You don't seem to have any understanding of how Android works. The buck does stop at vendors since they are the ones who ship OS updates to consumers.
Vendors don't prioritize updates because their customers don't understand enough to make this part of their purchasing decision, so there is little incentive for them to spend resources on it.
Minimizing this major problem doesn't help.
And - instead of saying 'think outside the box' - why not actually contribute some out of the box thinking?
"Google winning is good for everyone" is propaganda that Google uses when they are threatened. Google is no different from any other corporation. Once they have power, they exercise it to their advantage to increase their share of profits.
Also, you should check your facts - Samsung has not exceeded Apple in smartphone profits. They have exceeded Apple in phone profits overall. You might as well throw washing machines into the mix if you are going to include profits from single purpose appliances that are not general purpose computers.
So basically because you "want Google to win" because you believe they are somehow different from any other corporation, you are trumpeting a false statistic in order to convince others that destiny is somehow at work, going in the direction you want.
If this isn't shilling for Google, I don't know what is.
Instead of minimizing or dismissing serious problems as 'already patched', hackers could help by warning consumers about the proliferation of Android malware. If sales were jeopardized, vendors would start caring about updates.
His video shows that he filed radars on July 19th - the same day downloaded the 100,000 developer names and email addresses.
This is not responsible reporting, and he's clearly broken the UK computer misuse laws, since he signed an agreement with Apple governing the use of these systems.
I hope he's arrested soon. This behavior does nothing to help legitimate business or the security community.
You can't have it both ways. They were transparent. Complaining that it was 3 days after the incident is irrelevant since we don't know how much investigation was required for them to understand the problem.
In Google's case, it's because Google advocates (and often incentivizes) the disclosure into its care. Since Google has been participating in this spy program for at least 5 years, while continuing to encourage people to give it their data, it is directly complicit.
That's exactly what Apple has tried to do, and although it hasn't completed the job yet, is much further along than anyone else.
Google on the other hand makes it's money out of analyzing people's communication and online behavior. Why would you expect it to protect people's privacy from itself?
Vendors don't prioritize updates because their customers don't understand enough to make this part of their purchasing decision, so there is little incentive for them to spend resources on it.
Minimizing this major problem doesn't help.
And - instead of saying 'think outside the box' - why not actually contribute some out of the box thinking?