• gnuplusmatt@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    102
    ·
    2 days ago

    Motorola is supposed to be doing Graphene supported phones soon, whether thats from the factory or with an official installer I am not sure

    • Joanie Parker@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      Won’t happen in the US ironically.

      Graphene refuses to collect user data. So all those new age verification laws, yeah they just eliminated our chance to go back to the good old days of Android.

      • paraphrand@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        19 hours ago

        Graphene does not need to collect that data. it’s the websites, apps and services that want it. Not Graphene.

        What you are implying is like saying Graphene won’t let a phone do any location services at all. And I doubt Graphene doesn’t support Maps.

        • Joanie Parker@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          17 hours ago

          Spoken like someone who hasn’t seen what the Graphene team themselves have said on the matter.

          And also someone who doesn’t understand current US laws going into effect.

          This is an OS level requirement now.

          • paraphrand@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            14 hours ago

            They might refuse adding APIs and refuse to collect data. These are separate things though.

            But upon looking closer, I guess at least one law wants the age check to happen at device setup instead of on the fly? Then I guess that falls into collecting data.

      • mlg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        Lenovo running the show is what makes it viable, otherwise I would have thought it was a Google backed conspiracy to drain GrapheneOS resources on a product that would never release.

        Tbh the mobile industry is long overdue for some competitive upgrades anyway. A lot of their underlying functionality has fallen far behind desktop OSs.

        • EliteCloneMike@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 day ago

          It’s too bad that the software and hardware are not wholly independent. As for Google pulling that kind of nonsense, I wouldn’t put it past them. They are as sketchy as sketchy gets. But this seems isolated and out of the prying hands/eyes of Google (hopefully).

      • dogs0n@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        1 day ago

        From the outside, this doesn’t look one sided to me and Motorola (Lenovo) won’t want GrapheneOS “locked away”.

        Motorola partnered with GrapheneOS explicitly because they want the highest security for their enterprise phones (in my opinion), so Motorola demanding GrapheneOS be less secure would be silly for them anyways since they prioritise enterprise (as far as I know).

        And in any case, if Motorola caused beef with the GrapheneOS team, I believe in GrapheneOS’s morals to ignore stupidity. They probably have a contract anyways that states Motorola have near zero influence over the OS.

        • Holytimes@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          1 day ago

          Lenovo and Dell are some of the only companies that actually care about Linux weirdly enough. That also arnt Linux software developers anyways. If anyone’s goanna do it “right” it’s those two.

        • fodor@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 day ago

          Motorola is desperate for a non-Google solution because they don’t want to be losing to Google when it has a monopoly over everything. So you may be right in that Motorola wants the highest security for enterprise but more generally if they don’t have an alternative operating system then they don’t have a future in the cell phone business.

      • sanitation@lemmy.radio
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yeah but even then - are they targeting hobbyists and privacy crowd? Or more like some special enterprise use case?

        • rumba@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 day ago

          Short answer, whoever buys them, all of the above. But consider, that with the whole world’s slide to the default invasion of privacy, the privacy crowd might well get invaded by the average Joe tired of all the shit.

            • FG_3479@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              The Moto Signature which is their highest end phone is £900, and a price comparison site can get you an under £40 contract, so the successor should be similar.

    • kiranraine@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      I want to applaud that but not if its the same as Google android where you’re waiting a year or more for an update. So many features I wanted over the years and was stuck to 11 or 12 at the time(or earlier idk which that thing had but it was a common occurrence since i had the issue with 2 diff phones)