Android 15 Upgrade Report Card: What the…?!

I’m not gonna lie to you: Writing these Android Upgrade Report Cards isn’t always exhilarating.

By and large, these reports tend to reinforce the same trends we see time and time again from the same small group of Android device-makers. Even when those trends are somewhat unpredictable in nature, that, too, often feels like a predictable quality.

This Android upgrade cycle is decidedly different.

With Android 15, officially launched in early September 2024, no one followed their typical upgrade performance patterns. Everything was topsy-turvy. And almost nothing played out in the way we’d expect.

This exact type of underemphasized variability is exactly why I started doing these Android Upgrade Report Cards way back in the platform’s prehistoric ages. From the get-go, we’ve seen some wild disparity in how well different device-makers support their products after you’ve finished paying for ’em — and as an average phone-owner or perhaps even business-wide fleet manager, there’s no real way to know what’s gonna happen six months or a year after you or your employees shell out stacks of dollars for a top-tier device.

[Get level-headed knowledge in your inbox with my Android Intelligence newsletter. Three things to know and try every Friday!]

It’s in part just par for the course with the nature of Android as a platform. The operating system is open source, which means each device-maker can modify it how they want (for better or sometimes for worse). And consequently, that means the responsibility falls on each company’s shoulders to process every new incoming Android version and get it out to its customers.

While we can’t control the level of care and commitment each company puts into that process, we can control our own knowledge about how different device-makers do or don’t prioritize post-sales support. That way, you can at least have the context you need to make an educated decision about which phone is right for you or your organization — not just for the first few weeks that you own it but for the entire two-year, three-year, or maybe even longer period that you’re likely to carry it around.

Now that we’re six months past the launch of Android 15, it’s time to step back and look at who’s making upgrades a priority and who’s treating ’em as an afterthought. Only you can decide how much this info matters to you. (Hint: It oughta matter — a lot!). But whether you find post-sales software support to be a top priority or an irrelevant asterisk, as always, you deserve to be armed with all the data that empowers you to make fully informed future buying decisions.

Want the full nitty-gritty on how these grades were calculated? You can find a detailed breakdown of the formula and every element taken into account at the end of this article.

Google

JR Raphael, IDG

Length of time for upgrade to reach current flagships: 43 days (46/50 points)

Length of time for upgrade to reach previous-gen flagships: 43 days (23/25 points)

Length of time for upgrade to reach two-cycles-back flagships: 43 days (14/15 points)

Communication: Good (7/10 points) 

This almost-always-first section of our Android upgrade analysis is usually the easiest to write — because with extremely rare exception, Google always gets each and every latest Android software update to all of its still-supported Pixel devices more or less instantly after the software’s release.

This year, as you may have guessed, is one of those rare exceptions. Technically, the company did still lead the pack this go-round, but instead of the typical near-instant rollout, Google took a leisurely month and a half to start sending Android 15 to its self-made Pixel products.

Given that it’s Google we’re talking about — the same company that creates Android — this was presumably a deliberate decision and a calculated compromise. Seemingly, the company wanted to get the Android 15 source code out there and available for everyone to work on despite the fact that it wasn’t quite ready to send it out to its Pixel devices at that same point. And so one could argue it serviced the greater good for the overall Android ecosystem while taking a hit on its own record.

Even so, our grading metric is constant here, no matter what circumstances may surround any specific scenario. So in an unusual occurrence, Google itself is coming in with a notably imperfect “A-” ranking for this latest Android rollout.

For all practical purposes, of course, Google’s Android 15 Pixel rollout was when the software first became available for anyone as a regular phone-owner. The fact that the source code came out 43 days earlier doesn’t really mean Pixel owners were waiting, since no one else had a working version of that final software yet, either. But technicalities are technicalities, and rules are rules. So Google’s grade, despite being at the top of the heap, is a respectable but slightly surprising 90%.

That being said, the relative picture is what really matters for anyone who buys Android devices. And, as I remind us all each upgrade cycle, the consistent level of difference in post-sales software support between Google and literally every other Android device-maker out there really is astounding. As you’ll see reinforced in a moment, Google is the only Android device-maker that makes an unwavering commitment to providing timely and reliable software updates — and makes that a formal part of its products’ promise — even with the occasional slightly later-than-expected kickoffs like this one.

Also of note, as per its typical standard, all of Google’s currently eligible Pixel devices — including both models of the regular current-gen Pixel, the newer flagship-tier folding Pixels, and the previous-gen Pixel flagships from one year and two years back — started receiving Android 15 at the same exact time.

(For the purposes of this analysis, by the way, it’s the start of a rollout — to a flagship phone model in the US — that counts, as you can read about in more detail at the bottom of this page.)

It’s a significant point to note that Google and Google alone treats all of its phones as equals — meaning that even if you own a previous-gen device, a two-year-old flagship phone, or even a lower-priced Pixel “a” model (be it current or an older model), you still get major updates like Android 15 at the same time as the current-gen flagship phone owners. That’s a sharp contrast to the way every other device-maker handles its lineup, and it’s very much the way things ought to be.

And while Google’s usual “rolling out in waves” asterisk always applies to a certain degree — with some Pixel owners not receiving the software on that very first day — Android 15 made its way to all supported Pixel devices within a reasonable amount of time and without the need for any extra communication beyond the company’s initial announcement (though the company’s initial announcement of the rollouts starting for Pixel owners “in the coming weeks” — a phrase used by Google so often that it’s become a bit of a punchline among those of us who watch this space closely — could have used a little more specificity, hence the slight ding to the company’s communication score).

For the standard caveat here: Sure, we could argue that Google has a unique advantage in that it’s both the manufacturer of the devices and the maker of the software — but guess what? That’s part of the Pixel package. And as a person purchasing a phone, the only thing that ultimately matters is the experience you receive.

As usual, the results tell you all there is to know: Even when the rollouts aren’t day-one perfection, Google’s phones are without a doubt the most reliable way to receive ongoing updates in a dependably timely manner on Android. It’s the only company that makes an explicit guarantee about that as a part of its devices’ purchasing package, and — as we’re about to reveal with some truly shocking twists — it’s the only one that consistently delivers on such a standard, year after year.

OnePlus

JR Raphael, IDG

Length of time for upgrade to reach current flagships: 65 days (43/50 points)

Length of time for upgrade to reach previous-gen flagships: 110 days (19/25 points)

Length of time for upgrade to reach two-cycles-back flagships: 175 days (9/15 points)

Communication: Poor (2/10 points)

If you read much tech news or follow many forums, you probably know that the popular narrative around OnePlus tends to be that it does a consistently decent job of providing post-sales software support to its Android devices.

I won’t beat around the bush: That narrative is flat-out inaccurate — and extremely misleading.

OnePlus bounces around with its software support more than any other Android device-maker out there. The best we could say is that it provides mediocre support on average, with the occasional pleasant surprise. But when you really dig deeper into the data, the reality is much more nuanced than that.

With Android 15, specifically, OnePlus took just over two months to get the software into the hands of folks who paid for its most recent top-of-the-line flagship (at the time of Android 15’s release) — which, hey, may not be gold-medal brag-worthy but is still reasonably all right.

The problem comes when you look at the company’s commitment to its older devices — flagships from just one to two years back, which waited 110 days and 175 days, respectively, to see their Android 15 updates. That’s inexcusable and unacceptable, and it’s also pretty typical for OnePlus.

If we look at the company’s overall grades from the last seven cycles, you’ll see what I mean:

Android 15: 73% C

Android 14: 69% D

Android 13: 77% C

Android 12: 76% C

Android 11: 60% D

Android 10: 85% B

Android 9: 74% C

As usual, what adds insult to injury is the fact that OnePlus is absolutely awful about communicating with its customers. Wade through the official OnePlus forum, and you’ll find pages upon pages of comments from frustrated phone-owners who are either desperate for any shred of info about when their top-of-the-line device will see its increasingly dated software update or are pulling their hair out because of problems with the rollouts that have started.

All in all, it’s just not a remarkable result — though, well, it could always be worse.

Motorola (Lenovo)

JR Raphael, IDG

Length of time for upgrade to reach current flagships: 170 days (31/50 points)

Length of time for upgrade to reach previous-gen flagships: 167 days (16/25 points)

Length of time for upgrade to reach two-cycles-back flagships: Still waiting (0/15 points)

Communication: Poor (0/10 points)

Well, well, well: Look who’s bucking the trends and actually trying for the first time in recent memory!

Now, hang on — let’s not get too excited. Motorola still earns a big fat “F” for its lackluster Android upgrade efforts with the Android 15 update. It’s done so in every analysis I’ve performed since 2016. (It scored a “D” the year before that.) Its last good grade was in 2014 — which was the last Android Upgrade Report Card prior to Lenovo’s acquisition of the company, for anyone keeping track.

But for the first time in a long time, Moto’s actually done something and brought itself up above a single percentage point. And for once, that at least isn’t nothing — which, if you ask me, is certainly something to celebrate.

Motorola managed to eke out an update to its current-gen co-flagship foldable, the 2024 Razr+, in early February of this year. It hasn’t sent anything to its non-folding US flagship, the 2024 Edge yet, which brings down its average in that area considerably. But, again: It’s still something!

A similar story shapes up in the previous-gen flagship category, with the US 2023 Razr+ receiving Android 15 in early February but the US 2023 Edge still waiting. The two-year-old flagships, meanwhile, haven’t had any activity, and Motorola’s communication is as minimal as usual.

On top of that, reports indicate all sorts of awful problems with the update — seemingly rendering phones more or less unusable in at least some circumstances.

All in all, it’s not much, and it sure doesn’t change the fact that it’s damn-near impossible to recommend Motorola phones because of their subpar post-sales support. But relative to Moto’s typical zero-effort showing in this arena as of late, it’s at least an improvement and a sign of a teensy bit of effort from a company we’d long ago assumed had given up entirely on caring.

Samsung

JR Raphael, IDG

Length of time for upgrade to reach current flagships: Still waiting (0/50 points)

Length of time for upgrade to reach previous-gen flagships: Still waiting (0/25 points)

Length of time for upgrade to reach two-cycles-back flagships: Still waiting (0/15 points)

Communication: Poor (0/10 points)

One word: Yikes.

I don’t even know what to say about Samsung with its software support performance for the Android 15 release. There’s simply no excuse for the top-selling US Android phone-maker to have failed to send out a single update to any of its devices — now more than six months after a major operating system release — and to land at the very bottom of this analysis, after even the most notorious Android upgrade flunkee of ’em all (hello, Moto!).

And we’re not talkin’ budget-level products here for Samsung, either. These are devices people have paid many of hundreds, sometimes well over a thousand dollars to own. They’re positioned as professional, business-caliber devices, too. And no professional business should be okay with using software that’s six-plus months out of date, especially when said software includes so many fixes and enhancements around critical areas like privacy, security, and performance.

Samsung, too, has managed to gain a reputation in recent years for being a “leader” in Android update delivery. Much like with OnePlus, this perception is misguided.

The data tells you everything you need to know. Here are Samsung’s Android Upgrade Report Card results from the past seven Android release cycles:

Android 15: 0% F

Android 14: 81% B

Android 13: 73% C

Android 12: 68% D+

Android 11: 68% D+

Android 10: 68% D+

Android 9: 37% F

The company’s certainly had some commendable (relative) high points, such as last year’s 81% result. But there’ve been an awful lot of ups and downs and some truly terrible lows in the mix, too. And a seven-year average of 56% is nothing to write home about.

Plus, much like OnePlus, Samsung tends to prioritize its most recent, current flagship while making anyone who owns a top-of-the-line phone from even a year ago wait significantly longer — anywhere from 60-some-odd days, on the better end of the spectrum, to well over 150 days on many recent cycles. (And that’s to say nothing about the company’s extremely poky progress with midrange and budget-level devices, which are treated very much as distant second-class citizens when it comes to upgrade deliveries.)

The company is also consistently quiet when it comes to any meaningful communication about its progress or when folks can expect to see something, anything, show up on their phones. In fact, the first official peep we’ve heard at all about a rollout date came this past Tuesday — March 4 — which was 183 days after Android 15’s release and after the six-month window of consideration for this specific analysis. (Long story short, Samsung now says it’ll start its first Android 15 rollouts sometime in April, which means best-case scenario, certain Galaxy phone owners may have the software seven months late and on the brink of Android 16’s arrival.)

All in all, it’s not a great look for anyone — but especially not for the company that most average phone buyers associate with Android and frequently turn to without even realizing other options are available.

Wait — what about everyone else?

Does this list seem shorter than you were expecting? Alas, this is our current Android hardware reality, at least here in the States at this moment.

One-time Android regular LG is no longer around, as the company bowed out of the phone-making game entirely in 2021. And early Android veteran HTC has been off the grid since 2021’s Report Card, given the fact that it’s barely even putting out new phones anymore — certainly not flagship-level devices. If the company ever comes back around and attempts to get in the game again at any point, I’ll eagerly add it back into the list for inclusion.

And then there’s Sony — a company a random reader will ask me about on occasion but that just doesn’t make sense to include in this list right now. Sony has never had much of a meaningful presence in the US smartphone market (which is a shame, really — but that’s another story for another time), and in recent years, its role in the US mobile market has dropped from “barely anything” to “virtually nothing.”

I can’t even begin to make head or tails of Sony’s convoluted, confusingly named phone lineup anymore, but the company sent out its first Android 15 upgrade in late November and has been chipping away at its list slowly but surely ever since. It certainly wouldn’t be topping the list if it were included in this analysis, but it’d be another addition to the middle-of-the-pack, C-range section if it had any meaningful US presence.

What about the HMD-owned Nokia? That company has a fairly limited presence in the US, but it had generally done a solid job of keeping its phones updated with both major and minor OS releases and with monthly security patches up until 2021, when Google’s Android One program started quietly falling apart. These days, HMD/Nokia’s taking its good sweet time to get current software onto its devices — with rollouts just getting going in late December — so even if it were included in this analysis, it wouldn’t be a remarkable result.

Last but not least, there’s Nothing — the hype-loving small-scale phone-maker from OnePlus founder Carl Pei. Nothing has been doing (ahem) virtually nothing in terms of communicating about its software support progress with its paying customers, but its earliest hint of an incoming Android 14 upgrade happened in mid-December, for its current-gen Nothing Phone 2 models, with its older-gen Nothing Phone 1 following in mid-January. Suffice it to say, its score wouldn’t be spectacular if it were significant enough to include in this breakdown.

In detail: How these grades were calculated

This Android Upgrade Report Card follows the same grading system used with last year’s analysis — which features precise and clearly defined standards designed to weigh performance for both current and previous-generation flagship phones along with a company’s communication efforts, all in a consistent and completely objective manner.

Each manufacturer’s overall grade is based on the following formula, with final scores being rounded up or down to the nearest full integer:

50% of grade: Length of time for upgrade to reach current flagship phone(s)

25% of grade: Length of time for upgrade to reach most immediate previous-gen flagship phone(s)

15% of grade: Length of time for upgrade to reach two-cycles-back previous-gen flagship phone(s)

10% of grade: Overall communication with customers throughout the upgrade process

Notably, 2023’s Android 13 analysis marked the first time the formula was expanded to account for flagship phones that are two generations back in addition to the most recent previous-gen models. With the de facto standard support window stretching to a minimum of three years, it made sense to take a broader view and see how different device-makers are actually doing when it comes to supporting those older models — as a promise of support alone only means so much. How long it actually takes for those phones to receive updates is equally important. And the scores here now reflect that, extending further into a phone’s lifespan.

Upgrade timing often varies wildly from one country or carrier to the next, so in order to create a consistent standard for scoring, I’ve focused this analysis on when Android 15 first reached a flagship model that’s readily available in the US — either a carrier-connected model or an unlocked version of the phone, if such a product is sold by the manufacturer and readily available to US customers — in a public, official, and not opt-in-beta-oriented over-the-air rollout.

(To be clear, I’m not counting being able to import an international version of a phone from eBay or from some random seller on Amazon as being “readily available to US customers.” For the purposes of creating a reasonable and consistent standard for this analysis, a phone has to be sold in the US in some official capacity in order to be considered a “US model” of a device.)

By looking at the time to Android 15’s first appearance (via an over-the-air rollout) on a device in the US, we’re measuring how quickly a typical US device-owner could realistically get the software in a normal situation. And since we’re looking at the first appearance, in any unlocked or carrier-connected phone, we’re eliminating any carrier-specific delays from the equation and focusing purely on the soonest possible window you could receive an update from any given manufacturer in this country. We’re also eliminating the PR-focused silliness of a manufacturer rushing to roll out a small-scale upgrade in somewhere like Lithuania just so they can put out a press release touting that they were “FIRST,” when the practical implication of such a rollout is basically just a rounding error.

I chose to focus on the US specifically because that’s where this publication (and this person writing this right now — hi!) is based, but this same analysis could be done using any country as its basis, of course, and the results would vary accordingly.

All measurements start from the day Android 15 was released into the Android Open Source Project: September 3, 2024, which is when the final raw OS code finished uploading and became available to manufacturers.

The following scale determined each manufacturer’s subscores for upgrade timeliness:

1-14 days to first US rollout = A+ (100)

15-30 days to first US rollout = A (96)

31-45 days to first US rollout = A- (92)

46-60 days to first US rollout = B+ (89)

61-75 days to first US rollout = B (86)

76-90 days to first US rollout = B- (82)

91-105 days to first US rollout = C+ (79)

106-120 days to first US rollout = C (76)

121-135 days to first US rollout = C- (72)

136-150 days to first US rollout = D+ (69)

151-165 days to first US rollout = D (66)

166-180 days to first US rollout = D- (62)

More than 180 days to first US rollout (and thus no upgrade activity within the six-month window) = F (0)

There’s just one asterisk: If a manufacturer outright abandons any US-relevant models of a device, its score defaults to zero for that specific category. Within that category (be it current or previous-gen flagship), such behavior is an indication that the manufacturer in question could not be trusted to honor its commitment and provide an upgrade. This adjustment allows the score to better reflect that reality. No such adjustments were made this year, though there have been instances where it’s happened in the past (hello, Moto — again!).

Last but not least, this analysis focuses on manufacturers selling flagship phones that are relevant and in some way significant to the US market and/or the Android enthusiast community. That, as I alluded to above, is why a company like Sony is no longer part of the primary analysis — and why companies like Xiaomi and Huawei are not presently part of this picture, despite their relevance in other parts of the world. Considering the performance of players in a market such as China would certainly be interesting, but it’d be a completely different and totally separate analysis, and it’s beyond the scope of what we’re considering in this one report.

Aside from the companies included here, most players are either still relatively insignificant in the US market or have focused their efforts more on the budget realm in the States so far — and thus don’t make sense, at least as of now, to include in this specific-sample-oriented and flagship-focused breakdown.

Don’t let yourself miss a thing: Sign up for my free Android Intelligence newsletter to get next-level knowledge delivered directly to your inbox.