• 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 hours ago

    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.

    • kuhli@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      54 minutes ago

      Custom ROMs should be able to disable the checks. My bigger concern is what it does to the open app ecosystem as a whole.

  • commander@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    7 hours ago

    I’ll hold off on a new phone to watch for this. Android could be great without Google’s nonsense. An OS that has high end hardware support and continues to work on convergence with desktop Linux both by the communities development and Google’s

  • rezad@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    my hot take: while this is good for users in short term, in long term it just prolongs non-copyleft android OS hold for google.

    my only hope for grapheneos is that they pointed that they may move from android too.

    • Lev@europe.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 hours ago

      That’s the long-term plan, yeah. Moving from Linux entirely actually, as they mentioned a future microkernel project

      • rezad@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 hour ago

        as I said in last post, I only see copyleft as a viable alternative. too many dev efforts forked and privatized. android should have been a warning. but many devs just think open source is enough. and they still think getting adapted by big corporation will not change the direction of projects.

        I am personally going in the direction of testing and helping only copyleft projects. so I skipped RedoxOS. even-though I like rust and new microkernel OSes.

        If I am going to give my time to a project (small as it is) I don’t want it to end up like android.

  • fodor@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    11 hours ago

    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.

    • Axolotl_cpp@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      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

      • Batmorous@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        32 minutes ago

        All I know is that whoever partners up with PostmarketOS, Mobian, and Ubuntu Touch will win big

  • Seefra 1@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    12 hours ago

    manufacturer will offer GrapheneOS support on future versions of their existing models, priced similarly to Pixels.

    Great, so I still won’t afford it…

    • Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      8 hours ago

      I paid $120 for each Pixel I own.

      I refuse to pay a premium to have the “latest and greatest gadget”

  • Zink@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    20 hours ago

    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!

  • skuzz@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    20 hours ago

    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.

  • SeductiveTortoise@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    87
    ·
    24 hours ago

    According to details shared on Reddit, the partnered manufacturer will offer GrapheneOS support on future versions of their existing models, priced similarly to Pixels. These initial devices will feature flagship Snapdragon processors, which GrapheneOS notes provide significantly better CPU and GPU performance compared to Google’s Tensor chips. The Snapdragon platform also bundles high-quality wireless connectivity, eSIM support, and decent image processing capabilities directly into the system-on-chip.

    Oh thank you. Let’s hope for something nice for a change.

    • Fizz@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      ·
      23 hours ago

      This might be it. This might be the alt phone to defeat all others. Flagship chip + graphineOS features and long term support is a killer killer deal.

  • Lka1988@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    54
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    23 hours ago

    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…

    • Lumisal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      ·
      21 hours ago

      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.

      • skuzz@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        20 hours ago

        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.

        • warmaster@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          18 hours ago

          Google will forever control Android. I would prefer if he just worked on Linux (phone & desktop) to the benefit of all.

          • skuzz@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            16 hours ago

            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.

            And edit72: I’m not just saying “hey magic people do this” - I’ve done this shit. I’m down to help, and I will. But the project owners need to step up for some actual work instead of just putting potpourri on something someone else built. Annoying side-story, I figured out how to cross-compile/rebuild/fix dependencies on a CPAP app called Oscar so it would be ARM-native on ARM Macs. Couldn’t figure out how to contact the devs after much digging to let them know, so. I have 1 of 1 copy of that app running ARM-MacOS native. Would be neat to help them replicate it though.

            • ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              11 hours ago

              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.

        • rirus@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          15 hours ago

          Google has more people working in Android then GrapheneOS does, it’s not possible for them to go completely independent.

  • courval@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    19 hours ago

    Disappointed to learn about Fairphone lagging behind in terms of security… I really wanted to get one. But still good news I guess.

    • DupaCycki@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 hours ago

      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?

    • fodor@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 hours ago

      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.