Android gets monthly patches, delivered in a timely manner to 1st party devices,
Android has recently started receiving monthly patches, as previously the state of Android fixes even for hardware from Google was woeful. I believe you're guaranteed these for up to 2 years?
(if you were stupid enough to buy 2nd party, or even 3rd paty device,
Android powers consumer devices, to expect consumers to all be fully versed in the intricacies of IT security is naive; and also does little to actually address the issue. People quite rightly expect to buy things that 'work'.
If your ADSL router ends up as part of a botnet is it because you're stupid for not buying XYZ? As it's consumer hardware shouldn't you have a reasonable expectancy of it being fit for purpose?
To decry unknowledgeable people as stupid doesn't really help the issue, the vast majority of Android devices aren't 'first party' and don't receive timely security patches. This is getting better, but is still not great.
that is not Google, nor Android's fault).
Who's fault is it if not Googles? Android is (primarily) a data capture platform for their advertising business, it's users are not the main customers. Security only became an issue to Google when it stood a chance of impacting their bottom line.
I'm not saying this is a bad thing, they're an ad broker after all and most companies don't spend on things like security until there's a demonstrable ROI.
However it does mean that easily updatable and patchable weren't primary design consideration in the early days, and the subsequent efforts are taking time to be broadly accepted. (For example, Android is based upon the Linux kernel, and for various reasons Linux doesn't have a well defined and version stable binary interface to it's driver layer; which means any new kernel version require more effort on the part of OEMs for driver validation. This acts as a disincentive to OEMs to update often as it increases cost, often on devices that have already been sold).
here in the real world, nobody ever sees real world problems.
What do you base that on if you don't believe the media? Do you just mean 'I don't know anyone?' (in which case your sample size isn't really representative), or have you actually carried out or are aware of some decent research into the matter?