61–70 of 99 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> unlockable bootloaders so the users can load whatever they want Here you go: https://puri.sm/products/librem-5 .
Give me a Librem 5 with an SoC that isn't hot garbage and I'd buy it immediately.
I think the throwback on HN on this decision is due to the lack of details and context on the news? From what I've understood from the local news (I'm a South Korean), It's not about blocking handsets with forked Android (that already happens regularly AFAIK), but the requirement of shipping Google apps like Chrome and Google Assistant. The big elephant in the room here is Samsung phones, which do ship it's own custo…
[1] https://ftc.go.kr/www/selectReportUserView.do?key=10&rpttype... (in Korean)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What we need is control on the bootloader, with the ability to unlock, load our own keys, and relock. We also need to clean-up the mess with all those "partitions" (some of them with critical informations e.g. calibration, IMEI, etc) so that only one partition would have all those static information (reasonably protected against overwrite, e.g. colocated with bootloader and device-tree). We should be able to re-parti…
Google phones allow re-locking the bootloader with your own key, except it still results in a warning during boot, and there's no way you're passing SafetyNet with this, at least not without hacks like Magisk. Also even when you unlock the bootloader, the TrustZone OS, which runs with hypervisor permissions and manages all the exciting things like DRM and SafetyNet itself, is still off limits for you.
Meanwhile the only real android competitor is manufactured by one company who doesn't allow even the end user to install apps not directly approved by Apple.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How about splitting the difference like locking the bootloader at point of sale with guaranteed period for updates? After the period has lapsed, allow users to unlock the bootloader to extend with custom software upgrades or, a subscription base to continue with original POS policy. This weirdly intersects for the Right to Repair movement, or for consumers whom would rather be conservative on new device purchases and…
Reminds me of the idea I've been thinking about - kind of unrelated - but once a device is officially no longer supported by a company - particularly consoles and online games - they should make the source code available so people can continue from there on their own.
Once the manufacturer ceases supporting a product, everything becomes open source.
Meanwhile the only real android competitor is manufactured by one company who doesn't allow even the end user to install apps not directly approved by Apple.
Do you really call iOS a competitor to android? Its like saying KIA is competitor to a Rolls Royce. Androids range from 50USD to anything else. Apple and Google makes phones but they’re not competitors, their market segments, user base have different opinions on what they want and do.
Also, to even compare that Android phones are 'cheaper' is rather bold, there's Samsung flip phones selling for $2000.
[1] https://www.counterpointresearch.com/us-market-smartphone-sh...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you really call iOS a competitor to android? Its like saying KIA is competitor to a Rolls Royce. Androids range from 50USD to anything else. Apple and Google makes phones but they’re not competitors, their market segments, user base have different opinions on what they want and do.
A quick google search actually reveals Apple has 53% of the market in the U.S. [1] Also, to even compare that Android phones are 'cheaper' is rather bold, there's Samsung flip phones selling for $2000. [1] https://www.counterpointresearch.com/us-market-smartphone-sh...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What we need is control on the bootloader, with the ability to unlock, load our own keys, and relock. We also need to clean-up the mess with all those "partitions" (some of them with critical informations e.g. calibration, IMEI, etc) so that only one partition would have all those static information (reasonably protected against overwrite, e.g. colocated with bootloader and device-tree). We should be able to re-parti…
Google phones allow re-locking the bootloader with your own key, except it still results in a warning during boot, and there's no way you're passing SafetyNet with this, at least not without hacks like Magisk. Also even when you unlock the bootloader, the TrustZone OS, which runs with hypervisor permissions and manages all the exciting things like DRM and SafetyNet itself, is still off limits for you.
The warning is a great thing for security: I'd appreciate it if my phone showed me that warning after I've surrendered it to the border control agent (alternatively, a sketchy repair shop), or bought it pre-owned, or if I "lost" it and gets returned to me.
Meanwhile the only real android competitor is manufactured by one company who doesn't allow even the end user to install apps not directly approved by Apple.
Do you really call iOS a competitor to android? Its like saying KIA is competitor to a Rolls Royce. Androids range from 50USD to anything else. Apple and Google makes phones but they’re not competitors, their market segments, user base have different opinions on what they want and do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you really call iOS a competitor to android? Its like saying KIA is competitor to a Rolls Royce. Androids range from 50USD to anything else. Apple and Google makes phones but they’re not competitors, their market segments, user base have different opinions on what they want and do.
Yes iOS is quite obviously a competitor to Android.