top 92 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 49 points 2 months ago (1 child)

personally i think Moto G Power is gonna be a beast with GOS

Dual sim slots sd card headphone jack insane battery

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 91 points 2 months ago (22 children)

    They need to support it on the Moto G phones so people can actually afford them.

  • source
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 39 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    iirc, as of right now, its only the expensive processors that meet the security standards GrapheneOS has. Therefore only being available in the future high-end Motorola phones.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    What are the odds that it filters down?

    I'll pick up a cheap android and put Lineage on it before I buy another flagship phone.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    Not for awhile as the cheaper chips don't have the features required.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    What are those features? I thought avoiding Google stack would be entirely software based. Send me a link if you don't want to write it all down.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 10 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    I got a deal on a new 9 from my carrier for $5 a month for 24 months.

    $120 CAD.

    But, in canada, the phones come carrier unlocked and had no issue flashing it. Though i only ever powered it on once before it was flashed - to turn on oem unlocking. The sim was not used until then. So it didn't do any auto downloads that might have caused a problem.

    Long short: you can find them cheap if you look.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    What is your plan price though. I see lots of thee x a month for phone but they also have a really high base price.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 months ago (7 children)

    I was looking at the lowest end pixel for Graphene (Pixel 7) and they are still nearly $400 on the aftermarket. It’s insane.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    Anecdotally I bought a used pixel 9a last year for ~$350, could be regional or due to ongoing inflation though

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago*

    I bought a new in box old stock Pixel 9a for $350 USD a couple months ago from eBay. This was just before that Cop City protestor gave a duress password to border patrol, I wonder if that caused a bit of a spike in demand for old Pixels?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 71 points 2 months ago (13 children)

    I'm still looking for a solution after https://keepandroidopen.org/

    About 50% of my apps are from F-Droid (the others are specific local apps and especially bank apps, which is difficult ...)

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    Will this affect graphene os?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 49 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    if developers stop developing apps, that will affect GrapheneOS, yes

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    I think apps will still be developed however they will reach only the custom ROM audience which I expect will grow massively.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago

    I think the second part is correct, but the first one is not because lots of developers don't use a custom ROM, and neither does a large part of their intended audience. Sadly, many people are not ready to give up the bank's app, perhaps literally cannot give up the government app, but also hardware compatibility with most phones is not there, because of missing drivers.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    yeah i need my banking, only thing stopping me from using a non-googled phone. everything else can fuck off

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    i dont think you need google play services for banking.
    furthermore, i disabled play services. i dont need it for 99% of apps.
    sometimes theres one cool heavily proprietary app that forces you to use it. sucks. and i just gotta uninstall it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    yes you do. my bank doesnt work without google play services

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 child)

    I'm pretty sure this is wrong. Like obviously it's a bad thing that they are making it harder to distribute apps through 3rd parties but they aren't stopping you from sideloading unsigned apps. They are introducing an additional step to unlock your phone to allow unsigned apps. Yes it is annoying and no I do not agree with what they are doing. But they are not removing unsigned app support from all android devices.

    The new step will be deciding how long you wish to allow unsigned apps to be installable on your device (either 7 days or indefinitely) and then it requires you to wait 24 hours before you can start to install apps without Google developer signing.

    These rules do suck, and it is a bad thing, but lying or exaggerating what is happening will not make them reverse course. It only justifies them when they say "it's not that bad and it's for your protection."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 116 points 2 months ago* (13 children)

    I love graphene, but I hope they're planning to also roll out some very strong stock software - or else this will make for a very rough first impression on a large audience of normies and hurt graphene's long run chance of success. The camera, gallery, and app store in particular will not come up to many users' standards.

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 152 points 2 months ago (7 children)

    My impression from the article is that the Motorola phones ship with default Android, but flashing to GrapheneOS is officially supported. So it would only be people who would be flashing GrapheneOS anyway.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 48 points 2 months ago (6 children)

    Yeah by "switch to" they probably do mean flash. I could have sworn they had plans to ship Graphene phones but maybe that's a later phase.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Would you trust a pre-flashed phone though?

    I guess with GOS they have integrity checkers.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 13 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    There are some third party vendors online that ship pre-flashed GrapheneOS phones iirc, but I don't believe there has ever been on with it factory installed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 56 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    I would never trust a pre flashed Graphene phone. Always flash yourself for security.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 15 points 2 months ago

    I agree, you should always flash it yourself. Though GrapheneOS does have the Auditor app to attest the integrity of the operating system against another GrapheneOS device. It's always going to be best practice to do it yourself, however.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 2 months ago

    Motorola should be able to lead them into the right direction for this. Moto controls their own drivers and while i don't know, i don't expect they're using stock android camera, they can probably just provide the camera app to graphene

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    There are some really talented people working on the camera systems for Apple and Google etc. what I don’t get is surely there are some equally talented engineers (in image processing) who love open source so why aren’t they working on an open source camera platform?

    It seems an itch that’s not getting scratched.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    idk if this is the case here but on a firmware level, interfacing with these camera chips almost always requires an NDA that they'll only sign with very large minimum orders

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 13 points 2 months ago

    This is also why open source wearables can't have the best PPG heart rate/SPO2 tracking.

    There are only about 4 PPG analog front ends still in production that don't require an NDA and the Max86141 is the only one worth anything it seems.

    You can't do analog front ends with any small FPGAs that I know of and it is simply to large to do it (well, at least) on a small wearable with discrete components.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 30 points 2 months ago (6 children)

    Man, I would be all over the is of it was on lower end models so I can run graphene as my sketchy international travel phone. But I don't really want to pay flagship prices for that. And I still believe in having a curated primary digital fingerprint.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    And I still believe in having a curated primary digital fingerprint.

    Could you please elaborate? I know what digital footprint is, minimizing and compartmentalization techniques, but not primary and curated digital footprint.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Functional and hypothetical only example usage of a curated digital footprint, for story purposes:

    You keep, use, maintain, and preferably daily drive technology interfacing gizmos in a manner that results in a footprint where the conclusions drawn from it resolve to a "curated" set of... whatever the beholder is looking to ID from the footprint.

    Functional example:

    You keep and use devices in a manner that is at most "normie+".

    You own a Pixel Phone but keep stock android on it and add just enough to it not make you hate your life. You use a couple of normal sub services.

    You still show some of your silly, like use an account on a porn website that federates with the world you care to socialize with. You still post how The Man better watch out.

    Same as everyone else. The fingerprint looks like what you want it to look like.

    So that it remains separate from what could happen/be happening elsewhere inside a Faraday cage with other devices there. How they are configured like, or who they talk to, the networks you utilize and the level of silly you display in your other accounts that have never so much as shared a trace route in passing together.

    That's hypothetically separate from the curated digital identity, depending on how careful and good at it your set up was.

    So when the friendly folks with the mass surveillance pull up your file, it's composed of what you wanted there to begin with.

    It's just another implementation layer of minimizing and compartmentalization, really.

    Hypothetically. For a friend.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 49 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    whistles

    They make a $2,600 smartphone?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 29 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    I'd bet that about half the price is just the RAM soldered onto the thing

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 months ago*

    It's gonna be a premium for the folding feature or some other feature on that particular model


    they list two other models that are considerably less expensive and have the same amount of RAM.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 49 points 2 months ago (14 children)

    Please Moto, make a not gigantic 6in slab of a phone. Please make one ~5in with good specs.

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    I don't care that much about size. Not nearly as much as the "flagship" designation bullshit. How about we don't have to pay 5x as much, because it's a flagship and still let us have Graphene?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

    Most Motorola phones in the U.S. were cheaper, but post sanctions I'm not sure.

    https://www.motorola.com/us/en/p/phones/moto-g/moto-g-power-2026/pmipmjb42mv?pn=PB9N0008US&tab=techspecs

    Wish I could get it without the free watch and earbuds and take those out of the price. "Free $299 value buying a $399 phone. Can I just buy the phone for $150 please lol.

    Edit: (Apparently the developers are just supporting flagships for now, so the normal phones I guess won't be supported)

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    Yep. Sick of giant phones. Crazy hard to find a small phone with decent specs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago* (1 child)

    I want a new take on the Pixel 4a. Slim, light, reasonably rugged just by the nature that it's plastic all around and weighs nothing. I miss that phone still...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 2 months ago* (4 children)

    Please ALSO make a giant 7" one, Moto. Thank you!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    6 inches is gigantic?

    That's what I have and it doesn't feel quite big enough. Close but not quite.

    Never once thought it felt too big in my hand or my pocket...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 2 months ago
    [–] 22 points 2 months ago (10 children)

    I 100% understand and support why the moved away from google.

    And Motorola was a good choice. But they really should have supported some budget phones.

    A pixel series a could easily be found for under 500€ new. These flagship motorola phones are all way over 1000€.

    And the developer clearly said they had currently no intention to support cheaper motorola phones. Among other things because Motorola won't offer 7 year updates for anything but these flagships.

    So, I get it. But let's face it that people on a budget will keep using pixels for GOS while they are maintained.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    They didn't specifically disregard budget phones. The budget phones just won't have the hardware required to meet GrapheneOS requirements. They've states that as the next gen flagship hardware trickles down to the budget phones, there'll be more options.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    I keep hearing this thing about the necessary hardware.

    What is this exotic piece of hardware that the GrapheneOS needs? Please, someone tell me what it is.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    Searching would probably have been quicker than commenting :)

    https://grapheneos.org/faq#future-devices

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

    (nothing I am about to say is necessarily personal; I am genuinely grateful for the link!)

    Is there a table of these requirements as columns and vendors as rows?

    I think most of this list is acquired by having a modern CPU or SoC, no?

    Much of the list is software requirements.

    There is one item that sticks out:

    • Support for disabling USB data and also USB as a whole at a hardware level in the USB controller

    Just how much of the hardware list is satisfied by say having a Snapdragon SoC?

    I would prefer if people said such and such vendor is missing such and such feature which we need. Always NAME the SPECIFICS. A link to a web page with the exact specifics missing for the most popular phones would help, imo. This is clear and educational. Instead we get "they don't got no good hardware maaaan." It's annoying. Looks handwavy even when it is not.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

    I haven't seem anyone respond in the way you're complaining about.

    There's a long list of requirements, with a big one being hardware memory tagging.

    https://www.techtimes.com/articles/325679/20260826/grapheneos-expands-motorola-better-snapdragon-radio-isolation-google-pixel.htm

    The Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 — the chip inside the 2026 Motorola Signature — introduced MTE support, but only in the Elite variant. The Foundation has characterized MTE in the non-Elite Snapdragon 8 Gen 5 as effectively broken for GrapheneOS's purposes. This is why even Motorola's current flagship lineup cannot qualify: the chip is close but the specific hardware feature GrapheneOS treats as non-negotiable is not reliably present across the Snapdragon lineup.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    I understand the annoyance of just having the list of requirements without having vendors, models, etc as it puts the burden of effort on the reader.

    On the flip side, the list would be crazy and more work for the devs, plus the definition of "most popular phones". Having that list would be informative but I don't know that it would be that helpful considering it wouldn't make a difference with regards to the devices that Graphene supports?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    These flagship motorola phones are all way over 1000€

    Yes. And now it's not going down. See, the corporation cannot make any money off of ads and analytics if there are none.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›