Android nonsense ie why you shouldn't by an Android mobile?

Let this be the continuation of my previous post on mobile phones. I have bad-mouthed the limitations in iPhones over the years and I would stand by my words until Apple tries to ramp up to speed where Android is. I didn't mean to sound like an oxymoron but I have to admit buying an Android mobile seems a huge mistake should you wish to intended hold on to the mobile for over two years. That is if you buy the mobile on the date of its release. 

Why? Where does the problem lie? Well, the problem with Android mobiles is their software update policy. None of the Android devices in the market as of this writing provide patch updates and security fixes beyond 24 months. On certain manufacturers offer security updates up to three years from the official release date. 

No matter how much you spend on an Android mobile, the manufacturer ceases its updates and security fixes approximately 24 to 36 months from the date of release; not from the time you own the device. 

Interestingly, Apple provides support for their mobile phones for up to seven years; offering major firmware updates and security fixes. 

The security fixes are essential, given the amount of valuable data hosted on my mobile. This might not be an issue if you're not using the mobile for anything other than communication. I need to make sure to block all the blocked numbers again and port all the important applications. It's not going to be fun. 

A few words on mobile a "porn"

Why are these new mobile phones so expensive? I can't justify spending $2000 on a mobile phone, not even $500, to be honest. I can book an air ticket to Europe for $2000. I need a simple phone to make and receive calls so does texts. Perhaps WhatsApp might be handy to contact those who aren't living in the list of countries to which Telstra offers free overseas calling. I don't need a phone with a better camera, I have a 42-megapixel camera with a bunch of Carl Zeiss lenses. I don't need much processing power nor ram since I own a few laptops. I might need to install a couple of apps that are needed to assist with my travelling habits. I don't need massive storage, I don't care where would be the fingerprint scanner located at. I don't need cordless charging. I need a simple mobile.

I can't put up with iPhones due to their limited functionalities but they seem to be the way considering their support lifecycle. The Android mobile vendors don't offer security updates and patches beyond two years from the official release date. This makes Android mobiles more vulnerable after 24 months since their release. The iPhones, however, receive updates and security fixes almost up to seven years from their release; making them attractive for blokes like me who'd be fine with limited functionalities but a longer support lifecycle. I'm inclined to buy an iPhone for the extended life support on their firmware alone. The alternative is to buy a cheap Android every two years to keep up with the updates and security fixes. Although I love Androids million times over the phones which have that fruit logo, I hate setting up my mobile on a regular basis. Why can't Android phone manufacturer can't make a phone with extended life support for five years at a minimum?