this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2025
296 points (100.0% liked)

Android

30775 readers
188 users here now

DROID DOES

Welcome to the droidymcdroidface-iest, Lemmyest (Lemmiest), test, bestest, phoniest, pluckiest, snarkiest, and spiciest Android community on Lemmy (Do not respond)! Here you can participate in amazing discussions and events relating to all things Android.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules


1. All posts must be relevant to Android devices/operating system.


2. Posts cannot be illegal or NSFW material.


3. No spam, self promotion, or upvote farming. Sources engaging in these behavior will be added to the Blacklist.


4. Non-whitelisted bots will be banned.


5. Engage respectfully: Harassment, flamebaiting, bad faith engagement, or agenda posting will result in your posts being removed. Excessive violations will result in temporary or permanent ban, depending on severity.


6. Memes are not allowed to be posts, but are allowed in the comments.


7. Posts from clickbait sources are heavily discouraged. Please de-clickbait titles if it needs to be submitted.


8. Submission statements of any length composed of your own thoughts inside the post text field are mandatory for any microblog posts, and are optional but recommended for article/image/video posts.


Community Resources:


We are Android girls*,

In our Lemmy.world.

The back is plastic,

It's fantastic.

*Well, not just girls: people of all gender identities are welcomed here.


Our Partner Communities:

!android@lemmy.ml


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

As noted by the news release from CalyxOS and Mastodon thread from GrapheneOS, Google did not release the Pixel device-specific source code alongside their Android 16 AOSP release like they usually do. I think many of us, including myself, are hoping this will be published in the near future, but considering they moved AOSP development behind closed doors earlier this year, it's more likely Google has stopped publishing this section or their code altogether, making development of custom ROMs for Pixel devices significantly more difficult. Sad news for the Android ecosystem, and for open source in general.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Barbarian@sh.itjust.works 24 points 3 days ago (2 children)

If you're in Europe, Fairphone is an option. I'm pretty happy with mine.

[–] AmbiguousProps@lemmy.today 19 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Graphene is centered around security. I've heard bad things about Fairphone in that regard - the Graphene team even talks about them in the replies on that thread.

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 9 points 2 days ago

Respectfully to the Graphene team, they say that about literally every other OS.

[–] Barbarian@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

Read their comment and I'm left scratching my head. Their role in security with the straight android phone (not the /e/OS version) is simply pushing security patches as/when they get them from the Android team, as they're using straight Android. Security is handled by Google for Android, not them. When it comes to /e/OS, no idea how good/bad it is, but apparently Graphene has some beef with Murena (the people who make it), at least according to their comment.

Not at all knowledgable about mobile kernels and drivers to comment on the rest of it. I do know Fairphone 5 uses an unusual CPU normally used for SoC as that was the only CPU that was both good enough to run Android reasonably while simultaneously providing very long-term driver updates (they're aiming for a minimum of 8 years of updates).

[–] AmbiguousProps@lemmy.today 6 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

I can't speak to beef, but there is more to Android security than what Google provides. That's what Graphene is for, to make Android even more secure through hardening various attack surfaces and introducing other completely new security features. If that weren't the case, Graphene wouldn't be necessary on Pixels because Google does monthly security patching for them.

It's also at the firmware level, which Google does not provide except for on their own hardware, and on top of that Google phones are some of the only ones capable of providing some security feature at the hardware level. This seems to be the main thing the Graphene team is trying to point out.

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 2 points 2 days ago

Their role in security with the straight android phone...is simply pushing security patches as/when they get them from the Android team

If that were true there would be no reason to use GOS. The entire point is that they introduce new privacy and security options into the OS.

[–] onlinepersona@programming.dev -5 points 3 days ago

You heard stuff? What stuff specifically? Care to elaborate and provide sources?

Anti Commercial-AI license

[–] 6nk06@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

The FairPhone is expensive and I'm not sure it can run Android Auto properly. If I can't run my own OS anymore, Android will be an ugly alternative to the iPhone and I'd have to go back to iOS, it's absolutely stupid from Google to do this.

[–] neo2478@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 days ago

Fairphone is not expensive. All the other phone are too cheap due to slave like labor both in the raw materials and production of the phones. Fairphone pays every one along the production chain fairly.

[–] onlinepersona@programming.dev -2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Why can't you run your own OS anymore? You don't have to buy a Pixel. This news is about Pixel phones, one of the many many many Android phones...

Anti Commercial-AI license

[–] Elkenders@feddit.uk 1 points 2 days ago

The discussion is about this being the first step to Google closing the source more broadly