251–260 of 907 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
AOSP is open source so it could be forked.
Except many key features are nowadays delivered via APEX modules, distributed via PlayStore. https://source.android.com/docs/core/ota/apex
GrapheneOS has apex modules disabled and never had the need for that.
It's a lost cause. We need to focus on pmOS: https://postmarketos.org/ With both Android and Chromium, we're ultimately at Google's mercy. btw, does anyone know if Huawei is following along with this in their fork?
Now I hate Google as much as the next person, but I also hate all the other Android manufacturers who just don't do better.
Ideally, major manufacturers would all contribute to AOSP to make sure that it runs well with their devices. And then we could install the "AOSP distro" we want, be it GrapheneOS or LineageOS or whatever the fuck we want.
> does anyone know if Huawei is following along with this in their fork?
They suck like all the other manufacturers: they forked as a quick solution, and then decided to go with their own proprietary codebase. If nobody else contributes, why would they make it open source?
What I see from the Linux experience is that the only way it works is to have a copyleft licence and a multitude of contributors. That way it belongs to everybody, and it moves too fast for one single entity to write a proprietary competitor on their own. But AOSP is not that: first it's a permissive licence, and only Google meaningfully contributes to it.
Oh, the irony. I still remember how in the early days of Android vs iOS discussions, the main point was "but it's OPEN!". The word "open" was used as a comma by Google people. It was The Thing. The Difference. Good vs Evil and all that.
It looks like eventually any company will start squeezing customers for what they are worth. But only once the company is powerful enough. We don't call Google a monopoly, because there is Apple, but taken together they certainly behave as one. Both create expectations, create expected momentum in a certain direction, people build (companies, lives) on those assumptions and boom, you can't get out and now the company…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> We accept everyone who accepts everyone. If we were to accept and enforce this rule, billions of followers of some major religions would not be eligible to be part of a free and open society.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't you also need to buy a Macbook? That is quite expensive. I guess in Apple's view also developping on a non-Apple device is a security risk.
I’ve never considered or tried anything other than using a Mac, so I don’t know. But I was responding to a comment about a different matter, the fees for a developer account.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We accept everyone who accepts everyone. If we were to accept and enforce this rule, billions of followers of some major religions would not be eligible to be part of a free and open society.
"Tolerate" might be a better word to use for their analogy. I can hate you and all you stand for, but I can still tolerate you. Meaning, I let you be and don't try to curtail your actions according to my personal beliefs.
Before buying a smartphone I tried to find an inexpensive model that supports open source OS, but I couldn't. What open OS support is ether expensive Pixels, or outdated models. The solution, I think, would be a regulation that forbids manufacturers of any chip or device CPU from making obstacles to reprogramming the device (using fuses, digital signatures, encryption etc). So if you buy a device with CPU and writabl…
You can buy a refurbished Pixel 5 for less than 200$. Great screen, great camera, 5G, the works. It's definitely not an "outdated" device, and it runs Graphene or Lineage with minimal hassle.