Earlier quoted context omitted.
The market for programs like revanced is pretty big, that's why Google is going to remove "sideloading". At which point there will be a large market for an open phone that allows the user to install what they want.
As long as the banking apps and such work.
Motorola announces a partnership with GrapheneOS
281–290 of 930 posts
Re: Motorola announces a partnership with GrapheneOS
#282So what does this mean? Are they going to ship GrapheneOS by default? Or just making it easier for GrapheneOS to support Motorola phones?
Re: Motorola announces a partnership with GrapheneOS
#283One thing that bothers me is the seeming lack of transparency about who is running GrapheneOS. Daniel Micay supposedly stepped down, so who is calling the shots now? Who runs the CI? Who owns the update servers and signing keys? Who am I trusting?
The directors of the the GrapheneOS Foundation and the other things you're talking about are public information. I stepped down as lead developer due to relentless harassment preventing me from being productive. The same people targeting me with harassment misrepresented what was happening. You shouldn't get info about GrapheneOS from Hacker News comments especially when multiple regulars here are part of the attacks…
Re: Motorola announces a partnership with GrapheneOS
#284Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm just hoping they make figuring out contactless payments a priority.
Contactless payments already work on GrapheneOS via Curve Pay, PayPal and the apps of many European banks. Solving the duopoly between Apple and Google for smartphone tap-to-pay in the US isn't something GrapheneOS can do. Regulators / legislators can force Google to let GrapheneOS pass the Play Integrity API checks and Google Pay will start working.
Are you sure about this? It was my understanding that NFC passes for gyms and stuff worked, but that if you want to pay for something with Google or Curve, you're shit outta luck
Re: Motorola announces a partnership with GrapheneOS
#285It's OnePlus all over again.
Re: Motorola announces a partnership with GrapheneOS
#286Earlier quoted context omitted.
If this translates to longer device retention (if you enable battery changes, a current gen device can easily last a decade), people will care. $200 phone that you can use for 5+ years without handicapping the user will be a much bigger hit. This translates well to the boots paradox. This can change "cheaper is much more expensive in the long run" to "cheaper is a bit more expensive on the long run". This, of course,…
This is one of the advantages apple currently has: Staying on the bleeding edge of or buying an iphone is cheaper than you would think, because iphones in general retain their value longer than the average android, due to apple's relatively long OS update period (and yes, it would be better if they were more open and less control freaky, but they still beat their competition). And even the android brands that do have…
For a 127 EUR Samsung A17 up to 6 OS and security updates (6 years) are advertised. For a Google Pixel up to 7 updates. How long is it for Apple?
Re: Motorola announces a partnership with GrapheneOS
#287Now do Samsung
Re: Motorola announces a partnership with GrapheneOS
#288Earlier quoted context omitted.
What?
eww lenovo -> lenovo owns motorola. lenovo is a trash company that ships shitware, even in their firmware, there is shitware see what you made us do google -> this event is a direct result of google's rug pull of support for pixel devices google/trump2 -> the current admin is linked to attempts to curtail people's control of their hardware
Re: Motorola announces a partnership with GrapheneOS
#289One thing that bothers me is the seeming lack of transparency about who is running GrapheneOS. Daniel Micay supposedly stepped down, so who is calling the shots now? Who runs the CI? Who owns the update servers and signing keys? Who am I trusting?
Funnily enough that same social media person has some odd ideas about trust and PKIs.
Re: Motorola announces a partnership with GrapheneOS
#290Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also requires a pretty new/high-end CPU for MTE and a separate secure enclave.
The secure element can be on the same CPU die as Apple does with the SEP but a device with only TrustZone wouldn't meet the requirements. It also needs to be a high quality implementation providing the expected features.