- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or # to comment.
deleted by creator
Full AOSP compatibility for Pixel devices is a huge reason to buy a Pixel instead of a 3rd party OEM. They’re shooting themselves in the foot.
That is probably a fraction of one percent of the pixel purchases.
Maybe but those 1% of buyers are multiplicators incentivizing others to buy the same phone.
Yes, they incentivize another 0.001%. How is google going to survive this?
Yes, they incentivize another 0.001%. How is google going to survive this?
Tech geeks acting as multiplication factors are the people who brought Apple from obscurity to mainstream.
That was 40 years ago. Any more recent examples?
I don’t agree with the other person but the closest example that I could find would be OnePlus. They had no physical shops, used word of mouth (influencers), had good marketing (flagship killer), and were relatively cheap. They quickly rose the ranks and became a mainstream brand.
deleted by creator
Yep. Thanks to this, I’m moving to IOS with a x64 handheld. I won’t need a smartphone beyond calls and tethering so, why bother. Google can enjoy the fruits of their labor.
Which? Rn, a Steam Deck, but soon, something smaller and more palmable, still fishing for something good. I’d even take something pi-based.
Hard truth: With America going to shit, the EU needs a smartphone brand like…yesterday. Germans, get cooking!
the EU needs a smartphone brand like…yesterday
Germans, get cooking!
This is the reason why I’m not a fan of permissive licenses.
This is the reason why I’m not a fan of permissive licenses.
If Google is the sole copyright holder, a copyleft license would change nothing because they still have the option to change the license going forward.
That is actually a fair point, but I assume out of the millions of lines of code, not all of them come from Google, right?
That would requiere convincing the copyright holders of those lines, or at least rewrite them. The latter I don’t see it impossible, but it would take time.
Still, I will always rather a strong copyleft license…
They’ll just do an Apple and publish the source to the bits they have to while keeping the bits they don’t closed source making the os as a whole closed source.
So, basically what they’re already starting to do?
I don’t understand.
also I thought Apple builds upon BSD style licensed stuff, while Android is on Linux which is gpl?
Doesn’t matter for a distribution, Apple historically also shipped some gpl tools like bash and Samba, they just provide the source for what they have to.
This myth needs to die. The only parts of BSD that Apple used for iOS/osx, were from bsd4.4 (released in like the 1990s). And even then it was only parts of the user space.
The kernel is a completely different beast.
I specifically said BSD style license. ChatGPT claims i the kennel started as a mix of the mach and FreeBSD kennels as base, improved by Apple. sadly I could but find any proper source :(
are you seen to know that “The kernel is a completely different beast.”, maybe you can shed some light
They planned so from the start.
Of course they are. They always did. The entire ecosystem is so closely tied to google services that it’s almost impossible to use the phone without them (if you want to use banking and security apps). For now the only alternative is iOS and I’m starting to doubt if mobile Linux will ever become usable.
deleted by creator
Lineage os and graphene os are both based on AOSP, no ? How to expect these projects to survive if AOSP becomes closed source ?
What worries me the most is the support for our phone. Constructor provides bad to average support for new android versions. Meanwhile, these projects can last for a long time. I have a one plus 7 pro and it is running on YAAP, receives OTA security updates every month and all the major versions of Android. Killing AOSP will lead to killing long term support of our phone.
Where, exactly, do you think the source code will go for aosp? It’ll just get forked. See ZFS and openzfs, or Solaris, and illumos.
You are right that it will continue, I was too dramatic. However the big advantage of AOSP is to have a solid common base.
deleted by creator
I think iOS is better than stock Android because Apple is not in ad business so it has better privacy protections. Its locked ecosystem sucks but privacy wise it’s better.
I went with GrapheneOS because it’s fairly large user base means that it will last longer than other, less used mods. But in the end it will only survive for as long as Google let’s it.
deleted by creator
Electronic Frontier Foundation doesn’t agree with you: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/04/apples-apptrackingtransparency-upending-mobile-phone-tracking
“Looking ahead, the mobile operating system market is essentially a duopoly, and Google controls the larger part of the -opoly. While Apple pushes through new privacy measures like ATT, Google has left its own Ad ID alone. Of the two, Apple is undoubtedly doing more to rein in the privacy abuses of advertising technology. Nearly every criticism that can be made about the state of privacy on iOS goes double for Android. Your move, Google.”
I trust EFF more then I trust you, sorry.
deleted by creator
As I said, I’m using Graphene OS. I think you’re confused about it the same way you’re confused about what EFF is and who is fighting Apple and why.
deleted by creator
Soooo, that means that android is fucked but custom roms should be able to continue from android 15, not?
deleted by creator
How will Samsung/OnePlus use Android 17 and 18?
deleted by creator
That’s not what I meant. Will the other OEMs have to pay Google for using Android 17 (since it’s not open-source anymore) ?
deleted by creator
AFAIK (I may be wrong), you have to pay google for bundling Google Play Services on your phone. For example, Purism probably does not pay Google anything because it only uses AOSP + it’s own suite of services. However, Android 17 will be a bit concerning. Let’s wait till we get a bit more clarity.
