top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 100 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Honestly this is one of the only things holding me back from going to graphene. Once this is available to non alpha users I might make the switch properly.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 95 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I tried out this OS last year and really loved it, until I went on a road trip and couldn't use Android Auto. This is huge and will make GrapheneOS an extremely attractive option to privacy minded people.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I think Android Auto is really the only thing keeping me from completely de-googling. Many times in the past I've installed some stripped down ROM or whatever but I always go back because Android Auto is too convenient.

    I wish there was a nice open source alternative that worked with my head unit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago

    So you can have Android Auto while beinging degoogled. I do. As others have pointed out there is: https://github.com/sn-00-x/aa4mg

    It's a bit of a faff to install, but works.

    The problem I found is no SatNav that can take into account traffic. The best I've found is "Organic Maps", but it is open and works without the Google infrastructure. No getting round that traffic knowledge makes Google Maps better.

    I have non AA things forcing me towards having to at least partly re-google.

    I've been eying GrapheneOS as a way to compromise without being compromised.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 41 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    To me it is super weird that GrapheneOS positions itself as a way to degoogle - but it is only supported on google's Pixel hardware.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 45 points 2 years ago (7 children)

    They only support Pixel hardware because it's currently the only line that meets their list of requirements. I'd guess that if something came around which beat the Pixel line, they'd support it...but I also don't see anyone positioned to do that right now.

    Though it's worth mentioning that the developers don't emphasize degoogling all that much and their community often have a bit of tension with degooglers who come to join them. The OS certainly meets the needs of those of us getting away from Google but the developers have no problem recommending workflows that go through Google (albeit with regular app access rather than the privileged and deeply integrated access on stock Android) when they're more secure than the alternatives. For example, they'll regularly suggest using sandboxed Google Play over F-Droid or Aurora Store, again because of their stance of prioritizing security above all.

    It can sometimes be a bit annoying when your priorities are more about avoiding corporate surveillance than protecting yourself from attackers or a snooping government, but their work ends up supporting both regardless.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago

    That sounds like a reasonable position. Google would have an advantage in getting timely AOSP and security updates, but getting that stuff done should be a high priority for all manufacturers anyway. As for the rest of the list, there are things I don't know about - but at a glance it looks fair enough. So I guess there could and probably should be other phones trying to meet those conditions.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (6 replies)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 30 points 2 years ago

    Oh hell yeah. That was a big issue when I tried out gOS last year.

  • source
  • [–] 25 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Awesome. I've been using GrapheneOS on my Pixel 7 for almost a year now and it's been great. I won't be using this feature, but am happy it might attract more users.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    I'm still iffy about grapheneos after the rossman issue. Any other good alternatives?

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 30 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    iirc that developer doesn't work on grapheneos anymore

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    Daniel Micay says he will retire from lead developer and move on to management role, yet I think he is still committing a lot of the code https://github.com/GrapheneOS/platform_manifest/commits/14

    However, I do believe he is very devoted to improving the privacy and security for all users, despite his communication issue. So I personally still uses grapheneos.

    Similar alternatives are divest and calyx, but it seems like graphene is still the best for me and probably for most beginners and experts alike.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 14 points 2 years ago

    If you need Android Auto, the closest thing you'll get is LineageOS with some sort of GApps, but those are far from the "privacy and security first" goals of GrapheneOS.

    If you are looking for something private/"FOSS-focused" and don't need Android Auto, I like CalyxOS a lot, and have heard good things about DivestOS.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago

    I generally like Louis Rossmann, but his arguments in the GrapheneOS video were beyond stupid. He says that he can't trust GrapheneOS because it's developed by Daniel Micay. I guess he doesn't understand that GrapheneOS is open source and anyone can see the code. Then he switched back to the proprietary Google ROM. So he's trusting proprietary software that's filled with spyware over privacy-respecting open source software that can be audited by anyone.

    You don't seem to understand the situation either and you blindly follow some YouTuber. I'd advise you to overthink your opinion on this topic.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 18 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Is Androit Auto proprietary? Does it depend on Google services (beyond GoogleMaps)?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 39 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Yes it's proprietary and depends on a lot of Google services. Usually if you want it on a custom ROM, you need to use the full GApps packages. No Android Auto on smaller GApps packages.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    It works with microG but you still need the proprietary Auto app.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 12 points 2 years ago

    About time!

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago (15 children)

    I'd have rather seen Google Pay support than Android Auto though I imagine it's a lot less feasible.

  • source
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 32 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Google would have to approve the OS by whitelisting it

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

    Would they? Why? I'm asking as I'm unaware of what restrictions are in place for it to work.

    Edit: i meant to ask: "would they have to approve it?"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (14 replies)
    [–] 8 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I really hope google pay is next, but safety net makes that hard

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›