Android Security or Vendor Lock-In? Google’s New Sideloading Rules Smell Fishy
Android Security or Vendor Lock-In? Google’s New Sideloading Rules Smell Fishy
Looks like it’s time to grow:
The way Google is actively on the war path against deGoogled ROMs and sideloading lately, I expect to have to install some sort of mobile Linux OS on my Fairphone at some point to do my regular smartphoning while preserving my privacy, while having to buy an ultra-cheap, small smartphone on the side with vanilla Google spyware just for my banking apps. In other words, carry two cellphones for nothing. Because Google.
I guess now that fascism rules the land, Google isn't worried about being getting broken up for being a monopoly anymore. That emboldens then to finally do what they've always wanted to do: lock down the Android ecosystem.
Fuck Google.
I'm thinking the same thing but really not sure which Linux OS is going to be best in terms of day to day use.
I'm thinking it will probably be between Postmarket and Lineage but do you have any opinions / insight on the subject?
having to buy an ultra-cheap, small smartphone on the side with vanilla Google spyware just for my banking apps.
Definitely would want one that has long software support.
There is still EU they still pushes back on corporate bullshit and privacy for their citizens, no?
So there's still hope?
they say "sideloading" we say "install the software of our choice"
Everyone needs to remember. Google never cared about making a phone. They never really cared about the android experience. They only care about your data. That’s it. They are a marketing company and you are the product that’s up for sale.
Not Android, not an Android fork, not reliant on hardware from the company you want to get away from (GrapheneOS requires Google Pixel devices).
Sailfish is probably the most complete alternative to the big two. It's got the biggest app ecosystem, first party hardware (meaning you can actually buy a device with it preinstalled - and yes Ubuntu Touch has a hardware partnership, too) and is based in Finnland.
Unfortunately it's not completely open source
I hope GrapheneOS guys will figure this out, as they usually do. Or someone else. Or at least we as a community would pay someone to make a truly free platform (pay me yay!)
because GrapheneOS at least allows to jail playstore and its emanations efficienlty, so one phone might be enough.
Still doesn't make sense to me to get a Google device (required for GrapheneOS) to "degoogle".
This only works because Google currently allows it. They could stop tomorrow and while you might be able to continue running GrapheneOS on a device where it's already installed, they can't magically update proprietary firmware for example.
While I was talking in another community about this topic (asking if GrapheneOS would get approached by a hardware vendor), another user mentioned that the team is currently in talks with an Android OEM to fulfill their security requirements for their upcoming device (2026-2027 estimation).
I don't know how to link comments on lemmy, sorry, but you can check my comment history for the conversation.
I think you misunderstand the reality. It's not about a small group of developers figuring things out. In a medium run, Google has the resources to close those back doors. The question is whether we can as a larger community create something strong enough to survive, or force regulators to issue another antitrust injunction.
I think there is potential for the latter, bearing in mind that Google has lost multiple antitrust lawsuits in the last few years. Clearly Google is only using this as a tool to restrict competition, and it's quite possible that courts will agree with my opinion. My view is that the AI bubble is a problem for their corporation, because they need to force it on people, but a lot of people don't want it. The reality is that cell phones today already do almost everything we would want cell phones to do. Except that most of us want better ad blocking and anti-spam features, which would cut into Google's bottom line. They know that they're trying to push things on us that we don't want, and if we have easy alternatives, they will lose business on a massive scale.
Regulators will be helpless if we keep buying our chains, that's all there is really. It woul be unethical to forbid self-harm, right? And vice versa, if we all just support the good guys, who needs regulators?
Vendor lock-in. Walled garden.
Please consider supporting these projects:
https://grapheneos.org/donate
https://opencollective.com/postmarketOS
https://ubports.com/donate
https://liberapay.com/mobian/donate