Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Android 10

android.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 518 posts

Re: Android 10

#211

Post by ktta »

nxc18 wrote: post #199
elbrian wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is difficult to understand about OP wanting features that iOS does not offer?

Its more the massive privacy, security, longevity, and performance penalty you pay switching to Android that causes concern. Android has some nifty features depending on device, but the core experience just isn’t there. (E.g. I figured chrome on Android has to be faster than Chrome on iOS - nope, my XR consistently beat a Pixel 3 side-by-side) My iPhone 6S from 2015 is still in service and fast; I gave it to my mom w…

FYI, chrome on iOS's core is just Safari's

Re: Android 10

#212

Post by jhack »

Can't wait to try it out in three years when I replace my eight-month-old phone that won't be getting an update.

Re: Android 10

#213

Post by shmerl »

KoenDG wrote: post #210

Just a thought: how's the integration with the Linux kernel going? I recall reading a few months ago that 1. There are significant differences between the "main" kernel and the one android uses. 2. This was a choice in early development. 3. Efforts are underway to largely undo this, making them as similar as possible. And as per usual, I can't find the article anymore.

Google were pushing for better upstream usage. For example they are backing Freedreno driver for Adreno (Qualcomm) GPUs.

Re: Android 10

#215

Post by greysonp »

fooqux wrote: post #38
gowld wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does Smart Reply send your messages to Google?

No, it uses the app's API to do that. However, the push notification from GCM does come from google and is possibly read though.

Signal dev here. Just wanted to make it clear that the GCM/FCM we send are completely empty. It just wakes up the app so we can fetch the encrypted messages, at which point we decrypt them and show them to the user.

Re: Android 10

#216

Post by [deleted] »

wyldfire wrote: post #184
heinrich5991 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't like suggesting Telegram because it is not end-to-end encrypted. I prefer WhatsApp (where it's Facebook that has access to all the metadata like who speaks to whom, but not the message contents), or Signal (which is also end-to-end encrypted and doesn't have the "Facebook" problem).

Note that even though I advocate for WhatsApp I recognize that it's not really what I would call "end to end encrypted". Any time that you allow a broker to execute the initial key exchange, you're implicitly trusting the broker. And beyond that: if you let the broker re-exchange keys without even informing you (!!!) then it's a stretch to call it "end to end encrypted." But if the system re-transmits old messages en…

[deleted]

Re: Android 10

#217

Post by ubercow13 »

wyldfire wrote: post #184
heinrich5991 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't like suggesting Telegram because it is not end-to-end encrypted. I prefer WhatsApp (where it's Facebook that has access to all the metadata like who speaks to whom, but not the message contents), or Signal (which is also end-to-end encrypted and doesn't have the "Facebook" problem).

Note that even though I advocate for WhatsApp I recognize that it's not really what I would call "end to end encrypted". Any time that you allow a broker to execute the initial key exchange, you're implicitly trusting the broker. And beyond that: if you let the broker re-exchange keys without even informing you (!!!) then it's a stretch to call it "end to end encrypted." But if the system re-transmits old messages en…

You refute your main point in your second paragraph - they do inform you of key changes

Re: Android 10

#218

Post by ubercow13 »

microcolonel wrote: post #147
kbenson wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But alas, iMessage pressure is real in my friend's group. Man, in my extended family SMS text group, this comes up once every couple weeks. One of us will note they aren't getting a random message, or someone will send a video and the quality will be crap, and the iPhone users will all mention how if we all had iPhones, this wouldn't be a problem. Cue a few of is getting kind of triggered because it's only Apple's…

They really ought to have some sort of format for setting up APN properly based on URIs, which could then be put in QR codes on fresh SIM card packages.

When I put in a fresh SIM, APN details are sent via some kind of special SMS and automatically set up. I think it’s been this way for a decade or more

Re: Android 10

#219

Post by wozniacki »

Godel_unicode wrote: post #198
wozniacki wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you elaborate on why you single out Telegram as a privacy deal-breaker as opposed to other similar apps? If they all are just as bad, is there something coming up on the near horizon thats worth the wait?

They are replying to a comment about Telegram, and mention other messaging apps which are better. They also do not say that they're all just as bad, unclear where you got that from?

I just asked for elaboration.

I don't get whats so confusing about that. The cited article is over 3 years old, from a site whose parent company's founder got sued out of existence for leaking private sex tapes.[1]

Is that what we consider the standard bearer for technical opinions on apps?

Or do you belong to some kind of voting ring that downvotes opinions on apps they don't like?

[1] Gawker to Pay Hulk Hogan $31 Million to Settle Sex Tape Lawsuit

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/nick-denton-announ...

[2] Gawker.com to shut down next week

https://www.politico.com/media/story/2016/08/gawkercom-to-sh...

Re: Android 10

#220

Post by fstephany »

mpalczewski wrote: post #113
skybrian wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is really quite cynical, particularly about sound amplifier. It should be very useful to the millions of people who are hearing impaired, but haven't gotten a hearing aid yet. (Most people tend to put this off for a while.) There's some irony that some folks might have gotten hearing loss from headphones in the first place, but it sounds like a useful feature.

It will be useful to me, but there's already a volume button. Would be nice if that just worked, instead of it being nerfed. The volume limitations only made sense if you never used headphones less sensitive than the oem ones and listened to source audio that was only at maximum volume all the time.

A great intro to hearing loss and what it takes to make an hearing aid device: https://medium.com/@AMP/cant-you-just-turn-up-the-volume-4ec...
Post reply on HN