this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2025
145 points (97.4% liked)

Technology

71396 readers
2995 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
top 39 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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.

[–] Rancor_Tangerine@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (2 children)

iOS isn't any better. I'm looking to OnePlus and maybe LineageOS. Hopefully GrapheneOS isn't dead.

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 1 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

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.

[–] Rancor_Tangerine@lemmy.world 1 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

It's not. iOS has just been awful for a long time and since it hasn't been downgraded in recent memory and some people take that as a positive thing.

iOS does not have better privacy protections. Privacy is more than putting the word Privacy in an ad. French Regulators fined Apple millions for illegal data collection AND they're still being sued by multiple orgs. In fact, you have no choice to opt out of the collection, only to opt out of it being used for personalization. Android has more granular controls over every permission. Until they really pull the plug GrapheneOS and others still count on Androids side as well.

Apple was cool before the iMac in '98. After that they've been drumming their products down. There is genuinely no advantage. "It just works" except it works less than my windows machine. "It's more Unix like" Windows has WSL now. "Muh Enclave Chip" TPM is better. Both collect your data.

Anyone who prefers or likes Apple products does it because of vibes and appearance rather than anything with technical.

I do want to add, Android beating iOS in privacy isn't a high mark. It doesn't mean Android is good with privacy.

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 0 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

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.

[–] Rancor_Tangerine@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I trust ads more than I trust them being sued for millions by regulators across the globe.

No wonder you ended up with an Apple device. Lol.

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 1 points 3 hours ago

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.

[–] Feitan@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

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.

[–] Rancor_Tangerine@lemmy.world 1 points 18 hours ago

Hope and fairy farts mostly. I'm assuming they'll branch out from what they have now if Android chooses to do that. Ala MariaDB.

[–] HiTekRedNek@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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.

[–] Feitan@lemmy.world 1 points 12 hours ago

You are right that it will continue, I was too dramatic. However the big advantage of AOSP is to have a solid common base.

[–] LWD@lemm.ee 67 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

From the article, Google can technically let AOSP still exist while destroying it in practice:

what could happen is that Google takes Android closed source from here on out, spinning off whatever remains of AOSP up until that point into a separate company or project... This technically means “AOSP is not going away”,

From the author, a sentiment I fully agree with:

If in 2025 you still take statements from big tech based on best intentions, you're a fool.

[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 31 points 2 days ago (3 children)

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.

[–] Vanilla_PuddinFudge@infosec.pub 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

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!

[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)
[–] apfelwoiSchoppen@lemmy.world 30 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That is probably a fraction of one percent of the pixel purchases.

[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Maybe but those 1% of buyers are multiplicators incentivizing others to buy the same phone.

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yes, they incentivize another 0.001%. How is google going to survive this?

[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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.

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net -3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That was 40 years ago. Any more recent examples?

[–] xavier666@lemm.ee 2 points 1 day ago

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.

[–] LWD@lemm.ee 4 points 2 days ago

Maybe Google is comfortable enough offering the Pixel as a typical consumer device now, instead of a developer one. They used to be able to differentiate themselves from their competitors, but there aren't many competitors left.

[–] TheFederatedPipe@fedia.io 22 points 2 days ago (1 children)

This is the reason why I'm not a fan of permissive licenses.

[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 16 points 2 days ago (1 children)

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.

[–] TheFederatedPipe@fedia.io 13 points 2 days ago (1 children)

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...

[–] Mondez@lemdro.id 6 points 2 days ago (2 children)

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.

[–] lka1988@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 days ago

So, basically what they're already starting to do?

[–] nibbler@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I don't understand.

also I thought Apple builds upon BSD style licensed stuff, while Android is on Linux which is gpl?

[–] HiTekRedNek@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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.

[–] nibbler@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 20 hours ago

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

[–] Mondez@lemdro.id 2 points 2 days ago

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.

[–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 13 points 2 days ago

They planned so from the start.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Soooo, that means that android is fucked but custom roms should be able to continue from android 15, not?

[–] LWD@lemm.ee 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The more time goes by, the worse the divergence will be. (I think this is basically the idea, but correct me if I'm wrong:) Right now, we might have GrapheneOS 15 vs Android 16. But eventually, there will be an Android 17 and an Android 18. GrapheneOS developers will either have to trudge along with an older OS, or hire more developers to recreate the missing pieces of the code - pieces Google has already created but will never release . The missing pieces will get bigger and more significant. Android 15 will age out of security updates.

This is pretty bad.

[–] xavier666@lemm.ee 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

How will Samsung/OnePlus use Android 17 and 18?

[–] LWD@lemm.ee 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Those companies have always developed some of their own, "hardware-specific" software and never released the results to the public either.

(Correct me if I'm wrong here, but that's probably why pixels of the past have had really good ROMs, while phones from other companies are lucky to get LineageOS on them.)

[–] xavier666@lemm.ee 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

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) ?

[–] LWD@lemm.ee 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

To use the word "Android" on their devices, they already have some kind of backroom deal with Google. Nobody really knows what that deal entails, though. It would take a(nother) lawsuit to find out.

[–] xavier666@lemm.ee 1 points 11 hours ago

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.