I'm surprised they've managed to foster a relationship with an actual OEM given how involved their ex-lead developer appears to still be with the project, and how abrasive he has been...
I'm surprised they've managed to foster a relationship with an actual OEM given how involved their ex-lead developer appears to still be with the project, and how abrasive he has been historically.
I didn't even know about him until recently, but I was reading the LineageOS changelog 30 release post on hackernews, following the post on here, and a single user was flooding the thread with rather unfriendly propagandising about GrapheneOS and I thought to myself "who is this dickhead?". By all accounts he is trying his hardest to pick fights with everyone who will engage.
At the time it was phrased by both the developer in question and the GrapheneOS social teams that it was a cutting of ties, but.. more recently they've walked back these statements and claimed...
At the time it was phrased by both the developer in question and the GrapheneOS social teams that it was a cutting of ties, but.. more recently they've walked back these statements and claimed that everybody misinterpreted them. He's also being very vocal on any discussion site that mentions him, and calls himself a GrapheneOS developer so. IDK, it seems to be a whole mess.
That's very disappointing, though I don't think it's enough to stop me from making the switch at some point... very much a "least of all evils" situation.
That's very disappointing, though I don't think it's enough to stop me from making the switch at some point... very much a "least of all evils" situation.
I'm not certain about "least of all evils"- from what I've seen of the LineageOS team, they're a lot more level headed. The project itself seems to strive for freedom from Google, and they don't...
I'm not certain about "least of all evils"- from what I've seen of the LineageOS team, they're a lot more level headed. The project itself seems to strive for freedom from Google, and they don't try to restrict what you can do with your device as much as the Graphene team do- as well as having a much larger list of compatible devices.
One of the more persuasive critiques I have read for Graphene is that, though they may very well be the most secure option, there are a couple of choices they've made in implementation (re: root, location services) which seem opinionated at best, and kowtowing to Google at worst- speculation suggests that they believe that the less they upset Google, the more likely they are to gain access to the device integrity programme.
But in all honesty, this is just online sentiment, parroted. I don't have much experience with GrapheneOS, having not owned a Google Android device before.
Root is objectively weakening the device security. Even most people who root their device acknowledge that. It's just a matter of personal priorities. If you value extra tweaking and customization...
root, location services
Root is objectively weakening the device security. Even most people who root their device acknowledge that. It's just a matter of personal priorities. If you value extra tweaking and customization over security, then GrapheneOS is obviously not for you, and there are plenty of other options.
location services
What about them? GOS is compatible with Google's location services as well as including their own private alternative.
kowtowing to Google at worst
If you release an alternative OS that fully sandboxes and cuts off all invasive features of Google Services, bypasses some of it's checks and reverse engineers the APIs, I don't think you can then "please google" by including a compatibility layer for their location service
I understand the security implications of root, but in my opinion anybody who has put in the effort to search for and install GrapheneOS on a device they own, should also be allowed to decide what...
I understand the security implications of root, but in my opinion anybody who has put in the effort to search for and install GrapheneOS on a device they own, should also be allowed to decide what compromises to security they can make without the derisive attitude that comes with any action that might have security implications.
As for the location services, from what I've read, there were limitations when it comes to the choice of location backend, especially for MLS (Mozilla Location Services, now deprecated), which were largely the consequences of one of Daniel's many spats with other open source projects.
But again- I've used LineageOS for years, and I've not really touched on GrapheneOS, nor have I participated in the GrapheneOS matrix instances. I admit that what I have read could be completely wrong, or an exaggeration, but I don't much have the energy for a deep-dive, especially into a project tied to such a problematic developer.
Do you use Lineage? I'm not super informed about alternative android ROMs (currently on iOS), but I was drawn to Graphene because of it seeming more plug-and-play than Lineage. I'm curious about...
Do you use Lineage? I'm not super informed about alternative android ROMs (currently on iOS), but I was drawn to Graphene because of it seeming more plug-and-play than Lineage. I'm curious about other's experience with alternatives.
If anything LineageOS is more "plug n play" that GrapheneOS, unless you're fine using a VERY strict and cut down amount of functionality. That being said, I use GrapheneOS as my preferred mobile...
If anything LineageOS is more "plug n play" that GrapheneOS, unless you're fine using a VERY strict and cut down amount of functionality. That being said, I use GrapheneOS as my preferred mobile OS right now and I would be thrilled to not need to own a Pixel to use it. It isn't perfect and I'd honestly love for a non-Android OS to get to a more usable state (I've tried a few and they were OK, but not to where I need them to be for it my only phone).
I have used LineageOS for years (though my current device doesn't have a build), and in my opinion it is a reasonably clean ROM with a great amount of flexibility. There are often problems with...
I have used LineageOS for years (though my current device doesn't have a build), and in my opinion it is a reasonably clean ROM with a great amount of flexibility. There are often problems with non-official builds for devices for which there is no official maintainer, but it's an active community of very smart people.
Any device which is listed as officially supported will just run out of the box.
For what it's worth, I've been using iodéOS ever since Calyx sort of imploded over the summer, and it's been great. The project is actively maintained by a self funded French shop that makes money...
For what it's worth, I've been using iodéOS ever since Calyx sort of imploded over the summer, and it's been great. The project is actively maintained by a self funded French shop that makes money by selling phones preloaded with iodéOS, and by selling subscriptions to a device-level tracker blocking service (which I don't use, as I have my own setup). They are pleasant and responsive, and have decent documentation. The installation process was very easy. And they have made very similar decisions about privacy and security tradeoffs to Calyx, which I largely agree with. They also support a very large number of devices (I think it's even the same set of devices that Lineage supports?).
That certainly sounds like him. Even when you mostly agree with him he tries to pick fights about minutia or any perceived slight against the very specific way that Graphenos works as a project.
That certainly sounds like him. Even when you mostly agree with him he tries to pick fights about minutia or any perceived slight against the very specific way that Graphenos works as a project.
I’m excited and hope it’s affordable. My dream device would be a CMF phone with Graphene, Pixels are very expensive and don’t seem to be worth the price. EDIT: Damn!
I’m excited and hope it’s affordable. My dream device would be a CMF phone with Graphene, Pixels are very expensive and don’t seem to be worth the price.
EDIT:
GrapheneOS also hinted that the mysterious partner’s devices will be “priced similarly to Pixels” and available globally
Well, the "a" series tends to be reasonably priced. Saying similarly prices to Pixels is really leaving a large range. Google actively tries to hit the flagship and midrange price tiers.
Well, the "a" series tends to be reasonably priced. Saying similarly prices to Pixels is really leaving a large range. Google actively tries to hit the flagship and midrange price tiers.
I'm looking at the 9a since it's got basically zero camera bump, but it's still ~$850 here. CMF phones are in the 400-500 range which is much more tempting, but it's got stock android, hence my...
I'm looking at the 9a since it's got basically zero camera bump, but it's still ~$850 here. CMF phones are in the 400-500 range which is much more tempting, but it's got stock android, hence my crossed fingers. I think that the price will probably be closer to non-a Pixels considering the relatively small potential customer base of Graphene.
Not necessarily. There are plenty of decent midrange phones priced lower than the Pixel A line right now. The article says that the devices supporting GrapheneOS will be future models of their...
Not necessarily. There are plenty of decent midrange phones priced lower than the Pixel A line right now. The article says that the devices supporting GrapheneOS will be future models of their existing devices, so it doesn't necessarily mean they will be some niche device.
Hey I do use a CMF as my secondary phone, been thinking of using a custom rom(iode OS?) to escape the enshittification of Android and Google but I don’t know what to do after unlocking the...
Hey I do use a CMF as my secondary phone, been thinking of using a custom rom(iode OS?) to escape the enshittification of Android and Google but I don’t know what to do after unlocking the bootloader or if I should do that in the first place.
It’s funny that the title is that they’re “ready to break free” but the article is the exact opposite. They specifically say they are working with a manufacturer to hopefully release something in...
It’s funny that the title is that they’re “ready to break free” but the article is the exact opposite. They specifically say they are working with a manufacturer to hopefully release something in late 2026/2027. So they are very clearly not ready.
Regardless, I’m super excited for Graphene to support more phones, especially with an OEM’s blessing.
I know it won’t be Samsung, but I would buy a Galaxy Fold running Graphene in a heartbeat.
Not sure what the phone will be but I'm glad to see a change happen. Maybe this will also open the door to having a device that comes with GrapheneOS pre-installed? I can handle the install...
Not sure what the phone will be but I'm glad to see a change happen. Maybe this will also open the door to having a device that comes with GrapheneOS pre-installed? I can handle the install process just fine (its really easy) but others wanting access to a privacy/security focused phone may not be tech savvy or have access to a computer.
I'm surprised they've managed to foster a relationship with an actual OEM given how involved their ex-lead developer appears to still be with the project, and how abrasive he has been historically.
I didn't even know about him until recently, but I was reading the LineageOS changelog 30 release post on hackernews, following the post on here, and a single user was flooding the thread with rather unfriendly propagandising about GrapheneOS and I thought to myself "who is this dickhead?". By all accounts he is trying his hardest to pick fights with everyone who will engage.
I watched a Louis Rossmann video about the guy, but I thought the Graphene team cut ties with him a while ago…?
At the time it was phrased by both the developer in question and the GrapheneOS social teams that it was a cutting of ties, but.. more recently they've walked back these statements and claimed that everybody misinterpreted them. He's also being very vocal on any discussion site that mentions him, and calls himself a GrapheneOS developer so. IDK, it seems to be a whole mess.
That's very disappointing, though I don't think it's enough to stop me from making the switch at some point... very much a "least of all evils" situation.
I'm not certain about "least of all evils"- from what I've seen of the LineageOS team, they're a lot more level headed. The project itself seems to strive for freedom from Google, and they don't try to restrict what you can do with your device as much as the Graphene team do- as well as having a much larger list of compatible devices.
One of the more persuasive critiques I have read for Graphene is that, though they may very well be the most secure option, there are a couple of choices they've made in implementation (re: root, location services) which seem opinionated at best, and kowtowing to Google at worst- speculation suggests that they believe that the less they upset Google, the more likely they are to gain access to the device integrity programme.
But in all honesty, this is just online sentiment, parroted. I don't have much experience with GrapheneOS, having not owned a Google Android device before.
Root is objectively weakening the device security. Even most people who root their device acknowledge that. It's just a matter of personal priorities. If you value extra tweaking and customization over security, then GrapheneOS is obviously not for you, and there are plenty of other options.
What about them? GOS is compatible with Google's location services as well as including their own private alternative.
If you release an alternative OS that fully sandboxes and cuts off all invasive features of Google Services, bypasses some of it's checks and reverse engineers the APIs, I don't think you can then "please google" by including a compatibility layer for their location service
I understand the security implications of root, but in my opinion anybody who has put in the effort to search for and install GrapheneOS on a device they own, should also be allowed to decide what compromises to security they can make without the derisive attitude that comes with any action that might have security implications.
As for the location services, from what I've read, there were limitations when it comes to the choice of location backend, especially for MLS (Mozilla Location Services, now deprecated), which were largely the consequences of one of Daniel's many spats with other open source projects.
But again- I've used LineageOS for years, and I've not really touched on GrapheneOS, nor have I participated in the GrapheneOS matrix instances. I admit that what I have read could be completely wrong, or an exaggeration, but I don't much have the energy for a deep-dive, especially into a project tied to such a problematic developer.
Do you use Lineage? I'm not super informed about alternative android ROMs (currently on iOS), but I was drawn to Graphene because of it seeming more plug-and-play than Lineage. I'm curious about other's experience with alternatives.
If anything LineageOS is more "plug n play" that GrapheneOS, unless you're fine using a VERY strict and cut down amount of functionality. That being said, I use GrapheneOS as my preferred mobile OS right now and I would be thrilled to not need to own a Pixel to use it. It isn't perfect and I'd honestly love for a non-Android OS to get to a more usable state (I've tried a few and they were OK, but not to where I need them to be for it my only phone).
I have used LineageOS for years (though my current device doesn't have a build), and in my opinion it is a reasonably clean ROM with a great amount of flexibility. There are often problems with non-official builds for devices for which there is no official maintainer, but it's an active community of very smart people.
Any device which is listed as officially supported will just run out of the box.
For what it's worth, I've been using iodéOS ever since Calyx sort of imploded over the summer, and it's been great. The project is actively maintained by a self funded French shop that makes money by selling phones preloaded with iodéOS, and by selling subscriptions to a device-level tracker blocking service (which I don't use, as I have my own setup). They are pleasant and responsive, and have decent documentation. The installation process was very easy. And they have made very similar decisions about privacy and security tradeoffs to Calyx, which I largely agree with. They also support a very large number of devices (I think it's even the same set of devices that Lineage supports?).
That certainly sounds like him. Even when you mostly agree with him he tries to pick fights about minutia or any perceived slight against the very specific way that Graphenos works as a project.
I’m excited and hope it’s affordable. My dream device would be a CMF phone with Graphene, Pixels are very expensive and don’t seem to be worth the price.
EDIT:
Damn!
Well, the "a" series tends to be reasonably priced. Saying similarly prices to Pixels is really leaving a large range. Google actively tries to hit the flagship and midrange price tiers.
I'm looking at the 9a since it's got basically zero camera bump, but it's still ~$850 here. CMF phones are in the 400-500 range which is much more tempting, but it's got stock android, hence my crossed fingers. I think that the price will probably be closer to non-a Pixels considering the relatively small potential customer base of Graphene.
Not necessarily. There are plenty of decent midrange phones priced lower than the Pixel A line right now. The article says that the devices supporting GrapheneOS will be future models of their existing devices, so it doesn't necessarily mean they will be some niche device.
Hey I do use a CMF as my secondary phone, been thinking of using a custom rom(iode OS?) to escape the enshittification of Android and Google but I don’t know what to do after unlocking the bootloader or if I should do that in the first place.
It’s funny that the title is that they’re “ready to break free” but the article is the exact opposite. They specifically say they are working with a manufacturer to hopefully release something in late 2026/2027. So they are very clearly not ready.
Regardless, I’m super excited for Graphene to support more phones, especially with an OEM’s blessing.
I know it won’t be Samsung, but I would buy a Galaxy Fold running Graphene in a heartbeat.
OEMs work on this time horizon as I understand it. They're planning models for this year, next year, and the year after that
Not sure what the phone will be but I'm glad to see a change happen. Maybe this will also open the door to having a device that comes with GrapheneOS pre-installed? I can handle the install process just fine (its really easy) but others wanting access to a privacy/security focused phone may not be tech savvy or have access to a computer.