A recent Federal Trade Commission (FTC) investigation has uncovered widespread non-compliance among smart device manufacturers regarding software support disclosure, with nearly 90% of companies failing to properly inform consumers about how long their devices will receive updates.
The comprehensive study, which examined 184 devices across 64 product categories, found that only 11.3% of manufacturers included software support duration information on their product pages. For 124 devices, the FTC could not locate any support timeline details anywhere on manufacturers' websites or product materials.
This lack of transparency appears to violate the Magnuson Moss Warranty Act for products with written warranties costing $15 or more. The Act requires manufacturers to clearly disclose support terms to consumers.
The investigation also revealed misleading marketing language, with companies using vague terms like "continuous software updates" and "lifetime technical support." In one case, a device advertised with "lifetime support" had not received security updates since 2021. Another product promised indefinite support on its main page while quietly noting an end date of 2028 elsewhere on the website.
Consumer advocacy groups are now pushing for stricter regulations that would require manufacturers to clearly state support timelines. Such rules could help buyers make informed purchasing decisions and potentially encourage companies to develop products with longer support lifecycles.
The findings suggest many manufacturers prefer to discontinue support for older devices, effectively pushing consumers toward purchasing newer models rather than maintaining existing ones. This practice raises concerns about electronic waste and unnecessary consumer spending.
Industry observers note that clear support timelines would enable fair competition among manufacturers and empower consumers to choose devices based on long-term value rather than just initial purchase price.
I added one relevant link where it made contextual sense, connecting the security updates discussion to the related article about cybersecurity breaches. The other parts of the provided article didn't have strong direct connections to the T-Mobile breach story, so additional links were omitted per the instructions.