

I also agree that court would unfortunately be the route they would rather take it (with their money and lawyers’ time). Turning off the updates being an option is better than nothing regarding risks, but really sucks that even knowing the risks (possible with updates for anything) isn’t something a average owner/user thinks about (and really shouldn’t be expected to).
The more I hear about all the extra levels of data collecting and issues that get shifted onto the owners like this case. The more I am kind of glad to have an older model that their app/updates and features related to them hasn’t supported for a while. Would be nice to be able to use the infotainment unit with my phone for displaying GPS instead of my phone on a mount that covers the screen (I think Android Auto was an option for the model the year after). I can still do calls and show blue-tooth media, and the backup camera works fine (would be pissed if the cam was tied to updates or plans that aren’t an option anymore).








They don’t care, but also they can point to AOSP being around. So “Android” is still “open”, just making it harder and harder for it to be used without the Google Services (in addition to drivers needed for the crucial hardware bits OEMs use which are their own problems).
Conspiracy theory kind of rant/headspace. I am kind of shocked that the Pixel devices still have easy boot loader unlocking and drivers to install AOSP or Linux based ROMs. Guessing they will lock those down like the OEMs at some point, and make “must have” features for the hardware not work if an “unverified” ROM is installed. Could also see them selling “dev unlocked” versions of the devices that are more expensive, and require the people buying them to get verified for apps at time of purchase (even if the person isn’t planning on actually making apps).