Motorola's GrapheneOS phones will launch in 2027 priced higher than Pixels : android@programming.dev

Motorola's GrapheneOS phones will launch in 2027 priced higher than Pixels (arstechnica.com)

submitted 1 month ago by codeinabox@programming.dev to c/android@programming.dev

12 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 12 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org 8 points 1 month ago (9 children)

...They had one job.

hideshow 9 child comments

[–] IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 month ago (7 children)

I'm confused. Were you expecting a relatively small volume flagship device to be cheaper?

parent

hideshow 7 child comments

[–] nao@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Who asked for a flagship device?

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] r_se_random@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I think one of the requirements for Graphene security specs was LTS support for the chipset itself.

Fairphone had the same issue in finding a chipset with LTS which wasnt flagship tier and ended up going for one from the IoT side of Snapdragon.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 month ago (1 child)

LTS of the chip does not imply flagshipness of the whole brick.

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] r_se_random@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago*

That is not what I said?

I said Qualcomm only provides LTS for either their IoT chips or flagship chips and Motorola decided to splurge.

parent

[–] lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I was expecting a phone that was affordable to the people who care about this stuff in the economy where we exist. Doesn't have to be a flagship.

Heck, they could have arranged with Motorola to release the bootloader relock keys for older models that are no longer on sale but are still used for CROMs, to make them into better gateway phones to then shift into a Moto with Graphene.

Instead, what we have is basically the "attempts to be the left" equivalent of the Trump Phone.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago (1 child)

You should read the article. The only chips that have the required security features (other than Google's tensor chips) are Qualcomm's flagship chips. That's what is driving the cost.

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 month ago

I read the article. That's why I said they had one job. They act as if unaware that the people who are looking for Graphene OS as a system to use have to resort to used Pixels for that; having to buy tomorrow's phone, even more overpriced, does not really factor in good into the decision.

parent

[–] onlinepersona@programming.dev 3 points 1 month ago

There's always some dude who will shit on anything and everything, no matter how good or bad it is.

parent

[–] _haha_oh_wow_@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago

Might pick one up if they're good. Otherwise I'll probably just stick with used Pixels.

[–] onlinepersona@programming.dev 2 points 1 month ago*

MKBHD might review this when it's released, or at least mention GrapheneOS. That could help with publicity.