I wonder if this will have a significant negative impact on Pixel sales.
Yes it well. Their chips are pathetic and they seem to have no motivation to do anything about it.
I want to try GrapheneOS. But my current Samsung phone still works. If I ever do switch, I would be looking for a Pixel on the local resale market so as to avoid giving Google money, anyway.
Used Pixels are cheap.
I have three, paid about $120 for each one.
It’s what I did. I bought a used pixel 8 and only regretted it after the recent strong of Google shenanigans. I’m still looking for a proper Linux phone solution in the meantime. I’d rather not have to be reliant on anything Google does in the future.
I would assume it will, if the SoC performance is in the same ballpark. Pixels have good NPU specs but their CPU, GPU and RAM feel like mid range options compared to snapdragons. So I don’t think that’s a high bar to hit. I don’t run graphene because I’m not buying a google phone, but I would consider running it on something else.
I can’t see how it would. Techies are the only people who know what GrapheneOS is, and even then it’s a small percentage of us. The average person still asks if you have an iPhone or a Samsung.
I hope it takes off, but even if it does the dent will be small.
The only reason I bought a Pixel is for GrapheneOS and the only reason my SO has one is also GrapheneOS.
But if google goes on with locking out the app store with the developer verification bs, how would would this play into that? If Aurora won’t install the app or the app won’t run, then we’ve accomplished little in that area. I’m really hoping I’m missing something.
Custom ROMs should be able to disable the checks. My bigger concern is what it does to the open app ecosystem as a whole.
TBH I would actually expect GrapheneOS not to disable these checks. GrapheneOS devs pride themselves to have the best implementation of the official Android security model, and enforcing signature checks is likely part of that…
They might add additional certificates I guess, to allow their own apps, and maybe a selected few others.
Except this ‘signing’ is more of a control feature than a security feature. Just because Google markets it as a security feature doesn’t mean it is.
Well… The Android security model, as it is implemented in stock android and GOS, is about top down control, the full trust is given to the system vendors, not the end users. No rooting for instance. From this perspective not allowing installation of apps that cannot be blocked by the system vendor, fits well with that model.
TBH, I am not a fan of that security model. And this is my critique of GOS. It doesn’t allow the user full access to their device, so that they can check and control what each application is storing or sending to third-party servers. Instead it is on full security and allows apps to store and transfer information to which the user has no access to.
But the system vendor/developers would have that access, because they control the whole base system.
The focus of the Android security model and in turn of GOS is on security, at the cost of privacy or freedom.
This is incorrect. The sideloading checks are implemented in Play Protect, which needs elevated privileges to function. On GrapheneOS, Google Play services run with normal privileges, just like any other user-installed app. This means, there are no Play Protect checks in GrapheneOS, and there will never be. It would only be possible on ROMs, such as LineageOS with Gapps, where Play services are installed as system apps, running with higher privileges than all other apps.
Well, good to know.
I was thinking more about the way of Android security models, and that it would make sense for GOS to restrict available storefronts to stay consistent with their way to implement them. But good to know that it will not automatically happen just by updating the google services.
And I would also think that people would likely complain if they where to implement it in a different way.
I’m skeptical. Even knowing how paranoid Daniel is about, well…everything.
Who remembers the last time a custom ROM got an OEM deal? It is the reason Lineage OS exists today…
With everything Google is doing with Android, they might not have a choice. It’s either this or possibly one day no longer being able to work on Graphene.
Graphene would be better off cutting themselves off from Google’s OS future entirely and pivot the fork as quickly as possible to remove all dependencies. Probably too arrogant to consider it, though. Also becomes much more work.
Google has more people working in Android then GrapheneOS does, it’s not possible for them to go completely independent.
Google will forever control Android. I would prefer if he just worked on Linux (phone & desktop) to the benefit of all.
You’re under-thinking it.
In pseudo-correct but probably not order:
- Step 1: Collect underpants
- Step 2: Keep receiving Google security updates but stop updating Google mainline
- Step 3: Start replacing the underbelly to just raw Linux (or BSD or whatever) and slowly shift the “Android” portion to a VM/container
- Step 4: RIL and other stuff (probably should happen first) have to be packaged up and become their new entity on the modem side (also probably the biggest challenge, but manufacturers and ODMs provide dev kits)
- Step 5: ???
- Step 6: Once the Android side is safely firewalled away from the core OS, start embracing something like PostmarketOS
- Step 7: GUI/graphics are built out with the Android pieces still running in a container
- Step 8: Start writing applications that replace the Android applications, go one by one, remove dependence on each Android application as you go while still maintaining compatibility (I mean the core OS ones that make the device at least basically functional, the F/OSS devs will have to each rewrite/change their apps, or some other magic can be inserted here that isn’t really magic.)
- Step 9: Once the OS itself is beefed up enough, retain Android container for the needs of some for some uncomfortably long frustrating time to maintain, but not too long
- Step 10: Have Obtainium/F-Droid/etc. all simultaneously pivot and start providing apps for the native OS as well as maintaining backwards compatibility with the Android apps in the container
- Step 11: Once some magic point, forced or otherwise happens, sunset the Android portion of the app stores. Keep the containerized Android around a little longer
- Step 12: Sunset the Android container, at this point the phone should be running 100% “native” OS and apps and store
- Step 14: Profit!
There are industry blueprints for this. Apple is probably the best example of how to implement these shifts, from OS 9 (co-op MT proprietary OS)->OS X (BSD-NextStep-based Unix OS), 68k->PPC, Replacing Unix underpinnings with Apple Frameworks, PPC->Intel, OS X->iOS, Mac from Intel->ARM, etc. etc. They frequently used containerization to keep the old running while the new was built up around it and replaced. It is a solid proven design pattern.
I think that sounds like a damn solid plan, personally. Not sure if the GrapheneOS devs would go for it. The lead dev (who I thinked stepped down, so may not be a factor now) had some strongly negative opinions towards a Linux phone due to all of its security holes compared to Android, but like… It’s not as if those things couldn’t be addressed like you describe. It would just take time.
I dearly remember my OnePlus One with CyanogenMod, if that answers your question?
But do you remember the clusterfuck that was Cyanogen Inc?
Nope, only from what I’ve read about it more recently. Back then I was just hyped about getting an even smarter smartphone with a better OS and all the new possibilities it brought to me. It was by no means my first smartphone, and I had already explored using my phones in interesting, useful or smart ways, but the OnePlus One felt like a very big upgrade in my daily life, especially since things were moving pretty fast on that area 10-15 years ago. CyanogenMod was definitely an important part of that improved Android experience, and I don’t think the corporation clusterfuck affected that, really, as I did not at all notice what was going on over there.
That situation destroyed CM and its team. Lineage OS was the proverbial phoenix that rose from the ashes of CM.
Disappointed to learn about Fairphone lagging behind in terms of security… I really wanted to get one. But still good news I guess.
Not really a ‘Fairphone issue’ and more a general ‘smartphone issue’. The vast majority of OEMs don’t invest into security and just use random parts with mostly stock Android. Sometimes they actually make it worse by replacing AOSP apps with their less secure ones. Which sadly will become more common with Google abandoning AOSP.
Fairphone simply isn’t focused on security. Should that change? Are Fairphone users interested in improved security?
Not too surprising as they don’t have the same company size, it’s hard to keep up.
I’m not saying the information about Fairphone is wrong, but you shouldn’t assume it’s all as bad as they made it out to be. You’re reading a marketing pitch from one group that works with one vendor saying why another vendor isn’t that good.
Qualcomm isn’t exactly the best vendor to choose either. They’re US-based, closely-aligned with the US government as a military contractor, and the baseband/processor are heavily integrated on many chipsets, even sharing memory. That means a compromised carrier network could twiddle bits that the operating system sees, if they so wanted. Among many other issues.
There’s something about a Samsung Exynos designed to spec by Google that is actually more desirable even with the lack of compute performance. More fingers in the pot, less chance of some sneakiness working its way in.
Fuck Samsung.
Bixby! Bixby is on a fridge!
So who do we think? It’s not Fair phone and it sounds like it’s not oneplus. I’ll be needing a new phone within the next couple of years, if they roll it out soonish
I hope Nokia
I actually think this could be it. Nokia has always been a little adventurous with their operating systems, and I think they are eager to claw back their old reputation.
It’s not.
Have a friend who works at a decently high position here in Finland and they actually are considering exiting the smartphone market all together because the margins are too small and they make easy more money on other things, like 5G equipment. They kind of want to move past being associated with phones basically.
They are called HMD now.
I’d love an HTC again
I mean those are the first two I’d suspect too. Maybe Sony or Pico? They’re both pretty dev friendly.
I hope it’s Sony
Praying from this end of my Sony xperia
Sony is sooooo expensive though…
They said it’d be on par with a Pixel, so either a reasonable Sony or not Sony…
The Sony xperia 10 VII has a micro SD slot and a 3.5mm port so I’m hoping Sony too.
Edit: looks like the OEM selected doesn’t have compatible phones today but would in 26’
Yeah, but the cpu sucks…. How can I justify to myself going from an iPhone 11 to something with a worse cpu
I’ve completely forgotten that Sony makes phones also, but this phone is great on paper. So much so that, next year, when I will be switching back to Android from an unfortunate ios hiatus, I will definitely consider one (maybe viii? ). Thanks for reminding me.
manufacturer will offer GrapheneOS support on future versions of their existing models, priced similarly to Pixels.
Great, so I still won’t afford it…
I paid $120 for each Pixel I own.
I refuse to pay a premium to have the “latest and greatest gadget”
Finally, some good news!
Every cell phone manufacturer has some interest in diversifying the operating systems. Because Google develops Android and sells its own cell phones, it has an unfair market edge. And now Google is threatening to filter out apps that it doesn’t like which makes the risk even higher.
So we can be sure all of the other major manufacturers of Android phones have considered if they’d like to support other distributions.
Maybe they will make deal with other distributors to ship their exclusive app stores and so that would be a good economic move for them
Not sure I’d trust Graphene so long as Daniel is still involved
I don’t know… Part of me thinks that someone overruled Daniel on this decision. He stepped down as the main dev years ago, but is still a director… maybe the other directors overruled Daniel?
But again, I don’t know. I’m just shooting from the hip.
Sock puppets.
Can you elaborate?
Techlore and Rrossman both have excellent videos going into detail the long history of his negative impacts on the community
Because linking to the site itself rather than the video is useless - https://techlore.tv/w/auQigUjYTqkME1Bj7uPEPm
In all the time i looked online Ive never found a legitimate basis for these vague claims of drama around Graphene. See a lot of it in Louis Rossman circles (nothing against him, but he made a dramatic video on YT about leaving GrapheneOS) it’s reactionary at best. Someone got blocked people got mad, full story only the ones directly involved know.
Louis was directly involved, and he brought receipts.
Daniel is extremely paranoid (arguably part of why GOS is as secure as it is), but that paranoia can also lead to anxiety and assuming everyone is “out to get you”.
Daniel resigned 2 years ago and I always see these comments conveniently leave that out.
Daniel resigned as the head developer a few years ago.
The incident in question happened before that. Also, he’s still listed as a Graphene OS Foundation director, which means he still has a lot of pull.
I always see these comments conveniently leave that out.
You should probably brush up on your research instead of simping.
My point stands, a lot of petty personal stuff that seems unrelated to GrapheneOS. But there is never anything fruitful from engaging you types.
Lots of people blocked. Rossman made excellent points.
I can’t wait to hear more. Please just make a phone that I’ll want to buy. My phone is 4 years old and there’s just nothing I want to replace it with yet.
It has become less and less of an issue over time though. Not only have I gotten used to using my phone FAR less with positive health results, but I have set myself up to have access to my Linux PC during the “chill with the family on the couch” times in the evening when one might zone out on their phone for a bit. That’s what I’m using right now!
I thought the exclusivity was because of Googles superior chip security?
So far all I have seen them say is that the new device meets their requirements. Considering that this company has a lot of power over them I would be very tight-lipped about details in case they start throwing curveballs
Partially. It’s more that Google’s overall architecture was better for security, inclusive of many different features.
You can find a big ass list here: https://grapheneos.org/faq#future-devices
Lol wut
About fucking time.
Anyone guessed Jolla? If not, I place my bet…
Do they count as major?
Certainly not
It’d be so awesome if Fairphone made a deal for Fairphone 7
