I’m sorry but it’s true. Graphene OS sucks the big one… It’s absolutely janky when it comes to its Android app support, it’s UI is absolutely atrocious, and all around. It’s simply a wonky operating system.

Not only that but the whole premise of of making an operating system built only for Google pixel hardware on top of Android Open source project is just silly when it comes to the idea of “privacy”. That would be like trying to open up a gay nightclub in Qatar. Google could snap its fingers tomorrow and lock down the ability to unlock bootloaders.

What do you think? Am I wrong here guys?

  • arnitbier@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    Wondering if engaging here is the wrong move but this is hoooooly shit levels of bullschibe ragebait

    Fuck that shit its awesome and yeah that’s not how any of that works

  • june (she/her)@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    18 hours ago

    The UI is just AOSP android, simple and ugly (imo) as always. It’s not unique in that either, most OEMs have a skin based on AOSP in some way.

    As for the app support, I have had very little issues over the past year on GrapheneOS. Aside from some apps being exclusive to the play store (ie they don’t host them elsewhere and Aurora doesn’t have a copy), I have a pretty seamless experience. And yes, including banking apps.

    Tap to pay doesn’t work (they’re upfront about that) but NFC is still fully features in my experience.

  • someacnt@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    1 day ago

    As a user, I can definitely say that GrapheneOS is the single best project in the open source space. 99.99% of stuff works out-of-the-box, with de-facto feature parity. The remaining 0.01% is the one dumb investing app which I can only assume has sneaky spyware on it.

      • stink@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        20 hours ago

        Yeah, I can access all my banking perfectly fine on GrapheneOS. Never ran into a compatibility issue with anything to be honest.

  • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 day ago

    That would be like trying to open up a gay nightclub in Qatar.

    It’s not just qatar. It’s many many allies of the fascist USA.

  • aspid@scribe.disroot.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    As I know some use Google pixel hardware because bootloader can be unlocked and then locked again (for security reason) with custom rom. Read that One+ allow do the same. With other vendors you can only unlock bootloader if vendor allow.

  • Thorned_Rose@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Tell me you don’t understand GrapheneOS without telling me you don’t understand GrapheneOS.

    This typed from a GrapheneOS phone that works just great, including the UI (breath of fresh simple air, no clutter, no crap, no AI).

    And I’m happily using my phone knowing that not a single thing is spying on me or data mining and everything on my phone is there by my choice. And even happier that there’s not a damn thing Google can do about it.

    Yes, you are wrong.

  • JustVik@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    54
    ·
    2 days ago

    It’s not their fault that they can’t make Graphene OS for more models. It’s the fault of the manufacturers of these smartphones who always put a stick in the wheel for anyone who wants to make a privacy oriented OS for their smartphone models.

    • ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      for a privacy oriented OS you don’t need a very specific security chip that only a single pije of phones have. that’s maximalism.

  • ganymede@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Google could snap its fingers tomorrow and lock down the ability to unlock bootloaders.

    only valid point in the post afaict

    • other8026@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      22 hours ago

      Well I suppose they could? But then how would that end for them? They sold devices with unlocked bootloaders. Changing that might get them in legal trouble. I’d think if a device is sold unlocked, it’ll remain unlocked.

      • ganymede@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        20 hours ago

        i think they mean future devices, not previously sold.

        either way the thread is 99% invalid criticism of what is afaict one of the best projects of our generation

  • pinball_wizard@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Google could snap its fingers tomorrow and lock down the ability to unlock bootloaders.

    This could prevent my next phone from being a Pixel.

    But to be clear, there’s nothing Google can do to my already unlocked phone running free (as in freedom) software.

    I am already outside their walled garden, running a phone that will comfortably outlast all of the vendor locked ones receiving enshittification updates.

    Now, I agree that the long term future of GrapheneOS, if it has one, probably isn’t Google hardware. I find that Google doesn’t present themselves, on the whole, as a trustworthy ally to free computing.

    But for today, it kicks ass.

    • other8026@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      22 hours ago

      This could prevent my next phone from being a Pixel.

      But it doesn’t make sense for them to do that. They can’t just sell devices promoting them as “unlocked” then brick people’s phones or locking them out so they can’t access their data down the road.

      Now, I agree that the long term future of GrapheneOS, if it has one, probably isn’t Google hardware.

      Maybe, maybe not. 10th generation Pixels can be supported, so it’ll be a while still. But GrapheneOS is in talks with an OEM and it’s looking likely that they’ll have official support for GrapheneOS for their devices soon enough.

  • Autonomous User@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Before complaining, what have you done? What does your post do?

    You post like a PSYOP, like we should give up, like there is no hope, WRONG.

    At least they are trying. What you are you doing to defend our software freedom?

      • Nelots@piefed.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        2 days ago

        Several of them are from the OP alone. Look at their post history, and at least the last three posts have dedicated a sentence or two on calling GrapheneOS bad.

        • Autonomous User@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          You are absolutely right. I just saw their history. They really do post like an active psyop.

          Whatever you read here, remember, think ‘does this post give us power or take it away?’

  • Seraphim@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Dogshit, braindead take. I’ve been on Graphene for months and had almost no issues. The issues I’ve had have been fixed within days because they come out with software updates damn near weekly. Tell me you’ve never used Graphene without telling me you’ve never used Graphene. You dumbass, its designed to be minimalistic and peacemeal.

    This has to be ragebait.