7 ms·

I've got to say, some of the comments here are pretty funny. > "The sideloading restriction is easily solved by installing GrapheneOS" > "Unless they block AD

by tdeck 1y ago

I've got to say, some of the comments here are pretty funny. > "The sideloading restriction is easily solved by installing GrapheneOS" > "Unless they block ADB, I wouldn't say it's accurate to claim they're "blocking sideloading"". Not to pick on these folks but it's like we on HN have forgotten that ordinary people use phones too. For some of us, it's not a limitation as long as we can solder a JTAG debugger to some test pads on the PCB and flash our own firmware, but for most users that's just about as possible as replacing the OS.

rvnx 1y ago
And official Android-based OS bring advantages too. For example, Samsung has lot of proprietary and useful features, and GrapheneOS you cannot use Google Pay (one major feature of a phone).
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- umbra07 1y ago
  The primary reason why I haven't bought a Pixel and switched to GrapheneOS is because Samsung's OneUI is just so far ahead of the curve. They innovate new software features years before anyone else does.
  - behnamoh 1y ago
    I mean, Samsung and Xiaomi at this point pretty much just copy Apple, sometimes shamelessly.
    - nashashmi 1y ago
      First Sam/Xiam create something new. Then it does not catch on. So they kill it. Then when Apple launches it, they recreate it and launch it again. sideloading apps was a feature that did not catch on. Now they kill it. Then when Apple launches it, watch them tout it again as a feature.
      - pdntspa 1y ago
        Apple already did. But Europe only!
        nashashmi 1y ago
        True but not as a feature.
    - crossroadsguy 1y ago
      > just copy Apple, sometimes shamelessly Right. And something that Apple has been doing generally from Android (while trying really hard to catch up) - feature after feature and shamelessly releasing it as the next biggest revolutionary thing since the moon landing, or an invention shadowed only that of the wheel and fire. In fact last few years of Apple's phone advancement has been nothing along with some features which has been Android for years. Or maybe that's not "copying", that's bringing "at par" which is of course different?
    - lawgimenez 1y ago
      You mean like Android widgets has been around since the start and then Apple released their own subpar version after 10 years.
- fifteen1506 1y ago
  Yes, you are right [regarding Google Pay]. That being said, it is a reasonable compromise that, as long as people know that beforehand, losing Google Pay as the price to loosen Google's grip on your data, location and preferences is an acceptable one [price].
- sfRattan 1y ago
  > GrapheneOS you cannot use Google Pay (one major feature of a phone) News to me. Edit: I misread parent comment.
  - 6581 1y ago
    Google Play != Google Pay.
    - sfRattan 1y ago
      Apologies. I misread. Yeah, it sucks that Google Pay doesn't work on GrapheneOS. Though Google Pay is also probably the least private of the major tech-company payment platforms (the others being Apple Pay, Samsung Pay, and Garmin Pay). It is, I think, the only one that actually requires an open network connection on the phone to work. The others all generate one-time codes that get sent through the payment machine's network for verification by Apple/Samsung/Garmin on the backend (i.e. you can tap an Apple Watch to pay with all its radios off, but you can't do that with Google Pay). From what I gather, Garmin Pay can work with GrapheneOS if you have one of their smartwatches. And Privacy.com works, but not with tap-to-pay.
      - 9-133-392-393 1y ago
        > Garmin Pay can work with GrapheneOS As an aside - I think the Paypal app in Germany offers HCE tap-to-pay, and In the UK/Europe 'Curve' is a Google pay replacement that runs fine on GrapheneOS (and they have first-party support for huawei phones that don't even ship Google play services anymore)
ty6853 1y ago
Fortunately the overlap between people that distrust centralization and those who have higher aptitude for overcoming is synergistic.
nullc 1y ago
GrapheneOS is totally normie friendly. When we last got new phones I put GrapheneOS on mine and my partners, I never subsequently had to play tech support on hers.
- demosthanos 1y ago
  And who's going to put GrapheneOS on an ordinary person's phone in the first place? The Web installer [0] is not really approachable to a normal Android user. The instructions are dense, loaded up with warnings about dozens of edge cases that are discussed in jargon that would intimidate even relatively tech-savvy users: What's USB passthrough? Did I install my browser through Flatpak or Snap? How would I know? Did I need to understand the paragraph explaining in detail how carrier models lock users in? There's a bunch of stuff in there about Linux... do I need Linux? What's a sha256 hash and do I need to care? It's not that this is impossible for non-IT-folks to grasp, but there's no chance that my parents are installing this on their phone. [0] https://grapheneos.org/install/web https://grapheneos.org/install/web
  - fifteen1506 1y ago
    It can be a non-binary option. I have never installed OpenWRT on an home router -- too afraid to brick it, to deal with somewhat manual updates [I think]. I bought a GL.iNet. Totally normie, automatic updates. And then, "Hey look, this is... OpenWRT with a GUI!" There are some [mobile] brands going on similar direction [albeit one that doesn't seem right to me]. Volla & Fairphone. They provide alternatives. I don't like them [the software options available for them], but alternatives exist, working out of the box.
  - imiric 1y ago
    You're right, but ironically the web installer is the most user-friendly way of installing Android. The GOS page simply documents technical aspects in great detail, but the actual process is no different from the stock web installer from Google[1]. It could easily be wrapped in a similar wizard-like UI without the technical jargon. The reason it's not is because the intended audience who would consider installing GOS is expected to be tech savvy, and they appreciate the details. FWIW, GOS is an excellent project, but I don't think it's a good fit for non-technical users. But there's nothing stopping someone from creating a distribution of it with a preconfigured Google Play sandbox, some sane defaults and applications, to provide technical support, and to streamline the installation process, or even sell devices with it preinstalled. As long as that entity is trustworthy, it would be a good alternative for people who want to leave the Google/Samsung/etc. ecosystem, but don't have the technical knowledge or want to bother with installing and configuring GOS themselves. [1]: https://flash.android.com/back-to-public https://flash.android.com/back-to-public
CaffeineLD50 1y ago
Murena has a preloaded fork. Easy
- fellowniusmonk 1y ago
  Ok, now try sending RCS messages?
  - CaffeineLD50 1y ago
    I use signal. Don't need.
- strcat 1y ago
  No, Murena sells devices with /e/OS which is fork of LineageOS which drastically rolls back privacy and security compared to it. LineageOS itself rolls those back compared to the Android Open Source Project but not nearly as much as /e/OS. LineageOS would be a better choice for privacy, security, app compatibility and usability than Purism's product. GrapheneOS and /e/OS are very different operating systems. GrapheneOS is a hardened OS with massive privacy/security improvements and a far different appropach to mainstream app compatibility. GrapheneOS can be purchased preloaded on devices including from companies like NitroKey, so that is not something that's a difference between them. GrapheneOS is based on AOSP directly, not LineageOS. https://eylenburg.github.io/android_comparison.htm https://eylenburg.github.io/android_comparison.htm is a third party comparison between different alternate mobile operating systems. It could include many more privacy/security features but it's a good starting point. https://grapheneos.org/features https://grapheneos.org/features provides an overview of what GrapheneOS provides. It doesn't cover all of the features but it covers a lot of them. /e/OS lags very far behind on shipping Android privacy/security backports, lags a year or more behind on shipping standard privacy/security patches and does not keep the standard Android privacy/security model or features intact. Like LineageOS, /e/OS mainly supports devices without proper non-stock OS support and without firmware/driver patches. For the few devices they support which do provide those updates, they are much worse than LineageOS at shipping them to users. They don't use standard hardware-based security features even when they're made available to an alternate OS. /e/OS is not a safe option because going months or even years without critical browser engine and OS updates is a serious problem. It is not an academic or theoretical issue. They are failing to patch critical issues and some of those are known to be exploited in the wild. You can run nearly all Play Store apps on GrapheneOS, but not /e/OS with the much more limited and less secure microG approach. https://bsky.app/profile/grapheneos.org/post/3lamcjfv5r22s https://bsky.app/profile/grapheneos.org/post/3lamcjfv5r22s explains the difference in approach. Of course, their approach certainly provides dramatically more mobile app compatibility than using the desktop Linux stack on mobile as is being proposed in the original post.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
oneplane 1y ago
Do ordinary people side load at all? Assuming most people use the phone to do something else, and not for the sake of using the phone, after you get the apps you want/need, ordinary people are likely to just do the same thing/consume the same apps over and over.
- nashashmi 1y ago
  Yes. We download an apk file. And then install it after it giving it permission that it is ok to install unverified apks. Some of the more savvy ordinary people even export apps as apk for other phones.
- omoikane 1y ago
  Majority of users don't sideload any apps according to: https://zimperium.com/blog/the-hidden-risks-of-sideloading-apps https://zimperium.com/blog/the-hidden-risks-of-sideloading-a...
  - WillPostForFood 1y ago
    A majority do not, but the article characterizes it more positively: Sideloading is a fairly popular practice. Our research indicates that 18.3% of mobile users globally engage in sideloading. In some regions, such as the Asia Pacific, the impact is as high as 43%.
  - godelski 1y ago
    You say that like 18% is just some rounding error. About 1 in 5 users sideload?! That's not something to ignore
- fsflover 1y ago
  They "sideload" apps on desktop, which we usually call "installing software". They would probably do it on a phone, too.
  - godelski 1y ago
    This! It's crazy how we act like phones are dramatically different than other computers. An average computer user can go to a website, click "download" and then we think the average phone user can't do the exact same thing? It's the same people! They might be used to downloading from one location but it would be laughable to think they couldn't do the normal thing too (To clarify, I mean apps. Things like GrapheneOS you're going to run into the same issues as expecting my grandma to install Linux. Might be doable but it isn't quite there yet)
jjice 1y ago
[flagged]
- snickerbockers 1y ago
  Damn i didn't realize HN or DropBox was even around back then. I would've been in high school. And in another year or two there are going to be people younger than this comment entering the workforce...
- vvillena 1y ago
  It's important to note that the infamous Dropbox comment was not just misguided. It was wrong. The proof is that multiple competitor products have been launched since, and all of them have had sync issues at some point, with different degrees of severity ranging from sync delays, through data conflicts, up to loss of data in all synced devices. To this day, I still trust Dropbox more than its competition. This includes custom rsync scripts.
crossroadsguy 1y ago
There was some Ubuntu (or Linux) forum where I had asked a question and I wanted an app or something (I can't recall now) which was easier to use and do repeatedly. Most of the people were replying with stuff like "why can't you just do <something that involves lots of CLI and more than an hour ro so>" or on the lines of it. I, someone extremely new to Linux (hell, new to computers), was bewildered. Then a commenter replied with something that helped me and exactly what I needed. He added a note directed towards others which went something like - the battle for Linux as THE desktop OS was sabotaged by its most ardent practitioners.
- CamperBob2 1y ago
  What's needed is a Dropbox analogue for Linux -- something that doesn't do anything that isn't already possible, but that makes things that are possible accessible to non-specialists. It looked like SteamOS was going to be a contender, but apparently not.
  - vvillena 1y ago
    This is impossible by design. Decades ago there were some distributions that had this as a goal (e.g. Mandrake, Suse), they included an application similar to the Windows Control Panel to manage everything. But such applications can never reach into all the corners, unless the distribution is severely locked down. The example of this extreme is... macOS. And still, there are some cases where dropping into the command line is the better or even the only option. Back on Linuxland, the userbase realized this about two decades ago, when Ubuntu launched. Having a nice default experience was considered better than having easy tweakability, because Ubuntu could also be configured to the fullest extent in the classic Linux way of reaching into the guts of the system and rearranging things to taste. Not that I would ever recommend tweaking Ubuntu too much, but it can be done. What about the other end? Most people who like fiddling with Linux by reaching into its internals have settled on distributions such as Arch, where this way of managing the system is expected and thus the distribution works to ensure this experience is as easy and predictable as it can be, by providing a good happy path experience for common scenarios, and providing top-notch documentation for common and uncommon customization options, or minority hardware platforms and devices.
Waterluvian 1y ago
People in general are very bad at knowing what the average experience is. We almost all have a predisposition to perceive our experience as being approximately normal, or if not, not too far away from normal. This is especially exaggerated anywhere experts of a domain congregate. They adjust to a significantly biased frame of reference. And that results in opinions that don't fall anywhere within the galaxy of what's reasonable for the vast majority of users of a given thing.
- pinoy420 1y ago
  [dead]
fakedang 1y ago
I mean, this website is also home to the famous Dropbox comment, so it is to be expected.
- LinAGKar 1y ago
  What comment?
  - fakedang 1y ago
    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9224 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9224
wnevets 1y ago
[flagged]
saurik 1y ago
And, worse, it isn't even true, right? As Google keeps adding more and more DRM tech to Android, along with APIs that let apps ensure they are running on "legitimate" software, installing GrapheneOS isn't even a viable option going forward unless you are effectively exiting the entire ecosystem anyway.
- strcat 1y ago
  Apps have to choose to block using a non-stock OS and only a tiny minority of them do it. GrapheneOS bypasses it for many of them and we intend to get it fully resolved. Regulatory action is in progress for this in Europe already and it will be solved. GrapheneOS users can currently use nearly all Android apps with the exception of a subset of banking/financial apps and a tiny number of other apps. Google trying to crack down further will greatly increase the already incoming consequences in multiple countries for the existing Play Integrity API.
  - privacyking 1y ago
    What regulatory action? I don't see any progress made legally.
axus 1y ago
Replying to everyone: Google changing defaults is a permanent change for some large percentage of their userbase. A subset of those can still figure out how to download and run an APK file but have no further recourse against monopolistic behavior. Maybe those people do need to be protected from scams. Social engineers have complete control over the user, so any control given to the user is owned by the scammer. Seems like the same problem as pig butchering, a technology or process solution can't save someone too stupid to save. Thinking about less controversial options for Google, they could track if any side-loaded apps have the dangerous permissions, and provide a global true/false status to other apps that request it. So Wallet / whatever would disable features if any "outside" apps were in a position to exploit the user. And Android could offer a button that cleans up the "problem" apps, setting the global status back to false.
magicalist 1y ago
> Not to pick on these folks but it's like we on HN have forgotten The linked article is literally an ad for Librem phones though?
paxys 1y ago
"Ordinary people" aren't sideloading apps one way or another. In fact this will help 99% of them, since for them sideloading is mostly used for malware and phishing.
Aurornis 1y ago
Making it difficult for ordinary people to sideload apps that access their SMS or accessibility features (e.g. screen recording, controlling the phone) is the point. I think what people on HN really forget is that the average person isn’t equipped to tell the difference between a legit source sideloaded app or a Trojan horse app that some TikTok video instructed them to install.
- palmotea 1y ago
  > Making it difficult for ordinary people to sideload apps that access their SMS or accessibility features (e.g. screen recording, controlling the phone) is the point. I wonder if they could solve that with delays. E.g. you can sideload, but the process is deliberately delayed to take two full days and require carefully reading warning screens and correctly answering questions about the warnings, then getting time to think, multiple times.
ryao 1y ago
They ordinary people would be the ones that need this level of protection, since a scammer would talk them into sideloading malware if the device permits it.
dmd 1y ago
oh come on please it's easy just /etc/init.apt-get/frob-set-conf --arc=0 - +/lib/syn.${SETDCONPATH}.so.4.2 even my grandma can do that
strcat 1y ago
GrapheneOS is sold preinstalled on devices. People do not have to install it themselves. It's also far easier to install than a desktop OS via https://grapheneos.org/install/web https://grapheneos.org/install/web. The post from Purism is highly inaccurate and is inventing issues which are not real issues along with presenting a product which massive reduces security and app compatibility as somehow solving those things. Dropping mainstream app compatibility and support for the main open source app ecosystem entirely hardly solves a tiny number of apps enforcing using the stock OS.

by tdeck 1y ago

rvnx 1y ago

And official Android-based OS bring advantages too. For example, Samsung has lot of proprietary and useful features, and GrapheneOS you cannot use Google Pay (one major feature of a phone).

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
umbra07 1y ago
The primary reason why I haven't bought a Pixel and switched to GrapheneOS is because Samsung's OneUI is just so far ahead of the curve. They innovate new software features years before anyone else does.
- behnamoh 1y ago
  I mean, Samsung and Xiaomi at this point pretty much just copy Apple, sometimes shamelessly.
  - nashashmi 1y ago
    First Sam/Xiam create something new. Then it does not catch on. So they kill it. Then when Apple launches it, they recreate it and launch it again. sideloading apps was a feature that did not catch on. Now they kill it. Then when Apple launches it, watch them tout it again as a feature.
    - pdntspa 1y ago
      Apple already did. But Europe only!
      - nashashmi 1y ago
        True but not as a feature.
  - crossroadsguy 1y ago
    > just copy Apple, sometimes shamelessly Right. And something that Apple has been doing generally from Android (while trying really hard to catch up) - feature after feature and shamelessly releasing it as the next biggest revolutionary thing since the moon landing, or an invention shadowed only that of the wheel and fire. In fact last few years of Apple's phone advancement has been nothing along with some features which has been Android for years. Or maybe that's not "copying", that's bringing "at par" which is of course different?
  - lawgimenez 1y ago
    You mean like Android widgets has been around since the start and then Apple released their own subpar version after 10 years.
fifteen1506 1y ago
Yes, you are right [regarding Google Pay]. That being said, it is a reasonable compromise that, as long as people know that beforehand, losing Google Pay as the price to loosen Google's grip on your data, location and preferences is an acceptable one [price].
sfRattan 1y ago
> GrapheneOS you cannot use Google Pay (one major feature of a phone) News to me. Edit: I misread parent comment.
- 6581 1y ago
  Google Play != Google Pay.
  - sfRattan 1y ago
    Apologies. I misread. Yeah, it sucks that Google Pay doesn't work on GrapheneOS. Though Google Pay is also probably the least private of the major tech-company payment platforms (the others being Apple Pay, Samsung Pay, and Garmin Pay). It is, I think, the only one that actually requires an open network connection on the phone to work. The others all generate one-time codes that get sent through the payment machine's network for verification by Apple/Samsung/Garmin on the backend (i.e. you can tap an Apple Watch to pay with all its radios off, but you can't do that with Google Pay). From what I gather, Garmin Pay can work with GrapheneOS if you have one of their smartwatches. And Privacy.com works, but not with tap-to-pay.
    - 9-133-392-393 1y ago
      > Garmin Pay can work with GrapheneOS As an aside - I think the Paypal app in Germany offers HCE tap-to-pay, and In the UK/Europe 'Curve' is a Google pay replacement that runs fine on GrapheneOS (and they have first-party support for huawei phones that don't even ship Google play services anymore)

ty6853 1y ago

Fortunately the overlap between people that distrust centralization and those who have higher aptitude for overcoming is synergistic.

nullc 1y ago

GrapheneOS is totally normie friendly. When we last got new phones I put GrapheneOS on mine and my partners, I never subsequently had to play tech support on hers.

demosthanos 1y ago
And who's going to put GrapheneOS on an ordinary person's phone in the first place? The Web installer [0] is not really approachable to a normal Android user. The instructions are dense, loaded up with warnings about dozens of edge cases that are discussed in jargon that would intimidate even relatively tech-savvy users: What's USB passthrough? Did I install my browser through Flatpak or Snap? How would I know? Did I need to understand the paragraph explaining in detail how carrier models lock users in? There's a bunch of stuff in there about Linux... do I need Linux? What's a sha256 hash and do I need to care? It's not that this is impossible for non-IT-folks to grasp, but there's no chance that my parents are installing this on their phone. [0] https://grapheneos.org/install/web https://grapheneos.org/install/web
- fifteen1506 1y ago
  It can be a non-binary option. I have never installed OpenWRT on an home router -- too afraid to brick it, to deal with somewhat manual updates [I think]. I bought a GL.iNet. Totally normie, automatic updates. And then, "Hey look, this is... OpenWRT with a GUI!" There are some [mobile] brands going on similar direction [albeit one that doesn't seem right to me]. Volla & Fairphone. They provide alternatives. I don't like them [the software options available for them], but alternatives exist, working out of the box.
- imiric 1y ago
  You're right, but ironically the web installer is the most user-friendly way of installing Android. The GOS page simply documents technical aspects in great detail, but the actual process is no different from the stock web installer from Google[1]. It could easily be wrapped in a similar wizard-like UI without the technical jargon. The reason it's not is because the intended audience who would consider installing GOS is expected to be tech savvy, and they appreciate the details. FWIW, GOS is an excellent project, but I don't think it's a good fit for non-technical users. But there's nothing stopping someone from creating a distribution of it with a preconfigured Google Play sandbox, some sane defaults and applications, to provide technical support, and to streamline the installation process, or even sell devices with it preinstalled. As long as that entity is trustworthy, it would be a good alternative for people who want to leave the Google/Samsung/etc. ecosystem, but don't have the technical knowledge or want to bother with installing and configuring GOS themselves. [1]: https://flash.android.com/back-to-public https://flash.android.com/back-to-public

CaffeineLD50 1y ago

Murena has a preloaded fork. Easy

fellowniusmonk 1y ago
Ok, now try sending RCS messages?
- CaffeineLD50 1y ago
  I use signal. Don't need.
strcat 1y ago
No, Murena sells devices with /e/OS which is fork of LineageOS which drastically rolls back privacy and security compared to it. LineageOS itself rolls those back compared to the Android Open Source Project but not nearly as much as /e/OS. LineageOS would be a better choice for privacy, security, app compatibility and usability than Purism's product. GrapheneOS and /e/OS are very different operating systems. GrapheneOS is a hardened OS with massive privacy/security improvements and a far different appropach to mainstream app compatibility. GrapheneOS can be purchased preloaded on devices including from companies like NitroKey, so that is not something that's a difference between them. GrapheneOS is based on AOSP directly, not LineageOS. https://eylenburg.github.io/android_comparison.htm https://eylenburg.github.io/android_comparison.htm is a third party comparison between different alternate mobile operating systems. It could include many more privacy/security features but it's a good starting point. https://grapheneos.org/features https://grapheneos.org/features provides an overview of what GrapheneOS provides. It doesn't cover all of the features but it covers a lot of them. /e/OS lags very far behind on shipping Android privacy/security backports, lags a year or more behind on shipping standard privacy/security patches and does not keep the standard Android privacy/security model or features intact. Like LineageOS, /e/OS mainly supports devices without proper non-stock OS support and without firmware/driver patches. For the few devices they support which do provide those updates, they are much worse than LineageOS at shipping them to users. They don't use standard hardware-based security features even when they're made available to an alternate OS. /e/OS is not a safe option because going months or even years without critical browser engine and OS updates is a serious problem. It is not an academic or theoretical issue. They are failing to patch critical issues and some of those are known to be exploited in the wild. You can run nearly all Play Store apps on GrapheneOS, but not /e/OS with the much more limited and less secure microG approach. https://bsky.app/profile/grapheneos.org/post/3lamcjfv5r22s https://bsky.app/profile/grapheneos.org/post/3lamcjfv5r22s explains the difference in approach. Of course, their approach certainly provides dramatically more mobile app compatibility than using the desktop Linux stack on mobile as is being proposed in the original post.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

oneplane 1y ago

Do ordinary people side load at all? Assuming most people use the phone to do something else, and not for the sake of using the phone, after you get the apps you want/need, ordinary people are likely to just do the same thing/consume the same apps over and over.

nashashmi 1y ago
Yes. We download an apk file. And then install it after it giving it permission that it is ok to install unverified apks. Some of the more savvy ordinary people even export apps as apk for other phones.
omoikane 1y ago
Majority of users don't sideload any apps according to: https://zimperium.com/blog/the-hidden-risks-of-sideloading-apps https://zimperium.com/blog/the-hidden-risks-of-sideloading-a...
- WillPostForFood 1y ago
  A majority do not, but the article characterizes it more positively: Sideloading is a fairly popular practice. Our research indicates that 18.3% of mobile users globally engage in sideloading. In some regions, such as the Asia Pacific, the impact is as high as 43%.
- godelski 1y ago
  You say that like 18% is just some rounding error. About 1 in 5 users sideload?! That's not something to ignore
fsflover 1y ago
They "sideload" apps on desktop, which we usually call "installing software". They would probably do it on a phone, too.
- godelski 1y ago
  This! It's crazy how we act like phones are dramatically different than other computers. An average computer user can go to a website, click "download" and then we think the average phone user can't do the exact same thing? It's the same people! They might be used to downloading from one location but it would be laughable to think they couldn't do the normal thing too (To clarify, I mean apps. Things like GrapheneOS you're going to run into the same issues as expecting my grandma to install Linux. Might be doable but it isn't quite there yet)

jjice 1y ago

[flagged]

snickerbockers 1y ago
Damn i didn't realize HN or DropBox was even around back then. I would've been in high school. And in another year or two there are going to be people younger than this comment entering the workforce...
vvillena 1y ago
It's important to note that the infamous Dropbox comment was not just misguided. It was wrong. The proof is that multiple competitor products have been launched since, and all of them have had sync issues at some point, with different degrees of severity ranging from sync delays, through data conflicts, up to loss of data in all synced devices. To this day, I still trust Dropbox more than its competition. This includes custom rsync scripts.

crossroadsguy 1y ago

There was some Ubuntu (or Linux) forum where I had asked a question and I wanted an app or something (I can't recall now) which was easier to use and do repeatedly. Most of the people were replying with stuff like "why can't you just do <something that involves lots of CLI and more than an hour ro so>" or on the lines of it. I, someone extremely new to Linux (hell, new to computers), was bewildered. Then a commenter replied with something that helped me and exactly what I needed. He added a note directed towards others which went something like - the battle for Linux as THE desktop OS was sabotaged by its most ardent practitioners.

CamperBob2 1y ago
What's needed is a Dropbox analogue for Linux -- something that doesn't do anything that isn't already possible, but that makes things that are possible accessible to non-specialists. It looked like SteamOS was going to be a contender, but apparently not.
- vvillena 1y ago
  This is impossible by design. Decades ago there were some distributions that had this as a goal (e.g. Mandrake, Suse), they included an application similar to the Windows Control Panel to manage everything. But such applications can never reach into all the corners, unless the distribution is severely locked down. The example of this extreme is... macOS. And still, there are some cases where dropping into the command line is the better or even the only option. Back on Linuxland, the userbase realized this about two decades ago, when Ubuntu launched. Having a nice default experience was considered better than having easy tweakability, because Ubuntu could also be configured to the fullest extent in the classic Linux way of reaching into the guts of the system and rearranging things to taste. Not that I would ever recommend tweaking Ubuntu too much, but it can be done. What about the other end? Most people who like fiddling with Linux by reaching into its internals have settled on distributions such as Arch, where this way of managing the system is expected and thus the distribution works to ensure this experience is as easy and predictable as it can be, by providing a good happy path experience for common scenarios, and providing top-notch documentation for common and uncommon customization options, or minority hardware platforms and devices.

Waterluvian 1y ago

People in general are very bad at knowing what the average experience is. We almost all have a predisposition to perceive our experience as being approximately normal, or if not, not too far away from normal. This is especially exaggerated anywhere experts of a domain congregate. They adjust to a significantly biased frame of reference. And that results in opinions that don't fall anywhere within the galaxy of what's reasonable for the vast majority of users of a given thing.

pinoy420 1y ago
[dead]

fakedang 1y ago

I mean, this website is also home to the famous Dropbox comment, so it is to be expected.

LinAGKar 1y ago
What comment?
- fakedang 1y ago
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9224 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9224

wnevets 1y ago

[flagged]

saurik 1y ago

And, worse, it isn't even true, right? As Google keeps adding more and more DRM tech to Android, along with APIs that let apps ensure they are running on "legitimate" software, installing GrapheneOS isn't even a viable option going forward unless you are effectively exiting the entire ecosystem anyway.

strcat 1y ago
Apps have to choose to block using a non-stock OS and only a tiny minority of them do it. GrapheneOS bypasses it for many of them and we intend to get it fully resolved. Regulatory action is in progress for this in Europe already and it will be solved. GrapheneOS users can currently use nearly all Android apps with the exception of a subset of banking/financial apps and a tiny number of other apps. Google trying to crack down further will greatly increase the already incoming consequences in multiple countries for the existing Play Integrity API.
- privacyking 1y ago
  What regulatory action? I don't see any progress made legally.

axus 1y ago

Replying to everyone: Google changing defaults is a permanent change for some large percentage of their userbase. A subset of those can still figure out how to download and run an APK file but have no further recourse against monopolistic behavior. Maybe those people do need to be protected from scams. Social engineers have complete control over the user, so any control given to the user is owned by the scammer. Seems like the same problem as pig butchering, a technology or process solution can't save someone too stupid to save. Thinking about less controversial options for Google, they could track if any side-loaded apps have the dangerous permissions, and provide a global true/false status to other apps that request it. So Wallet / whatever would disable features if any "outside" apps were in a position to exploit the user. And Android could offer a button that cleans up the "problem" apps, setting the global status back to false.

magicalist 1y ago

> Not to pick on these folks but it's like we on HN have forgotten The linked article is literally an ad for Librem phones though?

paxys 1y ago

"Ordinary people" aren't sideloading apps one way or another. In fact this will help 99% of them, since for them sideloading is mostly used for malware and phishing.

Aurornis 1y ago

Making it difficult for ordinary people to sideload apps that access their SMS or accessibility features (e.g. screen recording, controlling the phone) is the point. I think what people on HN really forget is that the average person isn’t equipped to tell the difference between a legit source sideloaded app or a Trojan horse app that some TikTok video instructed them to install.

palmotea 1y ago
> Making it difficult for ordinary people to sideload apps that access their SMS or accessibility features (e.g. screen recording, controlling the phone) is the point. I wonder if they could solve that with delays. E.g. you can sideload, but the process is deliberately delayed to take two full days and require carefully reading warning screens and correctly answering questions about the warnings, then getting time to think, multiple times.

ryao 1y ago

They ordinary people would be the ones that need this level of protection, since a scammer would talk them into sideloading malware if the device permits it.

dmd 1y ago

oh come on please it's easy just /etc/init.apt-get/frob-set-conf --arc=0 - +/lib/syn.${SETDCONPATH}.so.4.2 even my grandma can do that

strcat 1y ago

GrapheneOS is sold preinstalled on devices. People do not have to install it themselves. It's also far easier to install than a desktop OS via https://grapheneos.org/install/web https://grapheneos.org/install/web. The post from Purism is highly inaccurate and is inventing issues which are not real issues along with presenting a product which massive reduces security and app compatibility as somehow solving those things. Dropping mainstream app compatibility and support for the main open source app ecosystem entirely hardly solves a tiny number of apps enforcing using the stock OS.