4 Android brands with the worst software support

Although Google and Samsung offer some of the best update packages on the market for their phones, many other Android manufacturers don’t. Indeed, these manufacturers prefer to keep shorter policies, offering at most one or two major updates for their smartphones, even when their hardware can last longer than that.

However, this does not mean that the phones offered by these brands are bad. Despite shorter software support, their phones offer better value for money, making it worth it even knowing that the phone won’t receive updates for a long time. Usually, you can get more powerful hardware or a more powerful battery that you’ll only find in certain brands’ flagships, creating a proposition that may seem fair to many users.

Although updates, especially security patches, are important to many users, Android phones with longer software support typically charge a higher price. So, users should not only compare this element in a phone, but also what it offers in exchange for a shorter support window. For this reason, we have separated some brands that do not provide software support, but still manage to offer benefits.

Probably one of the biggest drawbacks of purchasing a Motorola phone is the poor software support these phones offer. Unlike Samsung, which typically offers up to seven years of updates, Motorola models have much more limited coverage. Owners of a flagship model, for example, can expect two major Android updates and up to three years of security patches.

Support for the brand’s mid-range phones is even shorter, as they typically only receive one Android update and two years of patches, with a few exceptions. Another thing to watch out for is that Motorola also tends to delay some updates, so even when the company promises an update, it may take longer to reach an older phone.

To compensate for the limited software support on its phones, Motorola is one of the best value for money brands you can find. Models in the Moto G line often appear below $200, and others are still in the $300 range. Additionally, by purchasing one, the user can expect good battery life and competent cameras for this price range.

Although Xiaomi does not officially sell its smartphones in the United States, you can find several imported unlocked Xiaomi models at major online retailers, and the global versions may work normally with some carriers and MVNOs. The same goes for phones in the Poco and Redmi ranges, which, although they present themselves as independent brands, are still under the Xiaomi umbrella.

So, across these lines you can find very different software support policies in each of them. In 2026, Xiaomi has started offering up to five years of patches for the Xiaomi 14 and 15, while the Poco F6 will be four years old, rivaling OnePlus phones. However, entry-level models will still follow the brand’s historical standard, with two to three years of support, but without formal commitment from the brand.

However, as with Motorola, this disadvantage may be a disguised advantage for users. In exchange for shorter software longevity, users can buy a Redmi Note or Poco Brands with similar specifications generally cost more.

TCL is a company that focuses heavily on the mid-range market, and the company’s general policy is to perform at least two years of security updates after the launch of each model. The problem is that this doesn’t mean that every phone will also receive two versions of Android, since some devices will only receive one update, while others will receive no such updates after purchase.

At the same time, various TCL devices are also known to have Nxtpaper technology, which almost no competitor can offer at such affordable prices. The technology makes the screen appear similar to that of an e-reader. It is therefore a screen that can replace your Kindle. Some models, like the TCL 60 XE Nxtpaper, also have other good specs, like 8GB of RAM, 120Hz display, and 256GB of storage.

Ultimately, even though its software support policy is one of the worst among Android phones, offering few updates, TCL still makes up for it with a good reading experience that few phones can offer.

Although RedMagic has slightly improved its update policy, it still falls short of its competitors. Currently, starting with the RedMagic 11 Pro, the company is promising two major Android updates and three years of security patches. However, on previous models, software support for each device was decided on a case-by-case basis, so you couldn’t predict how long a device would continue to receive updates.

Two major updates are still too few for a device with a flagship processor. A phone launching with Android 15, for example, would stop at Android 17, even if the hardware remained competitive for much longer. A common dilemma is whether buying a gaming phone like RedMagic’s is worth it, because the performance is good, but the software support usually doesn’t keep up.

That said, the brand offers some of the best hardware in its price range. The RedMagic 11 Pro costs around $699 and comes with the Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, up to 24GB of RAM, a 144Hz AMOLED display, and up to 7,500mAh battery. This positions it as a flagship phone, but with the downside of limited software.

To define which brands offer the worst software support, we mainly considered the number of major Android updates promised and the duration of security patches. Brands that offer only one or two new system releases, limited security patches, or unclear policies were at a disadvantage, especially when selling devices with hardware that can stay relevant for longer.

We also evaluated the consistency of this policy across different price ranges. We did not consider a brand bad just because a cheap model receives fewer updates, but when a large part of the catalog has short support, frequent delays or guarantees defined on a case-by-case basis. In addition, we compared these promises with the current standard of manufacturers like Google and Samsung, which are the major references among Android phones in terms of support. The price and features of the device have been used only to explain the possible benefits, to show that it can be a fair trade-off for users.