this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2025
484 points (98.8% liked)

Technology

71314 readers
4464 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

TL;DR

  • Google has made it harder to build custom Android ROMs for Pixel phones by omitting their device trees and driver binaries from the latest AOSP release.

  • The company says this is because it’s shifting its AOSP reference target from Pixel hardware to a virtual device called “Cuttlefish” to be more neutral.

  • While Google insists AOSP isn’t going away, developers must now reverse-engineer changes, making the process for supporting Pixel devices more difficult.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] fouc@feddit.uk 1 points 30 minutes ago

Long time coming, Play Integrity (or whatever's called nowadays) restrictions have effectively killed any alternative distributions.

This fucking sucks. Cyberpunk dystopia

[–] fin@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 hour ago

Damn, I've just switched to Pixel 3a XL I got for $100 and then installed Evolution OS.

[–] malwieder@feddit.org 25 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

That was bound to happen at some point. Buying a Google device to then "degoogle" it never sit quite right with me.

[–] ryannathans@aussie.zone 3 points 1 hour ago

Amen but here we are

[–] Takios@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 2 hours ago

I bought mine secondhand because I had a bad feeling about giving google money just to degoogle as well but still really wanted to use GrapheneOS

[–] danzabia@infosec.pub 9 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

So I installed LineageOS recently. Now that I've transferred my passwords and account info I'm quite happy. What will happen from here? Will some apps stop working? If not, is there a problem with just continuing to use the phone as is until I need a new phone (security, eg)?

[–] mctoasterson@reddthat.com 11 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

I am running GOS on a Pixel 7, which means I've had this device for ~2.5 years at this point, and back when I transitioned to this setup I was aware they were talking about being beholden to Pixels due to the hardware security module not being available on other devices.

It has been a known issue. I understand it is a very difficult and costly undertaking to develop new hardware and new entrants would be competing against the big guys for fab space, manufacturing and assembly etc.

We need some kind of nonprofit or independently financed group to advance this cause. Could it be FUTO, Framework, or some other company/organization like this?

There would be market incentive to solve these problems - There has got to be a lot of demand for a neutral hardware platform that meets the hardware security module and other requirements for bootloader security, custom ROMs, etc.

[–] chutchatut@lemm.ee 6 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Would fairphone be a good choice?

[–] moonleay@feddit.org 3 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

No. Sadly they lack the security requirements of GOS. Source

[–] Quik@infosec.pub 71 points 19 hours ago (3 children)

Now more than ever we need more work on PostmarketOS, Mobian, Gnome Mobile etc...

Bummer that it's still so hard to find a somewhat modern, affordable phone that is Linux compatible

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 24 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

Yeah, I'd totally buy a phone running one of those provided it does all the phone things properly: SMS/MMS, reliable calls, all day battery, etc. I don't need fancy apps, I just need a working phone.

If I can get that, I could probably donate some time porting apps.

[–] timbuck2themoon@sh.itjust.works 8 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (3 children)

I really want to give furios phone a shot. It's apparently close to supporting my carrier.

That and a sailfish phone. The community one though didn't support my carrier (think it's mainly EU specced only.)

What I find missing most of the time though is any esim support. Makes me wonder if the hardware one that you can program an esim on works.

[–] swelter_spark@reddthat.com 2 points 7 hours ago

I plan on buying one when my current phone is no longer usable.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 2 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

I want a phone with only cellular data, no calling, no sms, just an open source browser capable of webasm and webrtc

[–] Ibuthyr@lemmy.wtf 3 points 2 hours ago

We had those, they were called Pocket PCs. I too want them back. I loved the Dell Axim x51v. A tablet does the job, but it's the same shitty OS.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 3 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Sounds like a tablet, and that very well could be easier for someone to build than a phone.

[–] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 hours ago

Can we have one of those that fit in my pocket, like 6.5" max ?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] thatradomguy@lemmy.world 7 points 12 hours ago

If Pine64 can spec out a reasonably decent prototype of a phone and Purism can sell theirs for 2 grand (not worth it), then somebody else can legit come out with something just the same. Pine64 project and Purism cannot be the only communities that can somehow come out with these kinds of tech. Better yet, more people should be jumping to help out these guys to be free from Google and Apple dominance.

[–] lemmyuser100002@lemmy.world 7 points 12 hours ago (2 children)
[–] pirat@lemmy.world 6 points 2 hours ago

It's Nopen Source

[–] TheFederatedPipe@fedia.io 35 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

This is not good, this is why I don't like permissive licenses.

[–] SanicHegehog@lemmy.world 16 points 13 hours ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] kami@lemmy.dbzer0.com 105 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

one less reason to buy a Pixel, well done Google!

[–] cryptix@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 7 hours ago

How badly would this affect graphine os?

[–] metaphortune@lemmy.world 28 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

I don't have any actual research, but I wouldn't be surprised if the Pixel itself doesn't really make money at all. One of those "get people hardcore into the Google ecosystem to get their money/data" things.

[–] ocassionallyaduck@lemmy.world 29 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

The absolutely criminal dark patterns that they pull on people via Google photos auto backup is insane.

Just in my own orbit 2 of my friends wives, my parents, and my in-laws all wound up paying Google because they thought they had to or lose all their photos. We helped most of them disconnect the autobackup (that they didn't even know was activated) and move it to offline safely. But that was the most downright evil shit Google has ever done and literally a fire in me for manipulating the elderly and less tech savvy so blatantly.

[–] Supernova1051@sh.itjust.works 18 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

devil's avocado: this move has saved many people's cherished photos from disappearing by having them auto save. before Google photos I'd run into cases (I used to do home IT support) where people had years of family photos disappear because they didn't back them up properly. Having to communicate what happened was never fun.

is Google photos perfect? No, but it's a great solution for people who don't want to manage their data.

[–] ocassionallyaduck@lemmy.world 11 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Yes, but that shouldn't explicitly opt in, and they shouldn't marry that product to Gmail and Google Drive if they are going to push it to enable by default.

Again, it's really insidious. They push it so aggressively I had to disable it on my personal device twice, and I can't just not use Google Photos app because it's tied to the camera itself on pixel phones.

[–] tiramichu@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

I agree with you, it's insidious.

Given you've got a Pixel phone, you can save at least yourself from this problem by running Graphene or Calyx on it.

[–] Feyd@programming.dev 92 points 22 hours ago (3 children)

The company says this is because it’s shifting its AOSP reference target from Pixel hardware to a virtual device called “Cuttlefish” to be more neutral.

This actually probably make sense, but they could still be cool and have pixel drivers be open source in a different repo if that was the only reason.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 56 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

Yeah, just that this has shit to do with the stated reasons. Google hasn't been an open source ally for quite some time now

[–] Toes@ani.social 4 points 8 hours ago

Do you think it may be related to the monopoly issues they are currently facing?

[–] ReallyActuallyFrankenstein@lemmynsfw.com 35 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

Yup, the entire culture of Google has nearly changed. It used to be coder- and innovation-driven, and open-source was a natural thing to support. Make more money by growing the pie, creating markets with new tech.

Now it seems it's middle managers and MBAs calling the shots, and their strategy is generic business zero-sum mindset - lock down, restrict, extract. They still see the PR value in open-source, but that's it.

Just becoming 1990s Microsoft or 1980s IBM.

[–] defaultusername@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 17 hours ago

Just another example of enshittification from a publicly traded company. Nothing really new here.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] LWD@lemm.ee 48 points 21 hours ago
[–] roofuskit@lemmy.world 60 points 23 hours ago (3 children)

Does this mean Graphene is dead? Probably the real reason they would do this is to kill Graphene.

[–] passepartout@feddit.org 80 points 22 hours ago (3 children)

The GrapheneOS team is very aware of their dependence on google. They are planning to either find an OEM for their own line of hardware or a brand whose phones support their requirements other than google. That being said, it will complicate work a lot, but for now it would be to early to jump to that conclusion.

Also, Google couldn't care less if <1% of buyers flash a custom ROM / OS on their phone, this is about tying the android ecosystem closer to google in general. Most other big phone manufacturers know this and are trying to come up with their own solution, like Huawei had to because of the ban when the orange man has been president the first time.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›