Most my phones are the low end free-to-get-you-to-sign-up models.
AT&T doesn't have low end Motorolas so I bought an unlocked, guaranteed to work with AT&T, sub $300 one directly off motorola.com and took it to the AT&T store.
Low-end Android all have the same nagging adware or if they're not nagging they're definitely selling your data way more than flagships where customer UX is a priority.
>they're definitely selling your data way more than flagships where customer UX is a priority.
I'd to see some evidence for this claim. It seems to be a ridiculous offhand claim to make in this era of late stage capitalism. Flagship phones owners are wealthier, their data is more valuable for customer acquisition. Why in god's name would those penny pinchers leave that kind of money on the table? It makes no sense. It's not like flagship phone owners can track whether their data is being sold any better than low end phone owners.
They might make it harder to turn data collection off in low end phones, but that says nothing of their desire to be able to sell the data of flagship phone owners.
Except not now with Google's changes to Android security patches moving to quarterly instead of monthly so they can cover for shitty OEMs that don't push updates.
You don't think those vulnerabilities are going to leak out during the 4 months that OEMs have them before patches are pushed out?
Google has chosen to sacrifice security for marketing.
I’m put off by how Samsung monetise every data source they’re trusted with though. E.g. TV viewing, phone data, Samsung Pay, forced analytics, etc.
As a brand they don't seem to have any restraint when it comes to user privacy.