badgolferman wrote:

> Samsung has rejected seamless updates. Does Apple use this method? I know
> it downloads updates in the background while I continue to use the phone
> but I don�t know if that's the same thing.
> <https://www.androidpolice.com/samsung-galaxy-s23-seamless-updates/>

Alan Browne opined:

> As to Android seamless updates, they are not actually seamless. They
> strive to minimize the downtime while preserving the current loaded
> (former) OS while the future load (new) OS is being installed. If
> something goes boink with the new load, the current OS can continue or
> be re-booted into (some assumption here).

Hi badgolferman,

What I am about to convey is an erudite _adult_ take on the penalty we all
pay for Apple's Draconian decision to build & release iOS as a Paleolithic
monolith which can _never_ be updated seamlessly as a direct result.

Since I don't own a pixel, I don't have any direct experience with A/B
updates myself, but I have plenty of experience with seamless OS updates.

To badgolferman, you have to understand Android isn't like iOS (which you
know in general, but you might not know in the specifics of OS updates).

Android (like all other operating systems _other_ than iOS of course), is
updated in asynchronous _layers_ (some of which are updated seamlessly).

By way of huge contrast, only iOS is completely different in its update
mechanism, which is best described as a primitive Draconian monolith.

I mean that, even as nospam will scream bloody murder that any one
individual device doesn't get the entire release if it doesn't need it, but
that's no different than saying any one iOS user doesn't get the complete
enema because it's Apple who prepares that monolithic release, not nospam.

You may note my cynicism in my portrayal of iOS as not only Paleolithic but
also as an enema, where the iKooks don't have the mental capacity to
understand all the inherent horrific drawbacks of a monolithic release.

Not only dies everything die sooner with iOS as a result of that monolith,
but iOS has the most zero-day exploits as a result of Apple's poorly
designed release mechanism.

Worse, as a direct result of that monolith, we poor Apple owners are
subjected to _multiple_ unnecessary enemas time after time after time.

All these unnecessary iOS enemas are due to the iOS monolith requiring the
entire operating system to be updated for _every_ bug that Apple is told
about from researchers (half of which are exploited in the wild).

Note the significance of what I am trying to explain to you, badgolferman.

Because half of these zero-day bugs are _already_ exploited in the wild by
the time Apple finds out about them, Apple must scramble to release the
_entire_ enema yet again (and again) (and again) and again and again.

BECAUSE of the monolith, badgolferman, you are subjected to numerous
unnecessary Apple iOS enemas, each of which is a significant event.

By way of stark contrast, Android isn't administered as a monolith.
Most of Android is updated seamlessly under the covers, forever.

As just one example, if Apple is told about an exploited hole in Safari
(which has had plenty), then Apple has to create an entire new iOS monolith
but, by way of contrast, if any other operating system other than the
primitive iOS monolith has a bug in, oh, say, Chrome, they do not.

They just seamlessly update Chrome in all operating systems not iOS.
And that, for Android, happens seamlessly in the background, does it not?