: 'Making the Inc. 5000 is always a remarkable achievement, but earning a spot this year speaks volumes about a company's tenacity and clarity of vision,' said Mike Hofman, editor-in-chief of Inc. 'These businesses have thrived amid rising costs, shifting global dynamics, and constant change. They didn't just weather the storm—they grew through it, and their stories are a powerful reminder that the entrepreneurial spirit is the engine of the U.S. economy.' Since its founding in 2017, ThreatLocker has grown from launching its first product, Allowlisting, to a global cybersecurity leader serving more than 50,000 organizations. Milestones include the introduction of key solutions such as Ringfencing™, Storage Control, Elevation Control, Network Control, Detect, and Cyber Hero® MDR. In 2025, ThreatLocker launched five new solutions: Web Control, Patch Management, Insights, User Store, and Cloud Control. The company also released Defense Against Configurations (DAC) and is now listed on the FedRAMP Marketplace. ThreatLocker has expanded its presence to more than 10 countries, added data centers worldwide, and grown its team to over 600 members, all while continually advancing its Zero Trust endpoint protection platform. Methodology Companies on the 2025 Inc. 5000 are ranked according to percentage revenue growth from 2021 to 2024. To qualify, companies must have been founded and generating revenue by March 31, 2021. They must be U.S.-based, privately held, for-profit, and independent—not subsidiaries or divisions of other companies—as of December 31, 2024. (Since then, some on the list may have gone public or been acquired.) The minimum revenue required for 2021 is $100,000; the minimum for 2024 is $2 million. As always, Inc. reserves the right to decline applicants for subjective reasons. About Inc. Inc. is the leading media brand and playbook for entrepreneurs and business leaders shaping our future. Through its journalism, Inc. aims to inform, educate, and elevate the profile of its community: the risk-takers, the innovators, and the ultra-driven go-getters who are creating the future of business. Inc. is published by Mansueto Ventures LLC, along with fellow leading business publication Fast Company. For more information, visit About ThreatLocker ThreatLocker® is a global cybersecurity leader that helps organizations stop cyberattacks at the source by taking a true Zero Trust approach to securing endpoints. Through powerful tools like Application Allowlisting, Ringfencing™, and Network Control, ThreatLocker gives IT teams the granular control they need to block ransomware, prevent zero-day exploits, and harden their environments from the inside out. Designed for simplicity, scalability, and speed, ThreatLocker security stack reduces complexity, accelerates compliance, and empowers businesses to take control of their cybersecurity—before threats strike. Headquartered in the United States with a growing global presence, ThreatLocker protects 50,000+ organizations across industries. Learn more here. Media Contact: Stefany Strong Attachment Cyber Hero® Team CONTACT: Stefany Strong ThreatLocker Inc +14077842109 while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data


Forbes
26 minutes ago
- Forbes
NVDA Vs. NVDY: The Better Nvidia Stock Buy For Your Investing Style
Nvidia is the crown jewel of the AI boom. But how you choose to invest in it, either directly through NVDA stock or indirectly via the NVDY covered call income ETF, reflects your risk appetite, time horizon and definition of returns. This article explores which option (NVDA stock vs. NVDY) is a better fit for your portfolio and what your choice reveals about your investor persona. What Is YieldMax's NVDY? The YieldMax NVDA Option Income Strategy ETF (NVDY) is an actively managed fund that does not invest directly in Nvidia shares, but delivers a far higher income yield vs. NVDA. The fund's staggering trailing twelve-month (TTM) distribution yield of nearly 80% stems from a unique strategy that generates monthly income through options without actually owning NVDA stock. To achieve this, NVDY implements a 'synthetic covered call' strategy by which it To generate monthly income by selling short-term covered calls, NVDY first needs a long exposure to NVDA stock. Rather than buying NVDA shares outright, NVDY creates a cheaper, synthetic long position by This combo allows NVDY to simulate NVDA stock's price moves, without actually buying the stock. These call and put options typically have durations of one to six months and strike prices near NVDA's current price at the time these option contracts are executed. The synthetic long position provides NVDY with exposure that is nearly identical to owning NVDA stock. If NVDA rises, the call gains in value and if NVDA falls, the put incurs a loss. If NVDA stays flat, typically both options may expire worthless, and the fund may lose the cost of the call, but this will be offset by the premium received from the short put. Suppose NVDA stock is currently trading at $200/share. NVDY buys a call option with a strike price of $200 (at-the-money) by paying a premium of $15. (Premiums vary depending on volatility and expiration, and the $15 figures here are for illustrative purposes.) This gives NVDY the right to buy NVDA at $200. If NVDA rises to $250, the call option's value would increase to $50. Subtracting the $15 premium paid, the net profit on the call is $35. As part of the synthetic strategy, NVDY also sells a put option with a $200 strike price, receiving a $15 premium. This gives it the obligation to buy NVDA at $200 if the price falls below that level. If NVDA drops to $150, NVDY is forced to buy at $200, incurring a $50 loss on the put. After subtracting the $15 premium received, the net loss is $35. These call and put options together form a synthetic long position, mimicking the payoff of directly owning the stock. Although synthetic ownership is more complex than buying shares directly, it is significantly more capital-efficient. For example, buying 100 shares of NVDA at $200 each would require $20,000 upfront. A synthetic long position created by buying a call and selling a put at the same $200 strike can replicate this exposure. If the premiums for both options are around $15 each, the net upfront premium may be close to zero. Since each options contract typically represents 100 shares, this setup simulates $20,000 of stock exposure with little or no net premium paid. However, this does not mean the position is free. The short put side of the trade introduces significant downside risk and typically requires substantial margin or collateral. While the strategy uses less capital than directly purchasing the stock, margin requirements and potential losses can be huge. This is an oversimplified example meant to illustrate the concept of capital efficiency. In practice, actual capital requirements and risk exposure will vary depending on market conditions and brokerage policies. Investors don't need to worry about this nitty-gritty, NVDY fund managers will handle the complexities. NVDY then sells calls against this synthetic long position to generate income from premiums. These call options are typically short-term (expiring within one month or less) and are written at strike prices 0–15% above NVDA's current price at the time. If NVDA's price goes up, NVDY makes gains up to the strike price, but anything above that is capped, because the fund sold away that upside in exchange for income. If NVDA stays flat or dips slightly, NVDY retains the premium from selling the call options. This is its main source of monthly income. NVDY also holds short-term U.S. Treasuries that not only serve as collateral for the options in connection with its synthetic covered call strategy, but also earn some interest. NVDY also employs a 'Covered Call Spread' strategy—a more nuanced variation of the traditional covered call—used when it anticipates a sharp short-term rise in NVDA's price or when market conditions make spreads more advantageous than outright calls. In this strategy, NVDY sells a call option while simultaneously buying a call option with a higher strike price but the same expiration date. This approach still generates income and, if NVDA's price surges, allows NVDY to participate in more upside than a regular covered call would. How Does NVDY Differ From NVDA Stock? NVDA stock and NVDY are both Nvidia-focused investments but serve different goals: NVDA stock is regarded as a growth superstar, while NVDY is designed as a tactical income generator. For NVDA investors, gains and losses move in lockstep with the stock price. But, NVDY's returns, shaped by its synthetic long structure, follow a more complicated path. So, we notice that drawdowns are more or less similar for NVDA and NVDY, but gains are capped for NVDY. So, why invest in NVDY at all? Because of the outsized income yield from NVDY that far surpasses NVDA's. NVDY pays varying monthly distributions, while NVDA pays a penny in quarterly dividends. On a TTM basis, NVDY has paid distributions totaling $14.04/share, equating to 78.7% distribution yield based on NVDY's last closing price of $17.85. This far surpasses NVDA's 0.02% forward yield or annual payout of 4 cents/share on a forward basis. Price performance and Total Returns (including dividends/distributions): Even with NVDY's hefty monthly distributions, NVDA has delivered stronger total returns. NVDY's monthly payouts are a mix of return of capital (ROC) and ordinary income (such as option premiums and interest from Treasuries) For example: Why this breakdown matters: Return of capital isn't taxed when received. Instead, it reduces your cost basis in the ETF, which can increase taxable capital gains when you sell. Illustration: Once your cost basis is reduced to zero, any further ROC distributions are treated entirely as capital gains for tax purposes. The income portion of the payout, however, is taxable in the year received. For July, this would mean the remaining 63% of the distribution was taxable income. Expense Ratio: YieldMax lists NVDY's gross expense ratio as 0.99%, while many third-party sites like Yahoo Finance report the net expense ratio as 1.27%. That means an investor pays $127 annually for every $10,000 invested in NVDY. Let's say an investor bought 1,000 shares of NVDY a year ago at around $24/share: Even after accounting for the $304.80 annual fee (1.27% of $24,000), the net income is still exceptionally high. In other words, the expense ratio barely dents NVDY's income advantage. Since its inception on May 10, 2023, when it was trading around $20, NVDY has paid out $32.71 in distributions. Investors who purchased one share at launch would have recovered their full initial investment and realized an additional $12.71 in income. It is important to note that NVDY shareholders do not receive any dividends paid by Nvidia (NVDA) directly. But with these juicy payouts from NVDY, no investor would have missed much. When it comes to NVDA, the math is simple. You'll need about 10× the cost of an NVDY share to buy one share of NVDA. Sell NVDA in a taxable account, and you'll owe capital gains taxes on your profits. Sell it in a tax-advantaged account like a 401(k), and those taxes can be pushed to another day. NVDY Vs. NVDA: Advantages And Risks Lower Entry Cost: NVDY trades at roughly one-tenth the price of NVDA stock, making it more accessible for smaller investors. Capital Efficiency: Through its synthetic long position strategy, NVDY can mimic exposure to thousands of dollars' worth of NVDA stock with a minimal capital outlay. Attractive Yields - NVDY's covered call strategy generates eye-catching yields, appealing to income-focused investors. NVDA on the other hand is coveted for its growth potential rather than dividends. Faster Capital Recovery: NVDY's hefty and frequent payouts can help investors achieve 'house money' status quickly, recovering their initial investment through distributions. This can substantially de-risk the investment. NVDA requires selling shares to realize profits. Occasional Upside Participation: when NVDA stock is expected to rally in the short-term (because of a sell-off or some positive development) NVDY employs the 'Covered Call Spread' strategy, allowing more upside capture versus a standard covered call if NVDA's price surges. Asymmetric Downside: NVDY's synthetic long structure caps upside but leaves investors fully exposed to NVDA's downside. High monthly income may not be able to offset losses from a sharp NVDA correction. Investor Exodus: Significant price drops in NVDY can trigger investor outflows, lowering Assets Under Management (AUM) and making it harder to generate option income efficiently, thereby creating a negative feedback loop. Distribution volatility: While NVDA offers paltry dividends, NVDY's monthly payouts can fluctuate sharply — largely because they rely on option premium income and include return of capital. When NVDA's implied volatility drops or NVDY's Net Asset Value (NAV) erodes from repeated ROC payouts, the ETF's distributions could shrink. Opportunity Cost: Historically NVDA's returns have outpaced NVDY's significantly. Simply holding NVDA stock may generate greater total returns than NVDY, especially during strong bull runs in tech. NVDA Or NVDY — Which Investor Are You? If you are betting on Nvidia as a core pillar of an AI-driven future, and seek full participation in Nvidia's growth story — you're a Growth Chaser — you pick NVDA stock. If you are comfortable with capped upside and prioritize monthly income, you're an Income Alchemist — you choose NVDY to tactically monetize volatility and generate consistent yield. If you are looking to blend growth and income — gaining exposure to Nvidia's long-term upside while securing a steady income stream, you hold both: NVDA for capital appreciation and NVDY for monthly payouts. That makes you the Hedged Optimist. Bottom Line In my view, NVDA stock remains the superior play with its compelling long-term returns despite the meager dividend. The NVDA stock has clearly demonstrated resilience by rebounding and reaching new heights after every sharp correction, highlighting its structural strength. On the other hand, NVDY's low capital requirements, exceptional yield and the potential to recover capital in a reasonable time frame are alluring. However, the risks of asymmetric downside and NAV erosion — potentially shrinking the very dividends investors seek — make NVDY better suited as a tactical, smaller allocation in a portfolio. By contrast, NVDA stock deserves to be a core holding and investors may consider accumulating on any weakness, although past performance is no guarantee for future results.


New York Post
27 minutes ago
- New York Post
YouTube to test AI-powered age verification system for US users
YouTube on Wednesday will begin testing a new age-verification system in the U.S. that relies on artificial intelligence to differentiate between adults and minors, based on the kinds of videos that they have been watching. The tests initially will only affect a sliver of YouTube's audience in the U.S., but it will likely become more pervasive if the system works as well at guessing viewers' ages as it does in other parts of the world. The system will only work when viewers are logged into their accounts, and it will make its age assessments regardless of the birth date a user might have entered upon signing up. If the system flags a logged-in viewer as being under 18, YouTube will impose the normal controls and restrictions that the site already uses as a way to prevent minors from watching videos and engaging in other behavior deemed inappropriate for that age. The new system will only work if viewers are logged into their accounts. AP The safeguards include reminders to take a break from the screen, privacy warnings and restrictions on video recommendations. YouTube, which has been owned by Google for nearly 20 years, also doesn't show ads tailored to individual tastes if a viewer is under 18. If the system has inaccurately called out a viewer as a minor, the mistake can be corrected by showing YouTube a government-issued identification card, a credit card or a selfie. 'YouTube was one of the first platforms to offer experiences designed specifically for young people, and we're proud to again be at the forefront of introducing technology that allows us to deliver safety protections while preserving teen privacy,' James Beser, the video service's director of product management, wrote in a blog post about the age-verification system. People still will be able to watch YouTube videos without logging into an account, but viewing that way triggers an automatic block on some content without proof of age. If a viewer is mistakenly called a minor, they can correct it by showing YouTube a government-issued ID, credit card, or a selfie. fizkes – The political pressure has been building on websites to do a better job of verifying ages to shield children from inappropriate content since late June when the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a Texas law aimed at preventing minors from watching pornography online. While some services, such as YouTube, have been stepping up their efforts to verify users' ages, others have contended that the responsibility should primarily fall upon the two main smartphone app stores run by Apple and Google — a position that those two technology powerhouses have resisted. Some digital rights groups, such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the Center for Democracy & Technology, have raised concerns that age verification could infringe on personal privacy and violate First Amendment protections on free speech.