14 ms·

I can almost guarantee this is due to licensing issues with the camera firmware. Modern cameras aren't just hardware any more. They're a mix of hardware and adv

I can almost guarantee this is due to licensing issues with the camera firmware. Modern cameras aren't just hardware any more. They're a mix of hardware and advanced processing algorithms that really do make a huge difference in the final output. Those algorithms are often licensed from 3rd parties with specific licensing requirements. Sony has been reasonably good about enabling open-source and fixing these things in the past, so I'd give them the benefit of the doubt that they'll try to find a way to enable the cameras on unlocked phones in the future.

danuker 5y ago
> they'll try to find a way to enable the cameras on unlocked phones in the future. In the meantime, I will only buy what ACTUALLY gives me control RIGHT NOW, namely, what is supported by LineageOS: https://wiki.lineageos.org/devices/ https://wiki.lineageos.org/devices/
- ddtaylor 5y ago
  The average consumer only wants to purchase the cross-section between what is the cheapest and works the best. For most consumers Open Source is not a feature.
  - danuker 5y ago
    With various right-to-repair legislation popping up everywhere, I am not so sure. Software restrictions are one way to ensure planned obsolescence.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago
      Actually, there is a specific set of features that guarantees planned obsolescence: * Irreplaceable battery (or one that is difficult to remove by the user). * on the iPhone, the Lightning socket and the Home button. The former starts to wear out after ca. 5 years; the Home button lasts a bit longer. Apple will repair both these for you but at this point you will be tempted to buy a new device instead because of the costs involved. * the support for older devices is being dropped from SDKs. With time, it becomes more and more difficult to develop apps for your device. For many developers this is something completely natural and reasonable. For me it's not. I'm not asking Apple to support iPhone 4s (would be nice, but it's unrealistic), but just to let me still run and provision apps on my old MacBook with a previous version of Xcode. It used to work well in 2012, why can't I do it now? Upgrade, upgrade, upgrade, produce tons of electric waste, buy more, buy more. OK, I am buying new devices, but I care about the old ones. I won't throw away a perfectly working phone that will serve me another 10 years just because it is not considered modern enough. EOL-ed smartphones are powerful computers, they have tons of different uses, I wish manufacturers recognized it and collaborate with their customers to reduce the amount of electrowaste.
      - qweqwweqwe-90i 5y ago
        For most people, EOL phones have 0 use.
  - forgotmypw17 5y ago
    I think this will change as devices become more long-lived (I still use an Android 5.x device today) and more repairable. For many it won't matter, but for many it will. You can see a similar thing today with automobiles. Some people only buy for features and let it go after a couple years, but many others also consider longevity and repair and parts costs.
- Abishek_Muthian 5y ago
  I feel LineageOS + F-Droid is often underrated when it comes to these discussions about alternate ecosystems. If we're ready to let go of name brands, then F-Droid has some very high quality apps[1] built with passion over profit. But I agree that the initial friction to setup LineageOS on the device is far too high for a non-technical customer, Something which could be only resolved if a devices ships with LineageOS(I think even F(x)tec, Fairphone requires the user to flash LineageOS) but then again memories of that fateful tie-up with device manufacturer which ended CyanogenMod would be fresh within LineageOS team. Now that's the catch-22, Alternate exists but not for everyone. [1] https://github.com/SimpleMobileTools https://github.com/SimpleMobileTools
  - jankotek 5y ago
    I had run LineageOS for some time. It works, but FDroid is missing too many apps, even opensource like Signal. I have to update apks manually every few months.
    - agilob 5y ago
      Signal team fought a long war against any forks or unauthorised builds of Signal. There are (or were) FDroid repositories with Signal compatible builds, but Moxie stated that any such build will be considered malware. Signal team was making such builds increasingly difficult to produce. Official F-Droid repo doesn't allow proprietary dependencies on which Signal depends for some messages (push?)
      - paulcarroty 5y ago
        > Signal team fought a long war against any forks or unauthorised builds of Signal. Yeah, this is main reason why I avoid Signal together with Google Services usage.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
      - fouc 5y ago
        Why doesn't Signal maintain an F-Droid compatible build? (if there's a dependency problem, then they should considering dropping it, release a Signal lite perhaps)
- arsome 5y ago
  Personally I refuse to buy any device that requires me to go crying to the manufacturer for an unlock key. Google and OnePlus devices can be unlocked locally with no need to contact anyone and beg, so no one can refuse your unlock on a device you already paid for.
  - flyinghamster 5y ago
    T-Mobile US's LG devices came with unlockable bootloaders as well, but that only helps if someone develops a ROM for it. Even then, more and more important functionality is getting locked behind closed doors. On my Stylo 5, it's not the camera, it's VoLTE. What good is it to run a custom ROM if I can't make and receive phone calls?
    - jeroenhd 5y ago
      For me, personally, a major reason to unlock the bootloader is to install Magisk. Running an entire ROM is nice if you can find a trusted and supported one, but failing that, root access is the next best thing. I've got background clipboard sync back in KDE Connect through a Magisk module. No need for an entire LineageOS ROM (would be nice if it were officially supported) if everything I want can be done another way. VoLTE is incredibly fragile. You can often force enable it and it'll just work, but there's so much that can go wrong that I wouldn't risk it.
      - fomine3 5y ago
        Just curious, is there any "trusted" custom ROMs? It seems that LineageOS is most reputed, but are they doing some good work about trustworthy like reproducible build, or just a reputation?. I was using random custom roms from xda until Jerry Bean era, but I'm now afraid to install entire OS.
        foresto 5y ago
        Maybe GrapheneOS?
- ByteWelder 5y ago
  If you want to free yourself from the clutches of Google, I recommend the LineageOS microG fork: https://lineage.microg.org/ https://lineage.microg.org/
- atatatat 5y ago
  You'll have the control to...not even lock your bootloader. Use GrapheneOS, if you want something resembling security.
  - floatboth 5y ago
    The GrapheneOS developers like to talk as if relocking the bootloader is unique to Google Pixels and providing a custom key is unique to them. But that's not true. Every OnePlus device in the last few years allows avb_custom_key as well, Xiaomi Mi A2 does too, probably many others. And ROMs like Pixel Experience publish their custom keys too.
    - sphinxcdi 5y ago
      Relocking the bootloader doesn't imply that verified boot is enabled or that that it's not broken for alternate OSes, as is the case for the devices you mentioned. https://twitter.com/GrapheneOS/status/1423665850725408771 https://twitter.com/GrapheneOS/status/1423665850725408771
  - summm 5y ago
    But then they don't allow me to have root at the same time. They claim it is for security reasons but fail to explain why and get really unfriendly. Maybe some power-trip? So now I can choose between vendor lock-in and random-programmer-lock-in.
- p1mrx 5y ago
  Buying a LineageOS-supported device doesn't necessarily help. I bought a Pixel 2 from the Google store, and later replaced it under warranty due to a bad microphone. Now the bootloader is permanently locked, and security updates ended in 2020. This is a widespread issue with no known solution: https://support.google.com/pixelphone/thread/14920605/google-refurbished-pixel-2-is-always-defective-bootloader-unlock https://support.google.com/pixelphone/thread/14920605/google...
sneak 5y ago
It doesn't matter whether it's the tyranny of Samsung being dicks or the tyranny of the copyright cartel jamming the fiction that is intellectual property down our throats (and thereby being dicks) that is fucking up one's phone. Perhaps the law needs to recognize that buying hardware should come with rights to the firmware. If all hardware is useless without firmware, then all hardware is useless without additional and separate rights, and that is a stupid and inefficient world in which to reside.
- amelius 5y ago
  I think we should have a clear separation between hardware and software companies. This is how it worked in the old days when the internet was built. Hardware companies are getting too much power over our data, and we need more freedom of choice in how our data is treated and by whom, regardless of the hardware that we own. A company can be "good" one day and "bad" the next day. We shouldn't be forced to throw away any hardware when that happens. Does that mean concessions on how well everything is integrated (in the view of the company and some people)? Probably, but that is of minor concern imho.
  - PeterisP 5y ago
    IMHO mainstream consumers are clearly voting with their wallets that the benefits of hw/sw integration are more important to them than the drawbacks of hw/sw integration.
    - amelius 5y ago
      That's because consumers are greedy and shortsighted actors which need help from an external entity to prevent them from getting trapped in a local optimum.
  - squiggleblaz 5y ago
    > I think we should have a clear separation between hardware and software companies. This is how it worked in the old days when the internet was built. I think that's an exaggeration, isn't it? Aside from the old PC industry (still surviving today), most computers were produced as a whole: whether it was Sun microcomputers and SunOS or Atari STs and GEM or Apples and MacOS, they were paired. The development of separate and competing operating systems and computers, with interchangeable parts and well understood standards, was an innovation but a temporary one. > and we need more freedom of choice in how our data is treated and by whom, regardless of the hardware that we own To that end, we need operating system developers to design data-first systems, where the user is in control of their data. Moreover, the liability for data loss and leaks in service-provided cloud storage should be so high that companies will be nervous about storing your data. It's so frustrating to me the number of apps where you install them, and you can't do anything with them without having a user account - even though there's no legitimate reason for them to have a user account for me!
swiley 5y ago
Never buy devices with non-free firmware. They're always full of garbage like this.
- brnt 5y ago
  Doesn't that rule out any phone?
  - teddyh 5y ago
    Not, reportedly, the Librem 5 phone.
    - ERD0L 5y ago
      A phone, sure, a smartphone, not a chance
      - teddyh 5y ago
        The Librem 5 is absolutely a smartphone: https://puri.sm/products/librem-5/ https://puri.sm/products/librem-5/
        0-_-0 5y ago
        Your linked page calls it a "phone" not a "smartphone", so you're proving GP's point.
        teddyh 5y ago
        What. By that definition, the Google Pixel 5a is not a “smartphone” either, since its product page does not use that term, either: https://store.google.com/us/product/pixel_5a_5g?hl=en-US https://store.google.com/us/product/pixel_5a_5g?hl=en-US
        0-_-0 5y ago
        Your leg is being pulled.
zeveb 5y ago
> I can almost guarantee this is due to licensing issues with the camera firmware. I think that a good pro-market regulation would be to require that all hardware be sold with the firmware required to operate it under some sort of open source license. Once one has bought a device, one should be able to continue operating it.
intricatedetail 5y ago
Then they shouldn't use such camera. Simple. This should be illegal!
Siira 5y ago
I don’t care that the evil company A has an obligation to evil company B to screw me. I just despise being screwed.
selfhoster11 5y ago
Then put that junk in a secure enclave (that unlocking doesn't touch), or in a separate chip. Don't screw over your users who want to have some control over the device.
m4rtink 5y ago
But why should customers care? They bought a device for good money and it stops working due to the user installing a different OS ? Good thing in the EU custom OS installs dont break warranty (even if vendors try to make you think otherwise).
alerighi 5y ago
Even if that is the case, what is the reason to forbid the access to the camera completely? Just remove the stock camera app with the proprietary algorithms in them. And let other applications access the camera trough the stock Android camera API. A camera is in the end a sensor that captures some video, why locking down that video stream? I get the algorithms, but leave the raw video stream to be used by other applications.
- fomine3 5y ago
  It's not just a raw video stream, but more complex work is needed to manage sensors.
atkailash 5y ago
Absolutely does not make it ok though. We paid/pay for the device. What we do with it is our business and it should work as expected (assuming drivers exist…licensing shouldn’t prevent this)

danuker 5y ago

> they'll try to find a way to enable the cameras on unlocked phones in the future. In the meantime, I will only buy what ACTUALLY gives me control RIGHT NOW, namely, what is supported by LineageOS: https://wiki.lineageos.org/devices/ https://wiki.lineageos.org/devices/

ddtaylor 5y ago
The average consumer only wants to purchase the cross-section between what is the cheapest and works the best. For most consumers Open Source is not a feature.
- danuker 5y ago
  With various right-to-repair legislation popping up everywhere, I am not so sure. Software restrictions are one way to ensure planned obsolescence.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago
    Actually, there is a specific set of features that guarantees planned obsolescence: * Irreplaceable battery (or one that is difficult to remove by the user). * on the iPhone, the Lightning socket and the Home button. The former starts to wear out after ca. 5 years; the Home button lasts a bit longer. Apple will repair both these for you but at this point you will be tempted to buy a new device instead because of the costs involved. * the support for older devices is being dropped from SDKs. With time, it becomes more and more difficult to develop apps for your device. For many developers this is something completely natural and reasonable. For me it's not. I'm not asking Apple to support iPhone 4s (would be nice, but it's unrealistic), but just to let me still run and provision apps on my old MacBook with a previous version of Xcode. It used to work well in 2012, why can't I do it now? Upgrade, upgrade, upgrade, produce tons of electric waste, buy more, buy more. OK, I am buying new devices, but I care about the old ones. I won't throw away a perfectly working phone that will serve me another 10 years just because it is not considered modern enough. EOL-ed smartphones are powerful computers, they have tons of different uses, I wish manufacturers recognized it and collaborate with their customers to reduce the amount of electrowaste.
    - qweqwweqwe-90i 5y ago
      For most people, EOL phones have 0 use.
- forgotmypw17 5y ago
  I think this will change as devices become more long-lived (I still use an Android 5.x device today) and more repairable. For many it won't matter, but for many it will. You can see a similar thing today with automobiles. Some people only buy for features and let it go after a couple years, but many others also consider longevity and repair and parts costs.
Abishek_Muthian 5y ago
I feel LineageOS + F-Droid is often underrated when it comes to these discussions about alternate ecosystems. If we're ready to let go of name brands, then F-Droid has some very high quality apps[1] built with passion over profit. But I agree that the initial friction to setup LineageOS on the device is far too high for a non-technical customer, Something which could be only resolved if a devices ships with LineageOS(I think even F(x)tec, Fairphone requires the user to flash LineageOS) but then again memories of that fateful tie-up with device manufacturer which ended CyanogenMod would be fresh within LineageOS team. Now that's the catch-22, Alternate exists but not for everyone. [1] https://github.com/SimpleMobileTools https://github.com/SimpleMobileTools
- jankotek 5y ago
  I had run LineageOS for some time. It works, but FDroid is missing too many apps, even opensource like Signal. I have to update apks manually every few months.
  - agilob 5y ago
    Signal team fought a long war against any forks or unauthorised builds of Signal. There are (or were) FDroid repositories with Signal compatible builds, but Moxie stated that any such build will be considered malware. Signal team was making such builds increasingly difficult to produce. Official F-Droid repo doesn't allow proprietary dependencies on which Signal depends for some messages (push?)
    - paulcarroty 5y ago
      > Signal team fought a long war against any forks or unauthorised builds of Signal. Yeah, this is main reason why I avoid Signal together with Google Services usage.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - fouc 5y ago
      Why doesn't Signal maintain an F-Droid compatible build? (if there's a dependency problem, then they should considering dropping it, release a Signal lite perhaps)
arsome 5y ago
Personally I refuse to buy any device that requires me to go crying to the manufacturer for an unlock key. Google and OnePlus devices can be unlocked locally with no need to contact anyone and beg, so no one can refuse your unlock on a device you already paid for.
- flyinghamster 5y ago
  T-Mobile US's LG devices came with unlockable bootloaders as well, but that only helps if someone develops a ROM for it. Even then, more and more important functionality is getting locked behind closed doors. On my Stylo 5, it's not the camera, it's VoLTE. What good is it to run a custom ROM if I can't make and receive phone calls?
  - jeroenhd 5y ago
    For me, personally, a major reason to unlock the bootloader is to install Magisk. Running an entire ROM is nice if you can find a trusted and supported one, but failing that, root access is the next best thing. I've got background clipboard sync back in KDE Connect through a Magisk module. No need for an entire LineageOS ROM (would be nice if it were officially supported) if everything I want can be done another way. VoLTE is incredibly fragile. You can often force enable it and it'll just work, but there's so much that can go wrong that I wouldn't risk it.
    - fomine3 5y ago
      Just curious, is there any "trusted" custom ROMs? It seems that LineageOS is most reputed, but are they doing some good work about trustworthy like reproducible build, or just a reputation?. I was using random custom roms from xda until Jerry Bean era, but I'm now afraid to install entire OS.
      - foresto 5y ago
        Maybe GrapheneOS?
ByteWelder 5y ago
If you want to free yourself from the clutches of Google, I recommend the LineageOS microG fork: https://lineage.microg.org/ https://lineage.microg.org/
atatatat 5y ago
You'll have the control to...not even lock your bootloader. Use GrapheneOS, if you want something resembling security.
- floatboth 5y ago
  The GrapheneOS developers like to talk as if relocking the bootloader is unique to Google Pixels and providing a custom key is unique to them. But that's not true. Every OnePlus device in the last few years allows avb_custom_key as well, Xiaomi Mi A2 does too, probably many others. And ROMs like Pixel Experience publish their custom keys too.
  - sphinxcdi 5y ago
    Relocking the bootloader doesn't imply that verified boot is enabled or that that it's not broken for alternate OSes, as is the case for the devices you mentioned. https://twitter.com/GrapheneOS/status/1423665850725408771 https://twitter.com/GrapheneOS/status/1423665850725408771
- summm 5y ago
  But then they don't allow me to have root at the same time. They claim it is for security reasons but fail to explain why and get really unfriendly. Maybe some power-trip? So now I can choose between vendor lock-in and random-programmer-lock-in.
p1mrx 5y ago
Buying a LineageOS-supported device doesn't necessarily help. I bought a Pixel 2 from the Google store, and later replaced it under warranty due to a bad microphone. Now the bootloader is permanently locked, and security updates ended in 2020. This is a widespread issue with no known solution: https://support.google.com/pixelphone/thread/14920605/google-refurbished-pixel-2-is-always-defective-bootloader-unlock https://support.google.com/pixelphone/thread/14920605/google...

sneak 5y ago

It doesn't matter whether it's the tyranny of Samsung being dicks or the tyranny of the copyright cartel jamming the fiction that is intellectual property down our throats (and thereby being dicks) that is fucking up one's phone. Perhaps the law needs to recognize that buying hardware should come with rights to the firmware. If all hardware is useless without firmware, then all hardware is useless without additional and separate rights, and that is a stupid and inefficient world in which to reside.

amelius 5y ago
I think we should have a clear separation between hardware and software companies. This is how it worked in the old days when the internet was built. Hardware companies are getting too much power over our data, and we need more freedom of choice in how our data is treated and by whom, regardless of the hardware that we own. A company can be "good" one day and "bad" the next day. We shouldn't be forced to throw away any hardware when that happens. Does that mean concessions on how well everything is integrated (in the view of the company and some people)? Probably, but that is of minor concern imho.
- PeterisP 5y ago
  IMHO mainstream consumers are clearly voting with their wallets that the benefits of hw/sw integration are more important to them than the drawbacks of hw/sw integration.
  - amelius 5y ago
    That's because consumers are greedy and shortsighted actors which need help from an external entity to prevent them from getting trapped in a local optimum.
- squiggleblaz 5y ago
  > I think we should have a clear separation between hardware and software companies. This is how it worked in the old days when the internet was built. I think that's an exaggeration, isn't it? Aside from the old PC industry (still surviving today), most computers were produced as a whole: whether it was Sun microcomputers and SunOS or Atari STs and GEM or Apples and MacOS, they were paired. The development of separate and competing operating systems and computers, with interchangeable parts and well understood standards, was an innovation but a temporary one. > and we need more freedom of choice in how our data is treated and by whom, regardless of the hardware that we own To that end, we need operating system developers to design data-first systems, where the user is in control of their data. Moreover, the liability for data loss and leaks in service-provided cloud storage should be so high that companies will be nervous about storing your data. It's so frustrating to me the number of apps where you install them, and you can't do anything with them without having a user account - even though there's no legitimate reason for them to have a user account for me!

swiley 5y ago

Never buy devices with non-free firmware. They're always full of garbage like this.

brnt 5y ago
Doesn't that rule out any phone?
- teddyh 5y ago
  Not, reportedly, the Librem 5 phone.
  - ERD0L 5y ago
    A phone, sure, a smartphone, not a chance
    - teddyh 5y ago
      The Librem 5 is absolutely a smartphone: https://puri.sm/products/librem-5/ https://puri.sm/products/librem-5/
      - 0-_-0 5y ago
        Your linked page calls it a "phone" not a "smartphone", so you're proving GP's point.
        teddyh 5y ago
        What. By that definition, the Google Pixel 5a is not a “smartphone” either, since its product page does not use that term, either: https://store.google.com/us/product/pixel_5a_5g?hl=en-US https://store.google.com/us/product/pixel_5a_5g?hl=en-US
        0-_-0 5y ago
        Your leg is being pulled.

zeveb 5y ago

> I can almost guarantee this is due to licensing issues with the camera firmware. I think that a good pro-market regulation would be to require that all hardware be sold with the firmware required to operate it under some sort of open source license. Once one has bought a device, one should be able to continue operating it.

intricatedetail 5y ago

Then they shouldn't use such camera. Simple. This should be illegal!

Siira 5y ago

I don’t care that the evil company A has an obligation to evil company B to screw me. I just despise being screwed.

selfhoster11 5y ago

Then put that junk in a secure enclave (that unlocking doesn't touch), or in a separate chip. Don't screw over your users who want to have some control over the device.

m4rtink 5y ago

But why should customers care? They bought a device for good money and it stops working due to the user installing a different OS ? Good thing in the EU custom OS installs dont break warranty (even if vendors try to make you think otherwise).

alerighi 5y ago

Even if that is the case, what is the reason to forbid the access to the camera completely? Just remove the stock camera app with the proprietary algorithms in them. And let other applications access the camera trough the stock Android camera API. A camera is in the end a sensor that captures some video, why locking down that video stream? I get the algorithms, but leave the raw video stream to be used by other applications.

fomine3 5y ago
It's not just a raw video stream, but more complex work is needed to manage sensors.

atkailash 5y ago

Absolutely does not make it ok though. We paid/pay for the device. What we do with it is our business and it should work as expected (assuming drivers exist…licensing shouldn’t prevent this)