▲ 47 ▼ Motorola's GrapheneOS phones will launch in 2027 priced higher than Pixels (arstechnica.com) submitted 2 months ago by codeinabox@programming.dev to c/android@programming.dev 12 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org 8 points 2 months ago (9 children) ...They had one job. permalink fedilink source hideshow 9 child comments replies: [–] IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works 15 points 2 months ago (7 children) I'm confused. Were you expecting a relatively small volume flagship device to be cheaper? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] nao@sh.itjust.works 13 points 2 months ago (3 children) Who asked for a flagship device? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] r_se_random@sh.itjust.works 15 points 2 months ago (2 children) I think one of the requirements for Graphene security specs was LTS support for the chipset itself. Fairphone had the same issue in finding a chipset with LTS which wasnt flagship tier and ended up going for one from the IoT side of Snapdragon. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 2 months ago (1 child) LTS of the chip does not imply flagshipness of the whole brick. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] r_se_random@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago* That is not what I said? I said Qualcomm only provides LTS for either their IoT chips or flagship chips and Motorola decided to splurge. permalink fedilink source parent [–] lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 2 months ago (2 children) I was expecting a phone that was affordable to the people who care about this stuff in the economy where we exist. Doesn't have to be a flagship. Heck, they could have arranged with Motorola to release the bootloader relock keys for older models that are no longer on sale but are still used for CROMs, to make them into better gateway phones to then shift into a Moto with Graphene. Instead, what we have is basically the "attempts to be the left" equivalent of the Trump Phone. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago (1 child) You should read the article. The only chips that have the required security features (other than Google's tensor chips) are Qualcomm's flagship chips. That's what is driving the cost. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 2 months ago I read the article. That's why I said they had one job. They act as if unaware that the people who are looking for Graphene OS as a system to use have to resort to used Pixels for that; having to buy tomorrow's phone, even more overpriced, does not really factor in good into the decision. permalink fedilink source parent [–] onlinepersona@programming.dev 3 points 2 months ago There's always some dude who will shit on anything and everything, no matter how good or bad it is. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works 15 points 2 months ago (7 children) I'm confused. Were you expecting a relatively small volume flagship device to be cheaper? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] nao@sh.itjust.works 13 points 2 months ago (3 children) Who asked for a flagship device? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] r_se_random@sh.itjust.works 15 points 2 months ago (2 children) I think one of the requirements for Graphene security specs was LTS support for the chipset itself. Fairphone had the same issue in finding a chipset with LTS which wasnt flagship tier and ended up going for one from the IoT side of Snapdragon. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 2 months ago (1 child) LTS of the chip does not imply flagshipness of the whole brick. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] r_se_random@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago* That is not what I said? I said Qualcomm only provides LTS for either their IoT chips or flagship chips and Motorola decided to splurge. permalink fedilink source parent [–] lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 2 months ago (2 children) I was expecting a phone that was affordable to the people who care about this stuff in the economy where we exist. Doesn't have to be a flagship. Heck, they could have arranged with Motorola to release the bootloader relock keys for older models that are no longer on sale but are still used for CROMs, to make them into better gateway phones to then shift into a Moto with Graphene. Instead, what we have is basically the "attempts to be the left" equivalent of the Trump Phone. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago (1 child) You should read the article. The only chips that have the required security features (other than Google's tensor chips) are Qualcomm's flagship chips. That's what is driving the cost. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 2 months ago I read the article. That's why I said they had one job. They act as if unaware that the people who are looking for Graphene OS as a system to use have to resort to used Pixels for that; having to buy tomorrow's phone, even more overpriced, does not really factor in good into the decision. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] nao@sh.itjust.works 13 points 2 months ago (3 children) Who asked for a flagship device? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] r_se_random@sh.itjust.works 15 points 2 months ago (2 children) I think one of the requirements for Graphene security specs was LTS support for the chipset itself. Fairphone had the same issue in finding a chipset with LTS which wasnt flagship tier and ended up going for one from the IoT side of Snapdragon. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 2 months ago (1 child) LTS of the chip does not imply flagshipness of the whole brick. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] r_se_random@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago* That is not what I said? I said Qualcomm only provides LTS for either their IoT chips or flagship chips and Motorola decided to splurge. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] r_se_random@sh.itjust.works 15 points 2 months ago (2 children) I think one of the requirements for Graphene security specs was LTS support for the chipset itself. Fairphone had the same issue in finding a chipset with LTS which wasnt flagship tier and ended up going for one from the IoT side of Snapdragon. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 2 months ago (1 child) LTS of the chip does not imply flagshipness of the whole brick. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] r_se_random@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago* That is not what I said? I said Qualcomm only provides LTS for either their IoT chips or flagship chips and Motorola decided to splurge. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 2 months ago (1 child) LTS of the chip does not imply flagshipness of the whole brick. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] r_se_random@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago* That is not what I said? I said Qualcomm only provides LTS for either their IoT chips or flagship chips and Motorola decided to splurge. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] r_se_random@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago* That is not what I said? I said Qualcomm only provides LTS for either their IoT chips or flagship chips and Motorola decided to splurge. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 2 months ago (2 children) I was expecting a phone that was affordable to the people who care about this stuff in the economy where we exist. Doesn't have to be a flagship. Heck, they could have arranged with Motorola to release the bootloader relock keys for older models that are no longer on sale but are still used for CROMs, to make them into better gateway phones to then shift into a Moto with Graphene. Instead, what we have is basically the "attempts to be the left" equivalent of the Trump Phone. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago (1 child) You should read the article. The only chips that have the required security features (other than Google's tensor chips) are Qualcomm's flagship chips. That's what is driving the cost. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 2 months ago I read the article. That's why I said they had one job. They act as if unaware that the people who are looking for Graphene OS as a system to use have to resort to used Pixels for that; having to buy tomorrow's phone, even more overpriced, does not really factor in good into the decision. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago (1 child) You should read the article. The only chips that have the required security features (other than Google's tensor chips) are Qualcomm's flagship chips. That's what is driving the cost. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 2 months ago I read the article. That's why I said they had one job. They act as if unaware that the people who are looking for Graphene OS as a system to use have to resort to used Pixels for that; having to buy tomorrow's phone, even more overpriced, does not really factor in good into the decision. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 2 months ago I read the article. That's why I said they had one job. They act as if unaware that the people who are looking for Graphene OS as a system to use have to resort to used Pixels for that; having to buy tomorrow's phone, even more overpriced, does not really factor in good into the decision. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] onlinepersona@programming.dev 3 points 2 months ago There's always some dude who will shit on anything and everything, no matter how good or bad it is. permalink fedilink source parent