Every smartphone has an expiration date, whether it’s due to software limitations or hardware wear and tear. While manufacturers like Google and Samsung now promise seven years of software updates, the question is: do we really need that much?
After all, the average smartphone lifespan in the U.S. is only about 2.5 to 2.7 years. Most people replace their phones long before the software runs out. So, does it make sense for Android makers to follow Apple’s lead with longer support cycles? Let’s break it down.
Smartphone Hardware Doesn’t Last Forever
Even if the software stays current, your phone’s hardware still ages. Screens get scratched, corners dent, buttons wear out, and, most importantly, batteries degrade. For many users, battery life is the first sign that a phone is nearing its end.
Depending on usage and charging habits, most smartphone batteries last 2–3 years before needing a replacement. Some might stretch that longer with good care. But eventually, charging slows down, and battery drain becomes unbearable.
Sure, you can replace the battery—but most people don’t. Instead, they upgrade. This brings us back to the original point: if the hardware won’t last seven years, why should the software?
Seven Years of Updates: Who Actually Benefits?
On paper, long-term update support sounds great. But the reality is more nuanced. Only two types of users truly benefit from it:
- Those who don’t upgrade often and want to hold onto their phones for as long as possible.
- People buying phones a generation or two behind. A phone released in 2023 might still be receiving updates when someone buys it secondhand in 2025.
For these users, extended support is helpful. It ensures their phone stays secure and usable longer. But again, these are exceptions, not the norm. Most people switch phones every couple of years, well before the update promise is even halfway fulfilled. So why the hype?
Android Phones Aren’t Built Like iPhones
It’s no secret that iPhones age better than most Android phones. Apple controls both hardware and software. It has tight quality standards and an extensive repair network with over 500 stores worldwide.
If your iPhone battery dies, Apple makes it relatively cheap and easy to replace. Plus, Apple is known for offering at least five years of software support, and sometimes even longer. So the experience feels seamless.
Android, on the other hand, is a fragmented ecosystem. You’ve got dozens of manufacturers using different parts and designs. And while Samsung and Google are improving, they still can’t match Apple’s longevity or repair infrastructure.
What’s more, Android is more open, which is both a blessing and a curse. You can sideload apps, flash custom ROMs, and tweak your phone to your heart’s content. But this freedom can come at the cost of performance, security, and consistency.
So even if an Android phone could get seven years of updates, it’s not always practical. The hardware might not be able to keep up with new features, especially as AI and machine learning tools become more demanding.
A Better Middle Ground: Four Years
Rather than chasing Apple’s tail with a 7-year update policy, Android manufacturers should focus on meaningful support cycles. Four years is the sweet spot. It gives users flexibility without overpromising. It allows for resale value, reduces e-waste, and still aligns with how people use their devices.
Yes, security patches should last longer, especially since they’re lightweight and critical for protection. But major Android version updates don’t need to drag on for nearly a decade.
Most users aren’t worried about getting the latest Android version year after year. What they do care about is stability, speed, and a battery that doesn’t die by noon.
The Upgrade Cycle Is the Real Problem
At the heart of the issue is our obsession with upgrading every year. Tech reviewers hype up small improvements. Manufacturers flood the market with yearly refreshes. And we, the consumers, keep biting.
But let’s be honest: most upgrades aren’t worth it. A slightly better camera or faster processor rarely changes how we use our phones daily.
What if manufacturers focused on bigger, more meaningful upgrades every two years? What if we stopped expecting something new every 12 months? Slowing down the cycle would give us better phones, longer support windows, and less e-waste. That benefits everyone.
What About Security Patches?
One argument in favor of long support is security, and it’s valid. Outdated phones miss out on critical patches that protect against malware, phishing, and exploits.
If you’re a typical user who doesn’t click shady links or install apps from sketchy sources, you’re probably fine for a while, even if your security patch is a few months out of date.
Sure, it’s not ideal to run an unpatched phone for long. But being cautious can buy you time until your next upgrade. According to Faith Leroiux of Android Police, she used a Galaxy S10 for 8 months after it stopped getting updates. Nothing bad happened. All she did to stay safe was to avoid banking apps and be careful with what she downloaded.
That said, security should always be a priority. But that doesn’t mean we need to commit to seven full years of major OS upgrades. Instead, separate security support from Android version updates, and keep patching older phones longer.
Cloud Processing and the Future of Hardware
Another wrinkle in this debate is AI. As AI tools become central to smartphone experiences, they’ll demand more power—more RAM, better chips, faster connectivity. Some of this load will be handled by cloud processing. But that opens up other concerns: costs, subscriptions, and data privacy.
What’s to stop Google or Samsung from bundling cloud-based AI features into a monthly subscription? That would make long-term update support less about user benefit and more about corporate profit.
The Bottom Line
Seven years of software support sounds amazing. However, it’s not as useful as it appears. The hardware can’t always keep up. The average user doesn’t hold onto phones long enough. And most people just want a device that works well, takes good photos, and lasts through the day.
Instead of chasing long support promises, manufacturers should aim for better durability, easier battery replacements, and smarter upgrade cycles. Give us four years of meaningful support, real innovation every couple of years, and we’ll stop replacing our phones so often. That’s the kind of future smartphone users actually need.