3 ms·
Is your alternative that someone should build a complete from-scratch alternative OS that can still be booted on the same hardware? For the time being, AOSP an
by neodymiumphish 1y ago
Is your alternative that someone should build a complete from-scratch alternative OS that can still be booted on the same hardware?
For the time being, AOSP and Chromium are still open source, so why not piggy-back off of all that labor and development to provide what GrapheneOS users want at minimal cost and effort?
- pjmlp 1y agoIf the goal is to be fully free from backdoors and development being cutted out at any time, yes.
- neodymiumphish 1y agoIf the source is fully open (it is) than detecting and disabling backdoors is completely possible. Not to mention the fact that other OS projects face the same risks. If Google cuts development of AOSP in favor of some closed-source alternative, the GrapheneOS team could simply continue development of AOSP on their own.
- wolvesechoes 1y ago> If the source is fully open (it is) than detecting and disabling backdoors is completely possible There exists a possible world where a group of underpaid FOSS devs forked Chromium and AOSP and effectively developed it further. But it is not our world. > the GrapheneOS team could simply continue development of AOSP on their own. They won't be able to do so.
- neodymiumphish 1y agoWhich makes the idea that a group like them could build their own OS from scratch all the more unattainable... That's the point I'm trying to make. At least if Google ever drops AOSP, it would be when it's still an intact OS available to continue development on. Additionally, I suspect a group like Graphene could get a lot more support developing AOSP's replacement in that instance, considering how many other manufacturers and devices utilize AOSP-derived software.
- phendrenad2 1y agoWhat makes AOSP so much more complex than open-source frameworks like Gtk and KDE? Or even partially-funded software like Gnome?
- twelvedogs 1y agoGraphene relies on a lot of closed source driver code I would imagine
- mindslight 1y agoIf you define the goal that way, then you actually need to clear a much higher bar of making your own hardware. Personally I'd much rather maintain a long term fork of AOSP than have to design, market, sell, and support a new device.
- BoredPositron 1y agoSailfish is alright.
- pdimitar 1y agoDo you have experience daily-driving it? Any prominent negatives?
- BoredPositron 1y agoI use it on an XA2, which is a bit of an older phone, but even there it runs fine. Sometimes the Android apps slow down and you have to relaunch the application layer, but that's just one click and takes about 5 seconds. That said, most Android apps run fine. All the enterprise stuff works great (Okta, MS Authenticator, Exchange etc.). Native Apps are a bit hit and miss but development is rather easy. I'd say the biggest pain point is that Google Maps doesn't work because of the lack of Google Play Services. The missing Maps/Play Services also breaks apps that rely on the maps API. Most of them just fall back to not showing a map at all while the rest of the app functions normally, but it's still an inconvenience. For turn by turn navigation I switched to HERE Maps which works without problems.
- tpoacher 1y agoi used to have a jolla and loved my sailfish phone ... until the phone died and i could fix it ... sailfish itself was great though. admittedly the android compatibility layer really helped though
- msgodel 1y agoDesktop Linux works very nicely on smartphones actually provided all the drivers are there. I lived with a PinePhone running FVWM on Xorg for a couple years and if the hardware didn't crumble away I'd still be using it today. No need to "build a complete from-scratch alternative OS" when that was already done 30 years ago.
- nolist_policy 1y agoDid you actually use it as a phone?
- msgodel 1y agoYes although mostly over VOIP. Voice calls aren't actually very complex though of you prefer using those directly.