Are Big Tech playing fair with Software and Firmware Updates ?

 

Have you suffered from problems with older phones, tablets or pcs not working following software and firmware upgrades recently ? Read on for a possible explanation of why it’s happened…

It’s been apparent for decades that international 'Big Tech' firms such as Google, Apple and Microsoft have been collaborating with product manufacturers to ensure planned obsolescence for their combined products. 

There are good commercial reasons for this – it makes them all more money.

The last thing Big Tech want is for people to hold onto their old devices, rather than buying ‘nice’ new ones.

The snag from their point of view is that modern tablets, phones and pcs are inherently pretty reliable beasts generally, and if treated carefully, can go on performing well for years or even decades. Consumers who take advantage of this longevity are, of course, anathema to the Big Tech firms and device manufacturers, who want as much product ‘turnover’ as they can get to ensure their profit margins remain healthy. With the cost of living crisis, of course, there has come another problem for them - affordability. Thus they feel the need to 'make' us move on, rather than leaving us the choice.

One of the principal ways they have devised to force us to upgrade is to build-in obsolescence to the software and firmware needed for the devices to function. Because our modern electronic devices almost universally involve some form of internal computer control to enable them to work, they require firmware to power the chips and software to control their operations. This provides a prime opportunity for software and firmware developers and device suppliers to deny us access to our devices - and without needing any physical contact with them.

Google have provided a good example of this in the development of their Android operating system (OS), which is widely used in tablets and mobile phones. Since Android came on the scene, there have been many versions of the OS – around 13 at the last count. Each version normally has a number of different sub-versions.  Each successive iteration of the OS provides and opportunity to exclude older Android devices from the new software and firmware. This is because application (app) developers nowadays very rarely design their apps to be ‘downward compatible’ i.e. able to work with previous versions of the OS.

There is also the possibility to render a device inoperable by introducing new firmware versions, which simply won’t work with the hardware in older devices due to incompatibility with their older chipsets.

Google have cleverly designed yet another way of encouraging equipment upgrades. Their Play Store app, which is supposedly designed to supply ‘all your Android app requirements’, and is by default the only way to acquire new apps when you buy a new Android tablet or phone, is actually programmed to check on the Android version your device is using when you first start the app.

And - here’s the clever bit - having worked out your Android version, Play Store will only offer you the range of apps it approves of for your version. If your version is ‘no longer supported’ by Google (currently anything older than v5.0), Play Store will offer you nothing at all, even though there are countless apps still available from other sources that will still run perfectly well on devices running Android 4.0 or above), hence you will be limited to whatever 'system' apps were built in to the OS, and won't be able to download any more. Although I’m no expert on Apple products, I’m sure the iOS system and its supporting  Apple Store will have a similar planned obsolescence policy enforced by its Apple Store offering.

You can, of course, 'go your own way' with older Android devices  (I’ve provided a link to my website where you can download instructions as to how to do this). Google 'don’t recommend' using apps from ‘other sources’ and actually build in a block on installing apps from anywhere other than Play Store in all new installations. If the user is adventurous enough to discover how to remove the block, Google also try to discourage their attempts further via stern warning messages.

Another more recent example of a unilateral manufacturer rendering one of its products 'obsolete' is Amazon's ever-popular range of Kindle e-reader devices. Amazon withdrew support to a large number of their older Kindle models in August 2022. This means you can no longer access their bookstore or the cloud direct via wifi on these devices, since they can no longer be registered with Amazon. The Kindles themselves work fine as e-readers, and you can still side-load books (this has always been possible, but is not encouraged by Amazon). You can even access any books you might have stored in the Amazon 'cloud' via your pc and then add them to your Kindle via a USB connection quite easily in the same way. This withdrawal of wifi access to the cloud has thrown up problems for eBay sellers in particular, since although the devices are fully functional in themselves, they now lack access to Amazon*. 

(*As an aside, I have to admit I find it difficult to understand why Amazon would risk doing this at all. The Kindle devices were brought out in the late noughties primarily to sell Amazon eBooks and provide a 'captive' buyer market using their devices. The readers themselves were essentially 'loss leaders' in that Amazon made little or no profit from their sale, but they did prove successful in boosting e-book marketing. Withdrawal of support last summer can only have been harmful from a business point of view. 

An Amazon user purchasing such a device will now be unable to access their existing cloud book collection and will only be able to access it via a pc. They will also be prevented from buying more of the very books that the Kindle was designed to sell them ! The fact that Amazon are very likely to pull the same trick again with more recent models will not have escaped the notice of already aggrieved users. 

How likely is it therefore that a disgruntled Kindle owner will be prepared to trust Amazon enough to 'invest' in a newer Kindle and go on buying books ? It's far more likely that they will abandon Amazon for any further book purchases and possibly even for any other items they might have been planning to purchase from Amazon as well. Amazon seem to have managed to 'shoot themselves in the foot' not just once but twice here. They obviously believe they have an unlimited numbers of 'legs to stand on'. So much for their famed 'forward thinking' marketing strategy...)

Neither are the other tech retailers blameless in this. 

A good example of another 'faux pas' that surfaced in 2019 was Tesco’s abandonment of support for their flagship HUDL 7" and 8.3" Android tablets. These well-built and reliable devices were released onto the market with a great flourish between 2013 and 2015 in order to promote online ordering through Tesco apps. By 2015 online ordering generally had become commonplace, and Tesco lost interest in the tablets as a promotional device and withdrew them from sale, but not before they had acquired a dedicated following. 

The key mistake Tesco made was that they instructed their 3rd party manufacturer to build-in a mandatory visit to their servers during the setup procedure for a new tablet. This was designed to ensure users registered for online ordering and downloaded their own proprietary apps. This IT blunder turned out to be their undoing from a PR point of view. When they first tried to withdraw server support ‘on the quiet’ in 2019, there was an outcry from the HUDL’s followers, who found they couldn’t reinstate their tablets after factory resets. After a deluge of emails to the CEO, culminating in several adverse mentions in the national press, Tesco were forced to reinstate their server support. 

Seemingly unable to learn from their past experience, Tesco then withdrew support again in 2020, this time permanently, on the instructions of a new CEO. When challenged as to why they had felt the need to do this, their excuse was that Google "...no longer offer support to the Android 4.2.2 version the tablets were shipped with. They have thus reached the end of their useful lives...". 

Further investigation by dedicated HUDL enthusiasts showed that the lack of version support was actually an ill-disguised smoke screen, since the server connection was still there and all that was wrong was that its certificate had expired, and Tesco hadn't bothered to renew it.  An excellent example of an international retailer ‘hiding behind’ the planned obsolescence policy of a Big Tech concern, without any regard for the environmental consequences of their decision.

Two questions arise from all this:

1)       Is a policy of planned obsolescence justifiable ?

2)       If not, what can we as consumers do about it ?

The answer to question 1) in this day and age is a resounding NO….

At a time when we are striving as a nation to fulfill the environmental objectives encapsulated in the ‘Net Zero by 2050’ concept, which is now actually enshrined in UK Law, planned obsolescence cannot possibly be justified. This is because the e-waste it generates, and the additional CO2 emissions the manufacture of new replacement products produces, go directly against our stated objectives to reduce non-replaceable resource consumption and greenhouse gas production. 

An additional factor in 2023 is the current cost-of-living crisis, which is now effectively forcing hard-pressed UK households avoid all unnecessary expenditure and thus focus on recycling and maintaining older products in preference to buying new. Deliberately rendering older devices that they still rely on obsolete  by withdrawing essential support merely adds to their misery, and in the current climate is downright reprehensible.

Question 2) is a little more difficult to address. 'Big Tech' and the larger international retail chains have clearly become over-powerful in recent years, and have also become adept at 'hiding' from the legal and tax systems of individual nations by using their international status and large balance sheets to move physical operations to different territories when needed.

When challenged on waste, their stock response is normally  ‘..we need to innovate continually in order to keep up with demand and ensure our products are up to date..’. 

This is a lame excuse at best. If products were designed to last and incorporated replaceable modules and easily upgradable software and firmware, it would be perfectly possible to generate new functionality without junking the lot and starting again each time.

Much has also been made of the security and perceived susceptibility of earlier OS versions to hackers as a means of encouraging upgrades. For a home use tablet, used mainly for offline tasks, any risk would be negligible. For more extensive online use, provided care was taken as to obvious vulnerabilities (e.g. storing critical passwords, bank account details, etc.), the risk should also be minimal. For Android systems, many Anti-virus apps are still available for earlier versions, and these can also be use to minimise risk.

Where there’s a will there’s a way, as the saying goes…the will, of course, is definitely not there in the minds of manufacturers, platform providers or retailers at present, and this 'culture' needs to change.

As consumers, we do of course have the ultimate weapon – that of boycotting products we don’t approve of. The problem with this, though, is that it can only be an effective remedy if large numbers of consumers use it simultaneously. That said, the cost of living crisis is arguably presenting us with the best opportunity we’ve had in recent times to exert our influence.

Why is this ? Essentially it’s because the economic downturn, now widely anticipated to last at least another year, will rein back spending on new items and put manufacturers and retailers alike under pressure to maximise sales at a difficult time. Consumers will therefore have the upper hand in a buyers’ market, and will be better able to dictate their requirements, and more importantly, veto items that don’t conform to ‘good environmental practice’. 

If, for example, we all insisted that any new electronic product must remain supported and fully usable for at least the first ten years of its life, then things would have to change. 

Manufacturers, Big Tech and retailers alike would of course be reluctant converts at best, and backup legislation might be required to focus their collective  minds, but I suspect that a concerted campaign by consumers and their ‘champions’ would probably be sufficient to ‘turn the tide’ initially. Indeed there are already rumblings in the press and on social media that indicate a marked dissatisfaction with the status quo.

How do we get the message across more forcefully ?

Social media is the obvious starting point. Eliciting the help of interested influencers and consumer champions has a habit nowadays of creating a stir, and once this happens, officialdom often starts to take notice. The PR departments of Big Tech firms are acutely sensitive to this and will quickly cotton on to the fact that they have a problem with public perception of their ‘normal’ activities and policies, which may then give them pause for thought.

Another possibility is through legal action. When a consumer buys a tablet or phone, they acquire certain rights concerning the item’s functionality. Even after the statutory guarantee period has expired, if a manufacturer or tech concern forces an upgrade to essential software or firmware such that the item ceases to function properly, they may well be knowingly and willfully infringing consumer rights. Although I’m no expert on UK or International Consumer Law, I suspect there may potentially be a case to answer here – one for the consumer lawyer specialists to have a look at, perhaps ?

I would encourage anyone who feels the same way as I do about planned obsolescence to help start the conversation. Please share this blog with others in your social circle if you agree that things need to change.

As a consumer, you can also help the process by being more discriminating when you make your next electronic purchase, and ensure you check with the retailer on its likely ‘useful lifetime’. If the retailer quotes less than 10 years – don’t buy it - and make sure you tell them why….

Viv

Version Date: 7.4.23