99.9% of consumers do not care about this and are totally willing (and expect) to connect their phone to their Google/Apple account

Not saying the grievance isn't valid, but don't fool yourself

99.9% of consumers probably have never heard about custom ROMs, and I'd reckon 99.9% of consumers who do hear about custom ROMs have boring old fashioned objections like "will it break my warranty" and "if it ain't broke don't fix it" and "I wonder what's on Netflix tonight/I think I shall be washing my hair".

For the few people who distrust Google enough to install LineageOS or some such, they probably distrust Google enough to not care too much about not using Google. Who is in this sweetspot where they want (i.e. install and use, not merely aspire to installing and using) a custom ROM but having no access to proprietary Google APIs is a bridge too far?

I have been using GrapheneOS for a couple of years and I feel frustration about this announcement. At the same time, sounds like not much of a biggie, but I'd prefer the burden of updating the apps not to be on the GrapheneOS contributors.

On the other hand, I can see Google's arguments and "plausible deniability" that this is not Embrace, Extend, Extinguish: really nobody expects them to "Don't be Evil" anymore, security vulnerabilities in these apps are probably the last thing in their priorities, and the target audience for these apps is really small.

Those apps have been forked any number of times already, there are plenty of dialers the grapheneos maintainers can use.

"What is Android ? Well you see, there are various operating systems out there. An operating system is the software that allows you to use your hardware. So for example you may be familiar with Windows, macOS or Linux..."

- Stopped listening 30 seconds ago

> they probably distrust Google enough to not care too much about not using Google

I think you probably greatly overestimate how much normal people worry about things like that.

Look out your window and count how many tinfoil hats you see people with. If there's more than maybe one or two, you live in a fairly atypical part of the world and it might be time to move house.

Well, it's not like they have a choice, isn't it?

Hmm I think it's getting pretty easy today to get a de-Googled Android phone that "just works". You can buy Murena phones that come with /e/OS pre-installed (I did that). Probably the same with GrapheneOS/CalyxOS/etc.

Users are lazy and don't want to take such a risk, but they do have a choice.

> Hmm I think it's getting pretty easy today to get a de-Googled Android phone that "just works".

This is a wild exaggeration.

I literally bought a Fairphone 3+ that came with /e/ OS pre-installed. It gets updates like a normal Android, I never had to care about the fact that it is not a normal Android (i.e. I never had to run a weird installer or anything at all).

How is that not "pretty easy"?

It doesn't take a 100 million people to build a new phone ecosystem. Only a few thousand, if even that. If there is no alternative, it will get built and be usable. I avoid other open phone projects because I don't have the time and AOSP works fine, but if Google breaks it beyond usability, you better believe I'll be jumping onto one of the fully open projects even if it has major limitations.

If Google "breaks" AOSP, I am pretty sure that the next big thing will be a fork of AOSP. But that would probably be bad for Google (they probably wouldn't want Samsung + Huawei + others to start maintaining a fork of AOSP, I think).

As far as I understand the distributor licensing for Googles apps and services outright prohibits manufacturers from selling any unapproved or Google free Android devices in countries where that isn't considered anti competitive.

It's a pretty weird subject: the document that has been mentioned in the press about that requirement doesn't exactly say that Google app are required, it says that when you do an "Android" it must always comply to Android APIs. Which can be done without Google apps. BTW that agreement still exists even where it was deemed anti-competitive, but in domains where Google isn't a monopoly (like cars).

That being said, it's Google. Even you didn't sign anything that says you're not allowed to do Google-less Android, when you launch a non-Google device, Googly devices may just "mysteriously" fall into "oops sorry we are understaffed, we don't have time to handle your requests".

I don't know where you can find that "only a few thousand" people or the funding. I don't know if one can even count the number of failed attempts at a mobile operating system.

Do you not participate in any open source communities? Many have thousands of participants, even obscure Linux window managers.

It's part of the recurring pattern of blindness towards the actual level of caring among average service users. Reddit is another example of this pattern. Mind you I say this as the minority who cares.

Less "blindness" and more "active hostility" in my opinion. Unpopular updates? Bad licensing? Privacy problems? Just double and triple down. There's no realistic alternative, so why listen to those pesky users?

I absolutely loathe today's smartphone landscape. You can have a semi-locked-down phone from a company that wants you to put all your data in the clown, or you can have a fully-locked-down phone from a company that wants you to put all your data in the clown. Worse, the only alternative that had a chance just had to be Microsoft. Watching the horror show of post-7 Windows, I think we dodged a bullet with Windows Phone going nowhere.

The masses aren't going to flock to any potential alternative unless it offers something they find truly compelling.

And go where? Apple? How exactly is that any better in this regard? It's even more of a walled garden.

Just like they've ditched Windows?

People don't care about Android. They care about their apps. Some are fun, some are necessary. In my country, cash has been almost replaced by an app (just one), and it's getting harder to exist here without it (as I try to). That's just one example. I've heard of other places where compulsory national ID systems only exist as apps. And so on.

Unless those apps becomes available outside official app stores, switching is going to be de facto impossible, and people will take whatever shit Google and Apple roll out.

Where do you live?

A compulsory national ID system already means they are living in a police state, so they have worse issues to worry about than this.

Also, maybe at some point the UE countries will start to enforce the CJUE directive that banned US companies (and especially GAFAMs) in 2015 (after the war is over ?), this would open quite a space for competition !

> A compulsory national ID system already means they are living in a police state

Such a bizarre take.

Many countries have national ID systems that are compulsory (or effectively compulsory) and do not fall under any reasonable definition of a "police state"

I never understood this. Do you have a driver's license? Do you have a job? Do you but stuff? Have a bank account? a credit card? health insurance? Do you use the internet? Do you pay taxes?

You are already in a lot of national databases, you're easily trackable already. You already are subject to all of your alleged downsides without the benefits of having a single document.

Do you really believe that an American has more freedom than, let's say, a Switzerland citizen? Really????

To be fair, other OSes can use the Google Play store, at least. Way back, Blackberry was somehow able to run Play Store apps, and as I understand it, many of the alternative Android roms can also use the Play Store if you wish. I'm not sure how well apps from that actually work on these phones, but most of these custom roms are AOSP anyway, so in theory it should be fine.

Apple is completely different of course: you're either in or you're out.

It would be nice if the alternative Android roms were better supported.

But you're completely correct; some apps really are almost necessary for daily life these days, depending on where you are.

Following the death of Windows phone and the earlier death of Symbian, the two options are "Android" or "iOS". This is apparently "not a monopoly".

Well, it's a duopoly. Which, since it is not literally a monopoly, often gets a pass.

Have a country with a single party you can vote for? This country will be called a dictatorship, dystopian shithole, undemocratic, whatever... Have a country with two parties which are marginally different you can vote for? Now it's just a normal democracy.

For all practical purposes, customers don't care about that. And the minority who cares is going to do what? move to an even more restrictive walled-garden?