If Google closes Android's source code and then breaks the way applications install, developers are going to develop their applications for the way Google has theirs set up, not the way it works currently. And therefore, you will begin losing access to applications as time goes on.

Yes, I know. I'm not saying Pixels are good. They're pretty much trash, just as everything else.

The problem with Sony and LineageOS (and other manufacturers and ROMs where applicable) is that once the official updates are gone, the new sources are gone too. So you're stuck with old unpatched drivers, old unpatched firmware, old unpatched kernel (because porting old drivers to the new kernel is a pretty non-trivial task) and so on.

Even with Pixels, they don't ship device trees for them anymore, so GOS team had to reimplement it themselves.

So from my side it's not a particular bashing of Sony, it's a bashing of the whole industry in general.

Putting music and media on them for local playback? Taking pictures and video? Installing apps?

I don't care what Google does with Android as long as a viable hard (vs soft, as with GrapheneOS) fork will emerge. I am not using Google's software sources, so Google has no power there.

LOL, why so many down vote

Well, Xperia is dead to me now

What I am saying is that Google can close source Android and then break the way apps install and then force people to use a newer version of Android than what AOSP has access to.

In fact, newer versions of Android already have that where it will not install an application under a specific Android version no matter what.

I don't care about what Google does. I'm using a Pixel tablet with GOS without any Google play. My phone is a GOS Pixel with Play sandboxed. If Google really wants it I'll kill my very old Google account.

The size of the storage isn't all - it is partitioned so that there is one partition for user data and two partitions for the operating system (+ a lot more, but they're not important for this explanation).

Android updates work by updating the "inactive" system partition, setting it as active and rebooting. If the updated system fails to boot a few times, the bootloader will automatically switch back to the known-working older system and the update will be rejected.

These partitions can be resized, but I assume Sony did something stupid like have the OS assume an exact partition size (for example to check that the system is not tampered with), and something would break if the old OS rebooted with the resized partitions.

Hell, maybe the encryption used doesn't allow them to resize the user data permission without losing all data in it - if the OS doesn't fit then they literally don't have enough space without forcing a factory reset.

None of this is to say that it's not Sony's fault - it is.

I have already heard at least the rumblings of an initiative to harden NuraEco to a similar point as Graphene OS.

Until Google breaks the way APKs installed and it will no longer work on the previous system. Yes.

i don't get it. the storage config reason isn't convincing tbh. and this looks like bad pr? i thought android updates these days aren't very costly for them to develop because of stuff like treble/gki

Sony announced the Xperia 10 VI in 2024 as an upper-mid-range device. It has a Snapdragon 6 Gen 1 chipset, 8GB of RAM, and 128GB of storage

lmao what storage issues

Your Pixel gets new GrapheneOS releases because Google keeps pushing Android releases for it.

Sony is one of the few other remaining phone manufacturers which still allow 3rd party OSes and release sources. So this matters for LineageOS users. Graphene is not the only one.

I barely use like 40 gigs, wtf are people doing on their phones.

No, seriously, after tasting GrapheneOS, going back to any device that doesn't support it feels not just like a step backwards, but more like a leap face down from a skyscraper (the skyscraper one might be more enjoyable for a few secs, actually). This kind of BS from Sony is one of the reasons.

A device with 128Gb of storage is too limited for Android 17? I find that interesting, considering Pixel 6 devices got the update and had a lowest storage tier of 128Gb. Owners can probably install LineageOS on it anyway if they want the update, but still a weird choice.

It's not a solution to the problem of slopware, it's a [partial] solution to the problem of total control that Google has over all not-degoogled phones (and all the bullshit they impose using that control).

KDE connect is available on W!ndows too. No account or interaction with m!croslop's store needed.

Hamachi did it back in 2004 or so.

MS is so late to the party because they want you to do it through them.

Same reason they bought (and killed) Foldershare around 2006 or so.

https://rip.so/microsoft-foldershare.html

Edit - forgot this is phone, and Hamachi still hasn't released a phone app unfortunately.

Still, this is crap to entice the inexperienced to use the "convenience" - same model Apple has always used to lock people in.

I use windows every day, and I'll be damned if I'll ever sync my phone with MS crap.

KDE connect lets you do this 5 years ago (and probably far longer ago)

The empty permissions page is weaker evidence than people in here are taking it for. That screen only lists runtime permissions, so INTERNET, ACCESS_NETWORK_STATE, FOREGROUND_SERVICE and the rest never show up there whether or not an app has them. Plenty of apps with a blank page can still open sockets.

The manifest line is the actual claim, and it's a much stronger one. Anyone who wants to check it without taking your word or mine: on the Play listing, About this app → App permissions → See more is extracted from the uploaded build, not written by the developer. Or aapt2 dump permissions on the apk. Both show the normal permissions that the on-device page hides.

That's.. Kinda shitty

As annoying as it is that this was decided now, continuing security updates without a mandatory android upgrade might be kinda nice.

It only makes sense up until they close it off truly and we lose the ability to trust our devices because we know Google is inherently untrustworthy and can't be trusted to act without supervision.