Google Could Have Updated the Pixel 3 To Android 13. It Just Didn't Want To. (androidpolice.com) 170
AndroidPolice reports: Google has confirmed to us that the Pixel 3 series has received its last update, marking the end of a three-year promise. But revisiting the 2018-era flagship, I still can't help but be disappointed that Google didn't try harder to keep it supported longer. Google may have met its marketing requirements, but as I've said before, it's hypocritical for a company committed to sustainability and customer security to leave old smartphones behind so quickly. Revisiting it for the last few days, the Pixel 3 is still a perfectly good phone that could have years of life left in it. And, according to everyone I've spoken to, there aren't any good technical reasons for it being left behind. Google just doesn't care.
Haha (Score:3, Funny)
Laughs in iPhone 6S that’s running the latest iOS.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, it is bit of pain, but it runs.
My reserve phone is a 6s+ and things seem.. sluggish.
I think it is because the 6s+ low memory. As they do not seem to be related to actual Cpu speed or similar.
Re:Haha (Score:5, Interesting)
Not laughing with older Mac Pro that isn't running the latest OS, because Apple refuses to support my 64GB memory, 4 TB of SSD drives, 4K monitor, 12 core, 24-thread Mac Pro.
I'm sure it's because they can't afford to. /s
It certainly isn't because the machine isn't capable of it.
Re: (Score:3)
I almost bought a Pixel (Score:5, Funny)
But I didn't want to.
Re: (Score:2)
good reasons... (Score:4, Insightful)
"there aren't any good technical reasons for it being left behind."
There's a good reason, it's just not a good technical reason.
The reason is, all those people with perfectly-good old phones won't be buying new phones. Where's the profit in giving people the option to not buy new stuff?
Re: (Score:3)
Data gobbling? Google shouldn't worry about hardware, it's a data gobbling company. They should allow us to update our older Pixel phones so that they can gobble more data from them. Unless their specs are not fancy enough to allow for, new, upgraded data gobbling of course!
Re:good reasons... (Score:5, Insightful)
You buy into planned obsolescence when you purchase a phone with a non-replaceable battery. Lithium ion batteries are a wear component that degrades with use and exposure to environmental extremes; building it into the product means that even if the manufacturer kept up software support, you'd still have to buy a new phone in 3-5 years because somewhere in that timeframe your battery life is going to take a nosedive.
The reason that removeable batteries only persist at the lower tiers of the market is that those phones are aimed at purchasers looking for the best economic deal -- e.g. companies providing phones to employees. When you buy a flagship phone you're not paying $1000 for practicality.
Re: (Score:2)
The thing is currently batteries can be swapped and are being swapped. Even the "non replaceable" ones.
Of course manufacturers want to stop that so look for such soon to be locked to the specific phone like newest iPhone screens.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, but it's a *repair* that's going to cost you at least $100 in labor, after which your phone is not guaranteed to be quite the same (e.g. you may no longer have the rated water ingress resistance). Some manufacturers will replace a battery for a fee -- Apple's fee is a very reasonable, but you have to be ready to be without your phone for up to five business days.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, though with older phones the labor seems lower. I guess newer phones are.. designed to be harder to repair.
Re: (Score:2)
The last time I needed to replace the battery in a phone with a replaceable battery (phone was about two years old) I could purchase replacements only from shady sellers on eBay and Amazon whose batteries were only marginally better than the one I was replacing.
Re: (Score:2)
Li-ion batteries degrade just sitting on a shelf unused. The reality is that if a manufacturer stopped making the battery you need 5 years ago, even the new-in-box replacements you can find will be compromised.
Re: (Score:2)
But my S8 Active phone's battery still seems pretty good. I'm not sure how old my phone is, but the model was released 5 years ago.
Re: (Score:2)
I use an app to measure charging and it reports my year-and-a-half Xiaomi phone still has around 90% of its original capacity. If it keeps an usable capacity for 4 or 5 years I'll be very happy
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yep that's generally regarded as true. I don't know to what degree but it's the reason electric cars have a buffer you can't use at all and even then will usually try to charge to 90% of the remaining capacity.
Unfortunately with phones it used to be a problem. I got an app to watch the charge level too, but it can't stop the charging by itself, it's just an alarm. So if I usually plug it in overnight, well it's going to be sitting at 100% for like 8 hours. Same with discharging, if I'm outside when it gets
Re: (Score:2)
Chinese knockoffs, as you say, are usually terrible. But there're a few (at least I found one) companies that make good quality spare batteries. As good as new original ones. In case you're interested one of them is N
Re: (Score:2)
Do they advertise the device as having a three year service life? No? Then "you are buying into planned obsolescence" is not an excuse.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:good reasons... (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem is in the current economic climate most people will be happy to continue using their existing perfectly good phone rather than parting with several hundred dollars buying a new one, even if it no longer is getting updates. Unless they drop it and break a screen they will just stick with what they have. I would guess that most probably won't even notice that they haven't got a monthly security update.
Re: (Score:3)
Indeed. and that causes real security problems.
Re: (Score:2)
"This is the FP you were looking for."
But almost lost deep in the discussion, though at least it got the favorable moderation it deserved. (As of this writing.)
Too bad the only criterion that matters for "success" these days is money and lots of it. Not acceptable to accept a small but honest profit.
Of course the google had to become EVIL. That's what the rules say now, as written by the mostly cheaply bribed politicians working for the best bribers and lobbyists. But it still makes me sad.
Also less free. I
Re: (Score:2)
I honestly don't think this is it so much as they don't want to keep supporting the phones. It's not that they make a huge margin on new phones, it's that every official phone that's in their lineup in some way constrains the decisions that they can make with regards to the OS and the experience.
You can actually see this most clearly with Apple and it's baffling support of the Series 3 Apple Watch. Developers hate it. It's under-powered, the display can't show colour complications (if I'm remembering right)
Re: (Score:2)
It's ridiculous perfectly good phone hardware is left behind just for economic reasons. Current smartphon
Re: (Score:2)
My PC is 10 years old (Ivy Bridge). A guy I know has Windows 11 running on a 17 year old Pentium D [imgur.com]. It's slow obviously but you've got the latest OS and security.
So yeah it's silly that you can't get more than 3 years from Google. I think it mostly has to do with the monolithic and locked down nature of the software which needs to be tailored to whatever the vendors did with the hardware. Plus Qualcomm is probably being an asshole about drivers as always.
Re: good reasons... (Score:2)
Drivers aren't a reason you can't update an Android device any more. Google fixed that several versions ago.
Re: (Score:3)
When they asked Google to explain why they did this a press flack gave this non-answer:
In response to an email asking Google why it stopped supporting the Pixel 3, a Googles spokesperson said, "We find that three years of security and OS updates still provides users with a great experience for their device."
If you think this is an actual answer to the question asked, you have been reading too much corporate marketing hype. It entirely avoids the question as to why it stopped supporting it and substituted a claim that "we think everyone should be happy with three years of support".
Re: (Score:2)
Yup, and that's why pretty much any Android device is massively overpriced. You'll get three years of running the current OS, and possibly some security updates after that, versus Apple out there supporting devices with new OS versions for 6+ years. Which is the better deal if you're buying a $1,000+ flagship phone?
Re: (Score:2)
Cry me a river (Score:4, Informative)
So...by the writer's own admission, Google fulfilled its promised number of Android updates for the Pixel 3, and they're upset that Google didn't go the extra mile and give them an additional one.
They provided what they sold you. Stay on version 11 like the majority of Android phone owners; there are more people on Android 9 than Android 12 so you've got plenty of company. Besides, Android 12 isn't exactly filled with compelling features.
There are already third party Android 12 ROMs for the Pixel 3 on XDA; go flash one of them, or tough it out for another month for a few more choices to come on the scene that might be more to your liking or from a more trusted source....or go compile your own Android build; there are Youtube tutorials demonstrating how to compile from source if you are so terrified of custom ROMs.
Go buy a Pixel 6 with its three years of updates.
Do literally anything other than write an article indicating that a company didn't do more than they promised to do. You didn't pay them more than the asking price for the phone, so everyone got what was promised.
Re:Cry me a river (Score:5, Insightful)
I think it is not really about the "promised to do" it is more on.. why?
As in:
Why do they support their phones such a short time when they control both software and harware?
Why does Google not attempt to reduce e-waste?
Why do they offer so much shorter support times than Apple?
I mean I understand why companies like Samsung want to support the minimum time: they make almost all their money from the handset sale and thus they want to sell you a handset as often as possible.
But Google makes most of their money from the advertising, so they really should not worry if you run an older handset.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, Samsung has been providing 2-3 major Android updates for their phones. That is.. ok.. I guess. The new flagships are much better though with promised 5 year? updates or some such. But that does not extend to their middle tier or low tier phones.
Re: (Score:2)
His point was that he would understand why Samsung would have a poor support lifecycle, based on the business model. That Google would seemingly be more interested in a consistent platform for their advertising. I disagree with this, as I don't think their telemetry/advertising requires consistent android, but I would think they would be eager to have a consistent platform for Android apps through the play store, while Samsung would be more purely about pushing new sales.
That said, Samsung looks to be leav
Re: (Score:2)
Well, he didn't say Samsung did have a poor support lifecycle, he said he could see a reason why it would.
However, in terms of keeping up with major Android version, the S9 didn't get Android 11, despite it coming out only 2 years after the phone release. The S10 got Android 12, but it's only three years old, so they haven't demonstrated keeping up with major version updates for 5 years. They may be getting security/bugfix updates, but they haven't doing better than Google yet at major updates.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Its valid in this point as its a non story, the author is attacking a company for providing services as agreed
Re: (Score:2)
>A way for Google to begin rectifying this bad public image would be to offer support beyond what they had promised for their physical products,
How would support of hardware translate into reputation for support of API's and software? I just don't see the businesses being that closely aligned that the culture of the phone business would affect the cultures of their software houses.
>Dispelling the idea that Google does not care about anything for the long term would help them more as a business than t
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, I see. Can't see them doing it but it would seem to be a good strategy. Thanks for this info.
Marketing, Plus Qualcomm? (Score:3)
Obviously, Google (like the rest) wants you to buy a new phone frequently. At a much higher price each time. Qualcomm likewise, since they need to sell more chips. The fact that they're generating vast quantities of e-waste is simply not an issue (for them). Of course, the old phone could probably run many future versions of Android, but it won't. The real problem is lack of security updates, which *could* continue even without paying the Qualcomm tax.
Since most of the computers in the world are now powered by Google (Android), Google has set the standard for o/s support. Microsoft, unfortunately, has jumped on the bandwagon. That is going to hurt more than having to buy a new phone every 3 (or 4 or 5, for a few recent flagships) years.
Re: (Score:2)
Except that in the case of Google specifically, they make so much more money from the advertisements and play store, that the actual hand set price is not a big part.
The other manufacturers like Samsung and the Chinese ones, definitely they want to sell you a new phone as often as possible.
Muh Apple... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Muh Apple... (Score:2)
Fairphone (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Not at all true. Apple has generally made iOS updates available for phones going back at least 5 years. The latest release, iOS 15, is compatible with the iPhone 6S [google.com], which was first released in 2015. This is not new behavior from Apple; they've supported their phones much longer than the rest of the industry.
For comparison, Fairphone 3 has only been out since 2019. The latest device, Fairphone 4 from 2021, they've only
Re: (Score:2)
If you look at Apple support it has not always been as long, basically they have increased the support period over time.
They started with only a few years(I think only about 2 years? early on) and have now increased to an astonishing 7 years.
That is a great progress, but it is something that has been a process for them, not a thing at start.
So a 4 years from the first Fairphone is a good start as long as they keep on increasing it.
Re: (Score:2)
Fairphone 3 doesn't even have Android 11. It is newer than the Pixel 3 by a *lot*, and is 2 Android revisions behind it. Fairphone is not keeping their devices up to date.
Re: (Score:2)
iPhone 6 was supported only until ios 12, we are at ios 15 now. But yes, that one is from late 2015.. (so just a nitpick basically, but people have been confused between the two)
Re: (Score:2)
6s is the one from 2015, and it supports ios 15. So he left of the s, but his point does stand that there isn't an Android example to point to for bothering to keep older devices up to date.
I hate iPhones, but begrudgingly considering one (Score:5, Informative)
1. I've gotten tired of dealing with ROM tinkering: having to find the right ROM, making sure everything works as well as stock, no reception or battery life issues, etc.
2. I've started using Google Pay, which adds another layer of problems any time I want to change ROMs, as well as raising the question of security and trust of the ROM itself since I'm entering in a bunch of my credit cards.
This has pushed me to the point of saying "fuck it, I just want a device that's seamlessly kept up to date by the manufacturer". 3 years from product release still isn't enough. 5 years is the minimum acceptable length of support.
At present this reduces available options to the Pixel 6, Samsung's 2021/2022 devices (not sure if all or just flagships), and iPhones. Factor in wanting a smaller device, and I begrudgingly realized... I have to consider an iPhone. I hate it.
Re:I hate iPhones, but begrudgingly considering on (Score:4, Insightful)
Honestly, why. I would understand if you use your phone for corporate secrets, but the reality is 99.9% of any mobile malware is targeted at getting users to install some app from some dodgy store. 99.9% of Android 13's features are pointlessly uncompelling (to the point where after receiving the update recently I honestly actually don't see what's changed in the OS and really I don't care enough to go and research it).
For all the huff and puff about security on mobile platforms, if you stick to play store and well known pieces of software your risk profile is insanely small. There's very little reason not to continue to use an out of date phone at present.
Re: (Score:3)
Except that there are always the "no click" and similar attacks that happen occasionally. Thus visiting a page might get you in trouble if you do not have newest security(and even then, but in such situations at least not an old such attack)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, I've heard about them in theory, and yet never actually heard of any notable target getting affected. And aside from one text message based no-click attack that I never actually heard of hitting anyone in the west, basically all this malware still does require the user to do something (often go to a website).
It's a bit like Linux malware, it exists, but the risk profile is so incredibly low that I'm willing to be 99% of Linux users here on Slashdot don't have any antivirus package installed.
If you use
Re: (Score:3)
the reality is 99.9% of any mobile malware is targeted at getting users to install some app from some dodgy store
My concern is about the ROM itself being compromised. People who install user-created ROMs are putting a whole lot of trust in the ROM developers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: I hate iPhones, but begrudgingly considering o (Score:4, Interesting)
The problem is trust.
I agree with everything you say and I actually had an iPhone in the shopping basket. Then I stumbled across GrapheneOS, ehich is made exclusively for the Pixel. But it offers privacy and security on a level I thought I'd never see from phone.
I still have the Pixel 4a I bought 1.5 years ago, and I dread next year when Google will probably take it offline (GrapheneOS supports phones only as long as Google does). $300-ish every 3 years sounded like an acceptable deal, but Google hasn't released any "a" versions of its latest 5 and 6 series, so I'm wondering if I'm stuck with having to buy a flagship every 3 years if I truly want security and privacy. That'd suck. I think paying more than $300 for a phone is fundamentally wrong (yeah, I know, wrong millenium...), so this would be particularly painful.
I could revive the iPhone idea when 4a support runs out - if it's going to be a flagship, it better last for 6-7 yesrs, right? But after GrapheneOS I'm afraid I'm spoiled for life.
Re: I hate iPhones, but begrudgingly considering (Score:2)
Apparently 6a will be released soon. So I'm set for another 3 years, I think...?
Re:I hate iPhones, but begrudgingly considering on (Score:5, Insightful)
3 years from product release still isn't enough. 5 years is the minimum acceptable length of support.
I disagree. Support should basically be indefinite. Good companies do this. Just as an example: Our home NAS is a QNAP we bought in 2009 or 2010. It still gets updates. QNAP may not have managed to sell me a new NAS in the past 12-13 years, but when I need a new one, I know what brand it will be. This is how you generate customer loyalty. Also free publicity from happy customers ;-)
Seriously: what modern electronic device should only last five years? My gaming computer is older than that, and updates are no issue at all.
Re: I hate iPhones, but begrudgingly considering o (Score:2)
This is kinda sad, actually (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If it didn't fund everything else. (Score:2)
Alphabet would have killed off its Internet Search business years ago.
I also think Alphabet would had killed off Android too except for the amount of money that brings in.
Alphabet has little stomach for refining and maintaining technologies. They just like the exciting big release of the new innovative product, but have little stomach on actually allowing the product to grow and expand.
Re: (Score:2)
No.
I am trying to claim that A company should provide customers with a long term support of their products/services.
Re: (Score:2)
His point is that Google doesn't want to maintain legacy stuff.
Yes, I am looking to change brands because of this (Score:2)
As an iPhone user, I want to.... (Score:2)
I want to say something smart-ass, but let's be honest here. Both Android and iOS are pretty darn good/solid smartphone OS's. That's why they're essentially the ONLY two real choices left in the marketplace, when all the other attempts to make one died off.
My question is, is there something in Android 13 that might not perform optimally with the Pixel 3's hardware? In Apple's case, that's really what drives the end of OS support for their phones, computers or tablets, more than just an arbitrary time-line
Uncompelling (Score:3)
What's the compelling need for an upgrade to the latest shiny OS? Honestly I've stopped caring about Android OS updates after version 5. That was about the last time a compelling must have feature was introduced, and even back then it was more an improvement in responsiveness rather than a feature per se.
I get also the desire to have a secure device, but the reality is ... that's hardly compelling either. Nearly all Android related risks come from installing 3rd party software. Few attacks are actually carried out on the system and those which are aren't spread very wildly. Risk is a measure of likelihood and consequence. The likelihood of suffering due to an outdated mobile OS is incredibly low in the west, and generally our consequences are quite low as well.
Corporate targets are more of a concern, as is anyone handling classified information ... on their phone. But by-n-large I see no compelling reason to give a shit about Google's poor upgrade policies.
Every time a beloved Android device loses support (Score:2)
...we get whinging articles like this. Google stated publicly at the time the devices was unveiled that they only promised new Android versions for three years. You got what you paid (or overpaid) for. Apple customers with six-plus year old iPhones are still getting feature upgrades and will likely receive security updates for a couple years after they no longer run the current iOS.
Anyone who pays anywhere close to a grand (or more) for a flagship Android phone with a useful lifespan of three years or less
Maybe they could charge for security updates (Score:2)
I have a Nexus 6 last updated 10/2017 to 7.1.1. The phone just works.
I would pay $50/year to get quarterly updates. Maybe lots of people would.
Not even a good version 12 (Score:2)
For the good of civilization ... (Score:2)
Buyers know what they signed up for. (Score:2)
Vote with your wallet in the first place because Google already got the money after which you mean nothing to them.
Expecting Google not to be evil is like expecting water not to be wet. If waste reduction mattered IRL phone makers would be required to support their device OS including upgrades for a decade.
It's easily affordable. Canonical supports all its PC versions for less than 200 million dollars a year which covers a wider device variety than the walled phone gardens.
Re:Not wanting to test (Score:5, Insightful)
Boo hoo.
Google knows their own phones.
Are they responsible? Look at the long littered ditch of projects Google has abandoned. Only random mercy updated the phone.
Don't expect anything more and you'll be happy.
Re: (Score:3)
Indeed. The real strange thing is that they have not totally abandoned the pixel phone lineup like so many other products they have.
Re: (Score:2)
At this point, it would make Google look flatly terrible to walk away from the phone.
Imagine:
Oh look! The world's largest purveyor of smartphone host operating systems walks away from their TinkerToy phone! Detaching from reality is OK, but detaching from profits is not.
Theirs is emblematic meritocracy. There is no soul. There never was, only the ruse of idealistic motives, if years ago.
Re: (Score:2)
They could easily say "We do not want to compete with our partners, we wanted to accelerate the adoption of cutting edge things in the Android ecosystem and now that our partners have embraced such... " or something similar.
Re: (Score:2)
And the update would be available then FIRST on their own reference hardware, wouldn't it?
But nope. Yawn.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, it is kind of funny how the new Samsung ultra has some google app features not even available to Pixel phones..
Re: (Score:2)
And Samsung even promises 4 years of Android updates. What a joke.
Re: (Score:2)
And in fact, they have gone back and forth a few times on whether they do their own devices or not. Nexus and Motorola for example.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. The real strange thing is that they have not totally abandoned the pixel phone lineup like so many other products they have.
You really think Google would walk away from Android?
As long as Google is developing Android, Google needs a platform to develop it on. It doesn't really work to use other companies' devices to do it, and it obviously doesn't work to use only emulators. So something like Nexus or Pixel is a hard requirement.
Re: (Score:2)
But that ought to be a differentiating advantage for a "genuine" google phone that comes from the makers of Android - 'we provide Apple-like OS and hardware integration and support!' (I'm not saying they do, or claim to - but they could and should.)
Re:Not wanting to test (Score:4, Informative)
Seriously now, you don't know what "Pixel" is?! Or if you do know (I mean seriously who on ./ wouldn't?) I get it, RTFA is way too much but it's in the title!
It's THE reference implementation, their own device, there should be no discussion whatsoever about "relatively less standardization", this is the device that defines the standard!
It's also really pathetic in the grand' scheme of things, Samsung about everyone used to complain for lack of updates is still pushing updates for S9 and that's a little 1.5 years older than the Pixel 3s. And that's coming from way before the current policy to support them 4-5 years! Heck, LineageOS is still pushing weekly or even nightly updates for probably most Pixels and it's community supported.
Re: (Score:2)
Android handsets are tricky.
For one, there's relatively less standardization.
Unfortunately for your argument, this isn't any random hardware--it's theirs and was a flagship device a couple of years ago. It's not like they're dealing with a god-knows-what handset running who-knows-what hardware in some third world country.
I can't stand Apple's walled garden, but my corporate devices live in it now because they're the only smart phone vendor that can be "trusted" (scare quotes intentional--they really can't be trusted, but their current track record is acceptable) to actually support
Re: (Score:2)
It still stands that they haven't done standardization, even within their flagship line.
In x86 land, for example, you have a lot of standards and risk is mitigated as long as you test the worst levels of the standards you want to support.
In Android phones, generation to generation they can do all sorts of stuff without being mindful of how that pertains to the prior generation.
Re: Not wanting to test (Score:4, Interesting)
I would actually totally disagree with you..
I am an iPhone user, but at times I really, really, hope that Apple would make something like the Samsung foldables of the 10x zoom lens from the ultra.
I am happy with the camera on my iPhone 12 max mostly, but at times when trying to take a photo of something like an animal, they tend to be fairly far away and the 2.5 zoom is just not enough and with digital zoom and 12mb sensor they result is usually disappointing..
My friends Samsung ultra, with it's 10x optical zoom, there is a huge difference..
And the build quality and Samsung offering 5 year upgrades on flagships.. I have been tempted to upgrade except for a few things I would miss and all the bloatware you cannot remove on the Samsung phone.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Yes, iPhone software is painful in many ways.
Back in the early days when I switched from a "dumb phone" to android, I had to Google a total of 2 things to find out how to do stuff.
When I switched to iPhone I had to google 6 things in the first 6 months alone and few more since.
iPhone software is just not very intuitive and some basic functionality is.. missing from the gui.
Re: (Score:2)
Like what?
Sounds like you were used to the confusing way of doing things in Android and could not unlearn what you had learned when you switched to the iPhone.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah I’m sure regression testing will definitely put a dent in googles bottom line.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually that seems like about 50% mark of First posts. There are about 25% totally spam,. about 50% of these things and about 25% actually interesting or good ones.
Re: (Score:2)
What percentage are Funny and how do you regard them within your three cases?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually they did some research in the context of product reviews. Fuzzy after some years, but I think they created the discussions so they could control how they started. If they started the discussions with positive comments, then the average reviews went one way, but they concluded the pattern wasn't significant. Essentially random oscillations around an average related to the actual quality of the product. In contrast, if they started the discussions with negative comments, the average reviews were sign
Re: Shut up and keep using the phone (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I bought a Pine Phone. It runs Android on its modem chipset and that thing likes to phone home. The Pine Phone is basically a tablet that talks to a Android based modem. The core Android thing has some nice AT+ commands to get it to do some interesting things. The odd thing is that it appears to be able to get some info via the local cell towers without any sim so the thing seems to be able phone home without a sim. At least there are settings so I can tell it to use a different AGPS server and things l