this post was submitted on 18 Feb 2024
237 points (87.4% liked)

Technology

59404 readers
3336 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 content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  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, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

While flagship smartphones boast impressive features, spending $1,000 is not a prerequisite for a satisfying Android experience nowadays. If you’re in need of a new smartphone and have a budget of approximately $200, there are numerous excellent options available. Surprisingly, some of the best Android phones under $200 come equipped with features like 5,000mAh batteries, multi-lens camera setups, and the promise of extended software updates.

We thoroughly evaluate various Android phones to ensure optimal performance without encountering unexpected issues down the line. If we were to recommend one Android smartphone in the sub-$200 price range, it would be the latest addition to Samsung’s lineup, the Galaxy A15 5G. Boasting a 6.5-inch Super AMOLED screen, a sizable battery with 25W fast charging support, and more, it offers a compelling package. Alternatively, consider Motorola’s Moto G Play (2024) for a straightforward yet functional device.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] conciselyverbose@kbin.social 4 points 9 months ago

That's not abuse.

If the developers choose to support that hardware, they have a reason. In either case, there is no way to use open source software that's abusive, with the exception of stuff like Amazon taking an open source project, modifying it without distribution so they're not obligated to share their changes, and selling the product as a service (at a scale that makes it extremely difficult for the authors to compete). That's against the spirit of open source even if it wasn't foreseen when licenses were written and is hard to legislate.

Using open source software to save money isn't.