3 ms·

In this case, my phone is a Google product. Google can make available the drivers if it so desires.

by ISL 7y ago

sangnoir 7y ago
Google doesn't make chips and therefore doesn't own the SoC IP - Qualcomm does. Google may not make unilaterally decide to avail those drivers. They could theoretically play hardball with Qualcomm on the licensing, but I doubt the Pixel line brings in enough revenue for Qualcomm to even consider that threat for more than half a second.
- gowld 7y ago
  The drivers work fine; the problem is Google dropping OS support. If Google doesn't figure something out soon, a lot of people who bought Google's iPhone competitor since 2016 are starting to notice that Pixels have no longevity and no resale value, and wondering why they are paying more to get less than an iPhone.
  - sangnoir 7y ago
    The drivers don't work fine when you upgrade the Linux kernel - which is the planned obsolescence that Qualcomm has relied on to push the sales of the latest Snapdragon. I don't know if custom Android ROMs are still a popular, but (SoC & camera) drivers were what forced custom ROMs to stick old kernels. Project Treble is Google's plan to keep the drivers working - I don't know how well that's going seeing that OEMs were given the option to not support it at the time it was launched.
geofft 7y ago
Hence my "parts of Google" comment - for an organization as large as Google, I don't think that saying that it "desires" anything other than profit is particularly meaningful. There are people and teams at Google who agree that this is a problem. I have no idea what influence they have over the people/teams that make the Pixel, or vice versa. For a good example of this, see the conclusion of this recent Project Zero writeup of an Android bug (related to old kernel versions in Android, in fact): https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2019/11/bad-binder-android-in-wild-exploit.html https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2019/11/bad-binder-an... First, Google Project Zero determined on their own that they would approach Google Android with a 7-day disclosure timeline because of active exploitation - usually a disclosure timeline is a way to force the hand of a software vendor you don't control. Second, their suggestion for fixing it is for Android to change how they approach kernel updates. For another good example, see the time that Google Ads penalized Google Chrome for buying paid links. https://searchengineland.com/google-chromes-paid-link-penalty-now-lifted-115560 https://searchengineland.com/google-chromes-paid-link-penalt...

In this case, my phone is a Google product. Google can make available the drivers if it so desires.

by ISL 7y ago

In this case, my phone is a Google product. Google can make available the drivers if it so desires.

Google doesn't make chips and therefore doesn't own the SoC IP - Qualcomm does. Google may not make unilaterally decide to avail those drivers. They could theoretically play hardball with Qualcomm on the licensing, but I doubt the Pixel line brings in enough revenue for Qualcomm to even consider that threat for more than half a second.

gowld 7y ago
The drivers work fine; the problem is Google dropping OS support. If Google doesn't figure something out soon, a lot of people who bought Google's iPhone competitor since 2016 are starting to notice that Pixels have no longevity and no resale value, and wondering why they are paying more to get less than an iPhone.
- sangnoir 7y ago
  The drivers don't work fine when you upgrade the Linux kernel - which is the planned obsolescence that Qualcomm has relied on to push the sales of the latest Snapdragon. I don't know if custom Android ROMs are still a popular, but (SoC & camera) drivers were what forced custom ROMs to stick old kernels. Project Treble is Google's plan to keep the drivers working - I don't know how well that's going seeing that OEMs were given the option to not support it at the time it was launched.

geofft 7y ago

Hence my "parts of Google" comment - for an organization as large as Google, I don't think that saying that it "desires" anything other than profit is particularly meaningful. There are people and teams at Google who agree that this is a problem. I have no idea what influence they have over the people/teams that make the Pixel, or vice versa. For a good example of this, see the conclusion of this recent Project Zero writeup of an Android bug (related to old kernel versions in Android, in fact): https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2019/11/bad-binder-android-in-wild-exploit.html https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2019/11/bad-binder-an... First, Google Project Zero determined on their own that they would approach Google Android with a 7-day disclosure timeline because of active exploitation - usually a disclosure timeline is a way to force the hand of a software vendor you don't control. Second, their suggestion for fixing it is for Android to change how they approach kernel updates. For another good example, see the time that Google Ads penalized Google Chrome for buying paid links. https://searchengineland.com/google-chromes-paid-link-penalty-now-lifted-115560 https://searchengineland.com/google-chromes-paid-link-penalt...