Top
Best
New

Posted by LorenDB 9 hours ago

Keep Android Open(f-droid.org)
1073 points | 413 commentspage 4
fredgrott 8 hours ago|
What people forget is that the real monopoly is in how the AOSP hardware OEM contract is written....

Remember how hard Amazon had it to attempt an Android fork?

I was due to OEM SOC access being locked out due to those contracts....

Any open source mobile OS attempting to complete with AOSP needs access to mobile OEM soc providers not touched by AOSP contracts and currently that is somewhat hard.

zb3 9 hours ago||
Android was never open. User apps are limited, only system apps can do X which means third party apps can't compete with Google and this is not a coincidence.

Let's focus on making it possible to use really open Linux systems on smartphones.

gf000 9 hours ago|
There are some functionality limited to google play services, but it really is not too much in my opinion.
vsviridov 9 hours ago|||
The amount of open stuff that was migrated into the Play Services closed source blob over the years just keeps growing.
tadfisher 7 hours ago||
I still can't comprehend why they implemented FIDO/WebAuthn support in Play Services. Passkeys are extremely difficult to support in apps that don't depend on Play Services client libraries.
zb3 7 hours ago|||
I'm not sure what you're referring to, but I was talking about the whole permissions system where the user is a third class citizen. Device manufacturers are second class citizens (restricted by Google via CDD/CTS) and the only true winner on that system is Google.

Regarding some concrete examples - Google can deeply integrate Gemini, but a competitor can't do this and users get no final say here either. Competitors are restricted by the permission system, Google is not restricted at all.

While rooting can alleviate this to some extent, Play Integrity is there to make sure the user regrets that decision to break free..

martin-t 5 hours ago||
Crazy idea: when companies change their product, they have to change the name.

Do you ever feel like the same food item doesn't taste the same it did 10 years ago? Maybe it's your memory being faulty or maybe the company got new management which decided to cut costs while keeping prices, extract the differential value from customer inertia and move on when the product stops being profitable.

Android is the same. Certain freedoms were a part of the offering - a part of the brand name. They no longer are. Not only should lose their trademark[0], they should be legally forced to change the name.

[0]: The purpose of which is to identify genuine product from counterfeits - in this case, the counterfeit just happens to be by the same company which released the original product.

306bobby 3 hours ago||
Looks like I'm staying in my custom ROM lol
jajuuka 6 hours ago||
>But Google said… Said what? That there’s a magical “advanced flow”? Did you see it? Did anyone experience it? When is it scheduled to be released? Was it part of Android 16 QPR2 in December? Of 16 QPR3 Beta 2.1 last week? Of Android 17 Beta 1? No? That’s the issue

A bit ironic to not believe Google is doing this. The same questions have same answers when asked about when Google is locking down side loading. A bit self-serving to pick and choose which things you want to believe are happening.

Macha 5 hours ago|
Google made the first move with their initial plan to lock it down, so the onus is on Google to calm the fears they caused if they don't want people to distrust them.
gethly 7 hours ago||
Just like Microsoft screwed up Windows, Google will screw up Android and people will move to Linux on PCs and some open version of Android, or Harmony, or whatever new mobile system comes up, on their phones.

Nothing lasts for ever. The sooner you make the switch, the better off you will be.

keeda 2 hours ago||
I wouldn't hold my breath:

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2026/01/windows-11-has-hit-1...

https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/

foobiekr 5 hours ago||
What is the advantage of moving sooner vs. moving later when rough spots have been smoothed over?
01HNNWZ0MV43FF 8 hours ago||
> We see a battle of PR campaigns and whomever has the last post out remains in the media memory as the truth

You must find truth. Lies will find you.

CodeBit26 6 hours ago||
Good thing
Atlas667 8 hours ago||
Capitalism is the privatization of human needs. As long as these tech platforms are owned privately they will be used to police and make money.

This view NEEDS to be central to the tech freedom rhetoric, else the whole movement is literally just begging politicians and hoping corporations do the right thing... useless.

nazgulsenpai 7 hours ago||
Aren't the politicians or their appointed bureaucrats who'd be making all the decisions if these needs were government owned? Why would state control lead to less policing? What incentive structure would lead to innovation without a profit motive, when even the modern communist world relies on capital markets?

(these are honest questions and not "gotcha")

Atlas667 7 hours ago||
> Aren't the politicians or their appointed bureaucrats who'd be making all the decisions if these needs were government owned?

Well that would be true under a capitalist government.

> Why would state control lead to less policing?

Its not just "the state runs it", its "we actively become the state".

Collective ownership through peoples councils, peoples courts with a world view that keeps it all open: socialism.

The world view of not allowing individual ownership over collective goods, the world view of socialism, is the life line of the movement. The actual practice of daily democracy, of running production and of deciding social functions is everyones responsibility and it should not be left to what has become a professional class of liars.

Public office members, which should only exist where absolutely necessary, should be locals and serve as messengers with 0 decision making power. All power should be in the local councils. We can mathematically implement this today (0 knowledge proofs).

Every single book on socialism is on theory and practices of acheiving this. Thats what the "dictatorship of the proletariat is", the dictatorship of working people, collectively.

> What incentive structure would lead to innovation without a profit motive, when even the modern communist world relies on capital markets?

We've been innovating for hundreds of thousands of years before capitalism. You dont need to generate money to innovate, the innovation itself is the driver, AKA a better life. No need to lock and limit production behind the attaining of profits of those who lead it.

nazgulsenpai 7 hours ago||
Thanks for responding.
Atlas667 7 hours ago||
Yeah, dude thanks for the good faith.

A lot of people are allergic to this rhetoric and will just assume I have a deep irrational bias, but I was actually a staunch free market supporter before.

Once I decided to be more intellectually honest with myself and read more about what both sides meant historically and currently, it really just made sense.

nazgulsenpai 6 hours ago||
I'm so exhausted of the partisan "my team vs your team" politics in the US that shuts down conversation, overlooks the blatant hypocrisies on either side, simplifies every issue to a single label to plaster on your opponent, etc etc.

I take honest conversation where I can get it, even when I don't agree. And to be clear I don't agree with most of your points and think it's idealistic and couldn't work in the real world. But I appreciate the spirit of what you're arguing for (in my interpretation) power with the people vs power with corporations and government and I think that's a very fundamental principle that is very important common ground.

edit: clarity

mistercheph 8 hours ago||
Copyleft fixes this.
Atlas667 7 hours ago||
They have the incentive to never chose this.

If we force it upon them by begging politicians, corporations still have the incentive to find a way to remove it or circumvent it.

Youre playing the cat and mouse game because you've been taught that solving it is too extreme (thats not a coincidence).

We dont need to endlessly fight a whole class of people, capitalists, for them not to use the things we require against us. Only socialism can solve that.

stackghost 9 hours ago|
From a marketing standpoint it seems like a baffling decision on Google's part.

I own a Pixel and while the hardware seems decent, I've had a buggy and annoying experience with Android, and it's been getting worse lately.

Are Google so high on their own supply that they think people use their phones out of preference for the OS? Because frankly it's not very good. That's like Microsoft thinking people use Teams because of its merits.

People buy Android phones because they can be had cheaper than an equivalent iPhone and because in spite of the buggy and inconsistent mess of an OS, you aren't beholden to Apple's regimented UX. Locking down Android will not give it a "premium experience"... It'll always just be "Temu iOS" at best.

drnick1 8 hours ago||
Have you considered Graphene since you own a Pixel? It's a huge upgrade over the stock OS in terms of security, privacy and general reduction of bloat.
stackghost 8 hours ago||
Yep it's definitely on my list but my Pixel is on its last legs and I'm considering going back to iOS.
microtonal 7 hours ago|||
Having just gone from an iPhone as my main phone to a Pixel with GrapheneOS, GrapheneOS is such a breath of fresh air. No constant push of AI, iCloud services, etc. plus I actually feel owner of my phone and not living on some feudal landlord's plot.

GrapheneOS is great!

drnick1 8 hours ago|||
I urge you not too. iOS is fully locked down -- Apple won't allow you to exert control over the hardware that you bought and own, it's shocking.
stackghost 2 hours ago||
I've owned iPhones before, they're fine.
gf000 9 hours ago|||
> "Temu iOS"

Come on, that's absolutely laughable.

There are several topics where Android is significantly ahead to the point that iOS is just a toy, and there are areas where the reverse is true.

And I say that as a recent convert, so it's not like I have a decade out of date view of any of the OSs. In my experience I had more visual bugs in case of iOS than android (volume slider not displaying correctly in certain cases when the content was rotated as a very annoying example).

stackghost 9 hours ago||
>Come on, that's absolutely laughable.

It's not, though. Google phones are not going to suddenly become luxury devices.

It's going to remain at the same level of polish (i.e. mediocre), except now without the major selling point of being able to run your own apps and have alternative app stores, etc. Back around Ice Cream Sandwich or thereabouts they got rid of "phone calls only mode" and forced us to rely on their half-baked "priority mode" that's an opaque shitshow.

When my wife is on call she gets random whatsapp notifications dinging all night, whereas when I had an iphone I could set Focus mode and achieve proper "phone calls only".

Android is not good. I use it despite its flaws, because of the trade-offs, not because it's better.

malfist 9 hours ago|||
> Google phones are not going to suddenly become luxury devices

Pixel Fold disagrees.

> When my wife is on call she gets random whatsapp notifications dinging all night, whereas when I had an iphone I could set Focus mode and achieve proper "phone calls only".

You can do that with do not disturb.

> Android is not good. I use it despite its flaws, because of the trade-offs, not because it's better.

That is your opinion. My opinion is different.

drnick1 8 hours ago||||
> Android is not good. I use it despite its flaws, because of the trade-offs, not because it's better.

Android is good, but Googled Android is not. You should check out GrapheneOS to see what Android done properly looks like.

Zak 7 hours ago||||
You can definitely make a "phone calls only" mode: create a mode, allow certain apps to interrupt, and add only phone calls to the list.

I do think they should offer more pre-configured notification modes by default, if only to show people what they can do with the feature. Perhaps "phone calls only" should be one of those.

franga2000 8 hours ago||||
People buy high-end Android phones like crazy, I don't know what bubble you live in. Samsung Folds and Flips are the luxury phones, not the iPhone Pro Max S eXtreme Edition 32 GB that looks exactly like the base model but has a slightly better camera. People show off their S Pen and perfectly stabilised 100x zoom lens, not their liquid ass. Multi-window and DeX are features for professionals who need to Get Shit Done^TM, iPhones are the toys kids use to send memojis to each other.

And yes, I can also click one button and go into phone calls only mode. I can even set it on a schedule or based on my calendar. I don't know where you're getting your half-baked Android, mine Just Works.

You might not agree with every one of those points, but you can't seriously think everyone thinks like you. Go outside your bubble some time.

stackghost 8 hours ago|||
Putting "Samsung" and "luxury" in the same sentence is lunacy. Their proprietary Android is even worse than Google's.

Where do you live? I've literally never seen anyone using a Fold or Flip device, ever. My kids are at the age where some of their peers are starting to get phones. All those kids have iPhones.

franga2000 7 hours ago||
If your plan is to keep saying unsubstantiated bullshit, take that to Reddit. Go to a store and try modern OneUI - it's just AOSP with a slightly different layout and more features. The apps are worse than Google's, but the OS is better. Both are miles above iOS in features, especially for power users. Split screen, windows, chat bubbles, DeX, notification categories and history, vendor-neutral PC integration and TV casting, ...

And I don't quite see your point about your kids' friends using iPhones. I sure as hell wouldn't give a kid a "luxury" phone. I'd take the cheapest thing that does the job and lasts a long time. An iPhone has a very long software support window so the cheaper models actually end up cost-competitive with budget Androids.

As for folds and flips, I've mostly seen people in suits using them, along with a few techy power users and some kids with rich parents. That's a luxury phone in my book.

GuinansEyebrows 6 hours ago|||
babe wake up new hn copypasta just dropped
gf000 9 hours ago|||
I'm talking about the OS though.
stackghost 9 hours ago||
Me too. The OS sucks.
StopDisinfo910 9 hours ago||
> Are Google so high on their own supply that they think people use their phones out of preference for the OS? Because frankly it's not very good

Honestly having gone back and forth between iOS and Android every three years or so, both OS are the same. It's not like the grass is really greener on the Apple side. The UX is virtually identical for anything that matters. Personally I put material Android above liquid glass iOS. The alleged polish of the Apple UX was lost on me when I had my last iphone.

The reason Google's moves are surprising has more to do with them embracing being a service player more and more with the arrival of Gemini and them having regulators breathing down their necks everywhere.

I guess they did it after the truly baffling US decision in the Epic trial but it's very likely to go against them in the EU.

tadfisher 9 hours ago||
The rumors that I have heard (and one government document I read that was poorly translated from Thai) is that there are some countries who are pressuring Google on this to combat info-stealing malware. Apparently, account-takeover/theft is very prevalent in SE Asia where most banking is done via Android phones.
StopDisinfo910 9 hours ago||
Maybe but lobbying is extremely strong in SE Asia. It's hard to distinguish from governments putting pressure for something and companies suggesting it would be a good idea.
More comments...