Google is doing better here than Apple. Most google devices have an unlockable bootloader.

I have old Chromebooks and Nexus Tablets that are EoL, but I can install linux on them and give them a second life.

The source code for my old EoL pixel phones is out there, it's just a matter of effort to port Ubuntu or PureOS or one of the other Linux phone distros to them.

It's Apple that is being as evil as possible when it comes to stomping down alternatives, they don't release iOS source code, they bricked most of my old devices when they EoL'd them by not letting me unlock the bootloader and install my own OS, they don't release drivers.

I'm deeply unhappy with Google's current direction, but they're still lightyears from the level of evil Apple inflicts upon us.

> Most google devices have an unlockable bootloader.

But that's not the case for other manufacturers, including ones way more popular than Google. Especially Samsung.

On average, a new Android device is almost as locked as iPhone is.

Yeah, while I am loathe to trust Google again, will never be buying another Apple hardware again too - I used an alternative map app on an old iDevice and wrote them a 5-star review for their good features, for being better than Apple and Google maps (in some aspects) and especially for still supporting older devices. A new update for the app was released and suddenly I couldn't install it because App Store reported that my ios was outdated and not compatible with the new release. So I revised the review for the app to 2-stars pointing out they had suddenly dropped support for older iDevices which was one of their main attractive features. The developers of the app contacted me asking me to reconsider the review. According to them, they had released the latest update for the app for the "outdated" ios version / older iDEvices too, but Apple deliberately sat on it without approving it for the App store. According to them, Apple hasn't clarified the issue. If the developers are being truthful (and I do believe them), this is a deliberate and malicious act by Apple to push planned obsolescence of older iDevices.

It’s 100% correct, but iPhone 6 came out in 2014, twelve years ago! That seems reasonable. Also, would an Android of similar vintage fare better?

As per september 2026: https://developer.apple.com/news/upcoming-requirements/

> but iPhone 6 came out in 2014, twelve years ago. That seems reasonable ...

Why does that matter? Even if it was released 20 years ago, why the hell should Apple (or any company for that matter) dictate if a developer can make an app for an old device or that a user wishes to use that app!? With Android, the developer doesn't need to depend on the "App Store", or even care about it, to distribute their app - any Android user can directly download and install the app through other means on their old or "outdated" device.

> I'm deeply unhappy with Google's current direction, but they're still lightyears from the level of evil Apple inflicts upon us.

s/lightyears/5 years/

Tbf, Apple does in fact keep their ‘Apple OSS Distributions’ GitHub current.

This is the TiVo situation. Does open-source require allowing third parties to install their own software / OS and have unlimited control over the device? (GPL v3)

Or does it regard to access to the source code but not access to the device? (GPL v2)

TV’s, routers, IoT, etc vendors aren’t even allowed to ship devices with user-alterable software!

Typing this from a e/os/ phone.

Alternatives exist. They just need signifiant adoption.

They exist. But they don't support Android apps that are unfortunately necessary. For example, any phone without WhatsApp or banking apps support is dead on arrival in Europe.

WhatsApp and my banking apps work fine on GrapheneOS (and /e/OS).

Which is why /e/ OS and Graphene OS adoption is higher than projects such as PostmarketOS (now Nura) or Ubuntu Touch, even if they are already quite mature. I daily drove Ubuntu Touch for two years in 2019 and 2020, and it's the need of Signal which made me switch to /e/.

Once upon a time WhatsApp had a j2me client…

Though I see signal usage creeping upwards. Maybe just my circle

Couldn’t the EU pass a law to require e/os/ to support WhatsApp or vice verse?

The problem doesn't lie with e/OS/, nor any other alternative. Google locks down capabilities with "Play Integrity", effectively attestation for official Google approved operating systems only. If you aren't on the list you fail the checks, and apps (like banking apps) will fail to run.

But it’s banking apps that opt into that. It’s not like Google is saying you must use Play Integrity. It’s a feature that banking apps are more likely to use. The EU could require banks to make apps for other operating systems.

IIRC EU was the issue?

"EU Age Verification Project Mandates Hardware-Bound Attestation"[1]

[1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/1vds3jm/eu_age_ver...

Someone should get the EU to ban the EU from requiring age verification.

No WhatsApp would be a feature

I wish we would all live in such a beautiful world; unluckily, the real world is not as nice.

Sailfish OS devices have good support for running Android apps.

How are /e/OS, GrapheneOS, or LineageOS alternatives?

Google can kill them in an instant, they need the AOSP source to survive.

Well the sources are open, Google cannot remove them. Google can stop to publish the new changes, but the current sources will stay open.

There's already an alternative, it's called Linux.

Though, as the narcs are quick to point out, Android 'is' Linux.

So really, the alternative is proper GNU/Linux (or as I've recently taken to calling it...)

It really isn't, it more like Inferno would have replaced its kernel with the Linux kernel.

It is as close to GNU/Linux as Inferno was to UNIX System V.

Which is why Termux has to work around what is actually available as public APIs on the NDK.

It's still Linux, though, the same way Ubuntu is still Linux despite carrying custom patches and security frameworks.

Termux has to work around security restrictions in a way not dissimilar to how you would need to work around an extremely securely configured SELinux setup on RHEL.

Ubuntu is GNU/Linux, you don't run Afterstep on Android via NDK, unless you rewrite X Windows or Wayland to run on top of OpenGL ES or Vulkan surface that is then hosted inside a AndroidView or JetpackCompose display surface.

Which is what Termux has to do, just like they have to call into specific Android services via JNI, as the NDK only exposes official NDK APIs, alongside the C and C++ standard libraries.

Android uses Linux but it has no consequences for users or developers. So this is practically irrelevant.

See also:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50057296

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50060611

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50060215

You've moved the goalposts from "Android isn't Linux" to "Android uses Linux but it has no consequences for users or developers."

I look forward to "Linux users and/or developers benefit from Android but..."

> from "Android isn't Linux" to "Android uses Linux but it has no consequences for users or developers."

What does "Android is Linux" mean to you? It uses Linux? Why does it matter?

> Why does it matter?

You asserted further up that "Android uses Linux but it has no consequences for users or developers."

That simply isn't true.

What are those consequences?

Related recent discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50051530

Yes, let's throw away a fully mature smartphone OS (AOSP) and replace it by something that does not even have proper app sandboxing. /s

The alternative are other AOSP-based OSes like GrapheneOS and Lineage. Once they are used widely enough and funded enough, they could fork AOSP when needed. In some sense they have already soft-forked in that they use major and QPR2 releases, but put a lot of patches on top to fix issues, improve security, etc.

GrapheneOS has an estimated 500,000 active installs now, apparently LineageOS has 1.4M active installs. Probably around two orders of magnitude more than traditional Linux desktop-based phones, which have been trying since, checking notes, Maemo in 2005?

Btw /e/ OS people have already shared that they were getting ready for a hard fork of AOSP looking at how Google is acting. But to be fair the challenge is more around the hardware support than the OS itself, so in the end it will be the chip makers which will decide which OS can run or not. If they go the AMD way then great, if they go the old nvidia way where even basic reclocking is impossible then we are screwed.

I would be surprised if they have the expertise and manpower to do that.

They are mostly relying on LineageOS now and putting their own cloud, microG, and App Store app and branding on top of Lineage. Even now they are not able to roll out Android releases and WebView updates timely. Them maintaining an AOSP fork would probably end up in an outdated, broken mess.

My money is on GrapheneOS and maybe LineageOS to do it when needed.

I agree, nevertheless, Murena has 50 employees and is profitable as a company. Idk how much money lineage and Graphene have, hopefully the partnership with Motorola is going to provide them some funding.

> We need an Android alternative, something that respects users' freedom.

You can support independent Android development (for example, GrapheneOS)

It might become independent if they manage to fork it.

> We need an Android alternative, something that respects users' freedom.

The more successful Android alternative - iOS - that people love so much doesn't do any of that and it's apparently even more secure and earns even more money.

See post downbelow: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50083579

So why? :)

sure if there are another corpo that want to funding it

There is a mass market Android/iOS alternative, it's called HarmonyOS on 50 million devices. I expect that's not quite what you were hoping for though.

Harmony is just another closed-down ecosystem controlled by a single company. It's already worse than Android with its late source releases.

It's the result of going public. Once a company even dips their toe in that water, it's over for any priority but one.

Isn't one of the main limitations to more open mobile platforms due to opaque drivers? The very recent trends in reverse engineering might provide some solutions to that.