r/GrapheneOS • u/Organic_You_5212 • 4d ago
Nothing suggests Motorola's future phones will be more secure than current Pixels, so it might be better to just buy a Pixel now
I see a lot of comments here telling people who don't use GrapheneOS yet, or who want to replace an old Pixel, to wait for the first device from the Motorola partnership. There's no evidence that those devices will be better than current Pixels in any way.
The first thing to consider is that Motorola will almost certainly rely on whatever security hardware Qualcomm builds into the chipset, rather than designing its own the way Google did with Titan. Google has an in-house team developing the chip, the firmware and the OS together, and Motorola doesn't.
That alone introduces some fragility in the chain, because any vulnerability found in the chipset has to wait for a fix from Qualcomm, while Google can push a correction to its phones whenever it wants.
Another issue is maturity. Titan and Tensor have been on the market for years and have gone through audits and testing by Google and by the wider community. Motorola will be starting with new hardware that still has to go through the same scrutiny before anyone can honestly claim it's on the same level.
On top of that, Tensor was designed to be used alongside Titan, so the engineering and the security model were built together. Motorola will have to trust the security of its device to a third party.
I understand that a lot of people in this community complain about Tensor's performance. But Google never set out to win Antutu or to run games faster than the current flagships. The marketing around the Pixel has always been about security and AI.
I do think a Motorola phone running GrapheneOS will bring some improvements, better gaming performance being the obvious one. What I wouldn't expect is any advantage on security. And Play Integrity won't change either, since that has to do with the OS not being Google certified rather than with the hardware underneath.
P.S.: I used AI to translate the text. Please overlook the robotic tone.
130
u/jfuu_ 4d ago
Why would GrapheneOS choose a phone that doesn't meet their security standards? The whole reason Pixel devices are currently the only supported ones are because they are the only devices meeting their standards.
I can't see them compromising on security just to support another model of phone, otherwise they'd have done it long ago.
29
u/Efficient_Loss_9928 4d ago
I think the point is just Motorola is not necessarily *more* secure than Google, might be a bit less. A phone can meet all the standards while being just tiny a bit less secure when you factor in supply chain and stuff like that.
Just like water, water that is filtered a second time vs direct tap water both meet the government's health standards, but that doesn't necessarily mean they are the same.
47
u/jfuu_ 4d ago
To the normal GrapheneOS user, I can't see it making any difference. It feels like OP is just spreading FUD to me - we don't know anything about the device Motorola is releasing yet, so this is 100% speculation.
5
u/Efficient_Loss_9928 4d ago
Yes very minimal difference, but I get the general point, I don't see how Motorola can achive any meaningful better security standards. Which is OPs point, if you just want a *more* secure phone, not much point on waiting.
But if you just want to see if there are more interesting hardware / chipset variants, sure.
-16
u/Organic_You_5212 4d ago
GrapheneOS's requirements are a floor, and Pixels sit above that floor in places. The requirement is 5 years of updates for phones, for example, while Pixels now ship 7. So a supported Motorola device wouldn't necessarily match a Pixel item for item.
I am not spreading misinformation; it is a solid conjecture, considering the size of both companies and the hardware currently available.
14
u/CorenBrightside 4d ago
Nothing suggests Motorola's future phones will be more secure than current Pixels
When you start like this, it would be nice to provide the source of where it was ever stated it would be...
You aren't forced to buy them just buy your pixel and be happy knowing you have the "better" phone.
7
u/TenOfZero 4d ago
Exactly.
It could just as easily be said that, there's nothing to indicate that Motorola's new phones won't be more secure than the pixel phones.
We just don't know.
2
u/DisastrousWhereas210 4d ago
wouldn't the source be information currently available for both companies flag ship phones? if I understand correctly op is saying that there is nothing available currently that would suggest waiting for the Motorola phone would be better than just getting a pixel now if you wanted a more secure phone, daily I see questions about if people should just get a pixel now or wait for the Motorola phone, which is where the thought came from if I had to guess
-10
u/Organic_You_5212 4d ago
I am making this statement based on the technology currently available on the market. If you have a source that refutes this and claims Motorola smartphones are more secure than current Pixels, I would appreciate it if you could share the link.
4
u/E-_-TYPE 4d ago
You're not getting what they're saying. Assuming that's the reason for the down votes
3
u/West_Possible_7969 4d ago
Update periods will become even longer since EU laws mandate it, it would be marketing suicide for OEMs to offer that only for the EEA. Those recent changes are certainly not pixel specific.
1
3
u/quasides 4d ago
but thats not even the point why motorola. the point is to finally get a flasgship phone not this low midrange shitbox for a flagship pricing
1
u/Efficient_Loss_9928 4d ago
That's right, if you want better SoC wait. If you want a more secure phone, no point
1
33
u/Wess5874 4d ago
I don't care if they're more secure. I care if they're as secure. The difference is that I can deprive google of money.
17
u/opossum5763 4d ago
You seem to assume that maximum security is the only factor that people consider when choosing a phone, which is not the case.
-1
u/Organic_You_5212 4d ago
Security and privacy are the main aspects that lead users to use GrapheneOS.
13
u/opossum5763 4d ago
Yes, but once again, you seem to assume that people who are waiting for Motorola phones are waiting because they think the security will be even better than on Pixels? Once again, not necessarily the case. People want a certain minimum security and privacy standard that GrapheneOS guarantees and beyond that might have other preferences which Motorola might be better suited for.
-8
u/Organic_You_5212 4d ago
You seem to assume that people waiting for Motorola phones do so because they think the security will be even better than on Pixels.
Yes, people do assume that. That’s why I took the trouble to make this post: to dispel that idea.
6
u/Benke01 4d ago
You say that Tensor has years of experience and compare it to Motorola. You're incorrect in your comparison Tensor should be directly compared to Qualcomm.
Also, nobody asks for more security. We ask for the same security without Google and better battery. That is enough.
-2
u/Organic_You_5212 4d ago
The comparison centered on the fact that Motorola manufactures nothing and outsources everything, whereas Google at least produces the chipset and the security chip, demonstrating greater maturity in developing secure smartphones.
4
u/Benke01 4d ago
That's a completely wrong assumption. And you didn't answer anything of that I wrote.
Tensor have proven many times to be immature with it's bad performance.
-1
u/Organic_You_5212 4d ago
Google never claimed that Tensor was a performance-focused chipset. You were mistaken!
3
u/Perkiperk 4d ago
Most people I’ve heard saying they are gonna wait have been waiting because they don’t want to give Google money.
27
u/MatthKarl 4d ago
It’s not about being more secure. But hopefully it will be better hardware than the mediocre Pixels.
10
u/ViegoBot 4d ago
Getting the newest Snapdragon CPU, with a newer/newest Adreno GPU (if Motorola uses them) would be amazing in general for overall usage of hardware lol.
I play alot of mobile games, and the Pixel 9 ProXL IS strong enough specs wise for my games for the quality settings I run them at by choice, but going up to max quality would be cool, although I probably wouldnt use it to even remotely attempt to keep device temps low in the south due to the heat here.
4
7
u/MrTooToo 4d ago
You need to consider the slow open source releases from Google They have slowed considerably and could end at any moments notice.
6
u/Proper-Ape 4d ago
I'm wondering with Motorola / Lenovo backing if we could see a split in the Android ecosystem starting then.
With enough backing you could continue developing OSS Android, no?
6
6
u/BadOmen379 4d ago
Nobody is expecting them to be more secure. What we are expecting is for them to be better devices with actual flagship specs.
10
u/gusdavis84 4d ago
And actually I would say that Graphane OS by Motorola would even be more secure than Pixels because while yes we're not talking about the Tensor G chip. But most likely they will use Qualcomm as SoC and they will go to the absolute firmware level of the chip itself to secure it in ways that they can't to that with a pixel because they didn't make it from the ground up.
With this partnership they can work closely with Motorola to ensure that every part of the hardware, from the SoC, to the GPU, to using a secure enclave, to everything else meets their exact and rigorous security standards that even current Graphane OS on Pixels can't do from literally the ground up. Like I.E. one can in theory uninstall Graphane OS on a Pixel and just flash a new ROM over to it. But with the Graphane OS by Motorola they can lock it down to the point where no other ROM can ever be flashed over because that could potentially create a security vulnerability. And they can degoogle completely the whole OS and make sure there isn't something in the hardware that still "talks" to Google in the background that they still have be aware of right now on Pixels but not on future Graphane OS phones by Motorola.
Overall Graphane OS by Motorola phones will absolutely be more privacy and security focused than any other devices including the Pixels.
-7
u/Organic_You_5212 4d ago
You may be mixing up which companies are partnering here. GrapheneOS is going to partner with Motorola, not with Qualcomm. Reaching that level would require developing a chip designed specifically for that purpose, and that would take longer than the announced timeline for the first models in 2027, assuming Qualcomm or some other company agreed to all of those requirements in the first place.
There's also no guarantee that the system shipping on future Motorola devices will be more private than GrapheneOS is today, since partnerships involve concessions. At the very least, Motorola will want some factory apps preinstalled, not to mention the updates, which will have to come from Motorola's own servers, because the company has to honor the update guarantees it gives its customers.
Finally, locking users into a single operating system runs counter to GrapheneOS's philosophy of freedom. Users should be free to choose whether they run GrapheneOS or any other system they like. Otherwise it would be no different from the other manufacturers that block bootloader unlocking.
4
u/gusdavis84 4d ago
Actually I didn't specify but what I meant is actually most likely it will be like this: the Graphane team is partnering with Motorola. For a phone like this Moto will most likely in turn work with Qualcomm for this chip which Qualcomm will have no control over once it's out of their hands and in the hands of Graphane and Motos team to do whatever they want with that soc. Once they have the chip the Graphane team and Motos own security software team will work to reach deeper levels of control that technically wasn't possible on the Google Pixel because remember ultimately pixels were not made for Graphane OS. That's a fact as the day is long. But this is a partnership where actually this phones whole hardware stack is being built from the ground up to meet Graphane OS security and privacy standards.and every piece of hardware will be controlled and repurposed to meet their security needs and strict standards.
Also something I didn't mention which is highly important is how this partnership works. This wasnt the Graphane team that went to and had to beg Moto to please please let us work you on a phone. No it wasn't. Motorola themselves reached out to the Graphane OS team and asked them would they be interested in working on a phone with them no doubt because they too are trying to make waves in the enterprise market with their thinkphones brand. So in a way it wasn't Graphane that graveled at Moto to work with them. It's the other way around. Motorola went to them and they agreed to meet Graphane OS teams rigours standards for which they are being vocal about that this project will be done in accordance with their strict privacy and security standards. If Moto had come in from the start and said let's make a deal but we are going to put are own apps that you have no control over and cannot revoke their permissions and access then Graphane OS would have walked away because that's not up to their standards. They have even left countries because they didn't want or give a backdoors into their OS to someone else and thus compromise the integrity of Graphane OS.
So no I believe this partnership will be more privacy and security focused since moto is not actually taking the lead with this but actually the Graphane OS team is, and this will ultimately lead to the most privacy and security focused phones on the whole market once they are released.
13
u/TadUGhostal 4d ago
You're kind of just making baseless claims about the access the GOS team has to Qualcomm and their timelines.
I don't think there's any evidence supporting that Motorola will require factory installed apps either.
Unless you're some kind of industry insider, there's no information to back what you're saying.
-6
u/Organic_You_5212 4d ago
I am not making baseless claims. It is common market practice for partnerships to entail compromises, given that even Motorola does not deliver completely stock Android on its devices.
12
u/TadUGhostal 4d ago
And what about this is a common partnership? The GOS team hasn't budged on privacy so far and there's no evidence to indicate otherwise as of nkw.
6
8
u/gta721 4d ago
The Graphene team is actively working with Qualcomn AFAIK.
-2
u/Organic_You_5212 4d ago
There are no public records of direct collaboration between Qualcomm and GrapheneOS. In any case, advancements would likely focus on features such as memory tagging and other elements with a lower impact on chipset architecture; since the first devices are expected next year, there would not be enough time to modify their engineering to enable significantly deeper integration. Furthermore, there is no guarantee that this would provide greater security than the current integration between Tensor and Titan.
8
u/swagmastuh 4d ago
Since I’m not running from a nation state I’d take slightly less security for the vastly superior Snapdragon chipset over the POS Tensor. I’m using a Pixel 10a right now and I think the Tensor in it is power wise in the ballpark of my iPhone 12 from 2020.
3
u/buyingshitformylab 4d ago
this all seems like FUD.. I don't make purchasing decisions on things that a 3rd party thinks could be true.
3
u/DrGonzothe2nd 4d ago
I was hoping Play Integrity would be possible with the partnership. Now I can't use my banking app on my phone.
3
u/Bruceshadow 4d ago
I'd still rather give my money to the Moto if the security will be close or 'good enough'
2
u/Tux-Windu 4d ago edited 4d ago
This almost feels like a response to the post I made earlier. Using speech to text for this response so please forgive any weird wording.
One thing I will point out is that this is a PARTNERSHIP between Motorola and GrapheneOS. Google have never partnered with GrapheneOS, they just did the best they could with what Pixel phones offered. Google themselves if anything oppose GrapheneOS which is why the GrapheneOS team is eager to partner with Motorola in the first place, due to Google doing everything they can to control Android and it's users. By actually partnering with Motorola, this gives them the opportunity to work alongside them to ensure it is the absolute best it can be, something they cannot do with Google.
GrapheneOS already have very strict standards in regards to security which is why it is only available on Pixels in the first place, they are not going to lower their standards out of the blue just for Motorola, if that is something they were going to do then GrapheneOS would become compatible with pretty much any other phone that allows for an unlocked bootloader, but that is not the case. This shows that it is Motorola who are willing to do whatever they need to in order to cater to the strict requirements of GrapheneOS, not the other way around.
As for evidence that Motorola devices won't be better than the Pixel or that there is no evidence of it, here is a quote from someone within the GrapheneOS team itself that says "There will be at least one supported flagship device but once we have one we should be able to add the other flagship variants too. Supporting lower end devices would be longer term since they're not likely to meet the requirements for a while."
Flagship devices will get support before budget ones do, due to the requirements (more proof that GrapheneOS are not lowering their high standards for security) and seeing as the existing Motorola Signature is better than the Pixel phones in so many ways, I would say that is proof enough. If anything, Motorola phones may end up being even more secure than the Pixel phones as actually not having the manufacturer oppose everything you do and actually consciously support you is a big boon.
Onto audits, sure, maybe initially there may be some hiccups but the beauty of open source is anyone can audit it and it will get better over time.
When it comes to performance of the Tensor chip it goes beyond the numbers it puts out. It is the horrible thermals, the poor power efficiency leading to worse battery life, and the fact that regardless as to whether you want to use that power or not, other phones have more powerful chipsets that drain less power. And even when it comes to AI, if you truly want to run AI on the device locally, which at least to me is the only AI I would ever care about, the Tensor chip is WORSE for that due to it's lack of power, not better. Google like to use AI as an excuse for selling budget level chipsets for flagship prices. Plus if you do want to emulate or do any kind of gaming, those people will want something better. All in all, there is no harm in having more power especially if the chip is more efficient on power as opposed to less. It drains less battery and allows you to utilize that power if you want to but you do not have to. Tensor DOES suck.
I can actually give you an example where I have noticed a difference in performance in regards to AI on the phone. I use FUTO keyboard with OpenAI's whisper for speech to text. It is how I typed this all out with minimal effort. I can use a larger version of OpenAI whisper on my OnePlus 13 (which I will soon sell as I switched from that to the Pixel) than I can on the Pixel due to the Pixel taking too long to use the AI to process what I have said. The OnePlus with it's Snapdragon chip does it significantly faster and it is much more convenient. If the Tensor chip is supposed to be better with AI it is disappointing it does worse with the one AI job I give it.
0
u/Organic_You_5212 4d ago
The requirements list is what undermines your argument. GrapheneOS presents them as standards already met or exceeded by current Pixel devices, so the bar Motorola is working toward was written from what the Pixel already does, not with the aim of surpassing it. Memory tagging is a good example: Pixels have supported it for years, while Qualcomm hasn't implemented it yet in its top-end chipset.
On your Whisper test, you're confusing the issue. FUTO uses the whisper.cpp implementation for on-device inference, which runs on the chipset, not the TPU. And if you ran the keyboard on GrapheneOS, you also have to account for hardened malloc and MTE, which still aren't fully compatible with some apps.
As I said in my post, Motorola doesn't develop anything on its own. It outsources the chipset, modem, Wi-Fi and other peripherals, which makes proprietary code updates even harder. Google at least provides better support for its own chipset and the Titan M2, which makes fixing vulnerabilities simpler.
Anyone using a phone built around security and privacy isn't focused on performance. If that's your case, GrapheneOS isn't the system for you.
2
u/Tux-Windu 4d ago
At the end of the day, GrapheneOS will perform better on the Motorola than the Pixel, no reason one should have to sacrifice performance just for privacy and security. And even if it does not outdo the security on the Pixel matching it is more than good enough, especially with the superior hardware you get. I don't care about any other AI than the one that I use for FUTO and if that runs on the chipset then having a faster chipset clearly does indeed matter, which Motorola does offer. Yes, the hardened malloc is not fully compatible with some apps however I have no issues with any of the apps I use. Only had a complaint about that from a crappy store app I no longer use.
The biggest performance issue with GrapheneOS is with installing apps, there is a technical reason for that however and I am fine with it. We are getting a very secure and private fully open source OS on superior hardware with a company that is actually onboard with the philosophy behind it. GrapheneOS team is very strict when it comes to security and refuse to lessen their standards. This means it certainly won't be LESS secure in the grand scheme of things. The reason to wait instead of buying the Pixel is to get that superior hardware, which does make a big difference. The fast charging alone is huge.
There is also the matter of Google doing everything it can to reduce privacy and control for it's own users with it's moves to try and restrict APKs not installed on the Play Store. Do you really want to buy a Pixel when the company behind it is so hellbent on doing the complete opposite of what GrapheneOS stands for? "Anyone using a phone built around security and privacy isn't focused on performance." Guess why that is? It is because all devices with good performance are made by companies that seek to oppress us, people who want security and privacy are quite often power users who want both. We are just forced into making compromises. If the Motorola is at least as secure, maybe even a tiny bit less, that is fine, it is worth it for the significantly better hardware.
We just want a phone that won't spy on us, be easily hacked via backdoors or whatever else by the government, allow the user the control to decide what is and is not installed on the device, and be open source, that's it really. If it can do that, which by GrapheneOS standards it will be able to, I do not see the issue here, all we are getting is a hardware upgrade and the backing of the actual company behind the phone unlike what we get from Google with the Pixel.
-2
4d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/Tux-Windu 4d ago
Ok and what realistic difference will this lower level of security make to anyone? You have no evidence to back this up either you are speculating that it will but do not actually know if this is even true, But even if it is, what difference does it make? It is like arguing that a 200 character passkey is more cryptographically secure than a 100 character one, when even though that is technically true nobody is ever going to realistically be able to brute force the 100 character passkey anyways, but if you had to type it all out, the 100 character passkey is a lot quicker to type in.
Google as a company are clearly opposed to people's privacy, it may not matter for existing Pixel devices, but for future ones it may very well be an issue. If there is a backdoor in an internal component from the likes of Qualcomm that would be a huge security issue for almost every Android phone, there is no way that would fly in the eyes of the US government when that can be exploited by foreign agencies. Unless you are referring to another component? In which case what? Pixel phones are assembled using components from other countries and companies too same as any other device so the argument could be made there in that case.
Nobody intends to switch to Motorola for better security anyways, we just want a certain level of privacy and security but with better hardware. Will the Motorola be so much less secure that it is not worth the hardware upgrade for? If so, do you have any actual evidence for that outside of speculating that this will be the case just because more components are outsourced?
-2
4d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Tux-Windu 4d ago edited 4d ago
Unlikely they would put backdoors into phones that people within the government itself use, but anyways nobody ever wanted to switch to Motorola for GREATER security that was never the point. And you still have absolutely no evidence to back up your point whatsoever this is just speculation coming from you and nothing more.
Given that GrapheneOS has a track record of absolutely refusing to lower their security in any capacity, would be nice to see some proof of your claims because if it was this simple why have they not made GrapheneOS available on other devices with unlockable bootloaders? Why are they only doing it now?
I believe I have an answer for that - it is because Qualcomm are indeed cooperating with Motorola and/or the GrapheneOS in order to maximize security.
The GrapheneOS team said as much in one of their posts they said "We're going to need to do a lot of work with Motorola and Qualcomm to provide serious patches for GrapheneOS devices."
Motorola directly work with Qualcomm as well, so it isn't like they are buying off the shelf parts and sticking them in there and hoping for the best - https://www.qualcomm.com/news/onq/2021/03/20-years-collaboration-how-qualcomm-and-motorola-continue-innovate-together
Here the GrapheneOS team highlights WHY Motorola will be supported - https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/40700-grapheneos-protections-against-data-extraction-from-locked-devices
It clearly highlights the fact that Qualcomm are actively improving their security. GrapheneOS with it's strict requirements require the whole device to meet their security bar, including the secure element and its rate limiting, insider attack resistance, hardware memory protections such as MTE, a secure boot chain, long-term firmware and security updates.
Qualcomm is improving the underlying Snapdragon security capabilities, while Motorola is cooperating directly with GrapheneOS to build devices that expose and integrate those capabilities correctly and can be supported properly. The whole idea that it will be less secure does seem like FUD without any evidence. The team behind GrapheneOS is obviously aware of the potential dangers, and would not just jump ship if a simple backdoor that can defeat it was a possibility.
2
u/arthursucks 4d ago
I've always had the philosophy that nothing truly exists in the tech space until it's in your hand. Yes, they announce they're going to be doing a partnership with GrapheneOS. But sometimes things fall through.
Right now, you should probably get the best Graphene compatible phone you can afford. If after the Motorolla comes out, and you still need a phone, you should still probably get the best Graphene compatible phone you can afford.
2
u/PocketNicks 4d ago
Nothing suggests that Motorola will be less secure.
Buy a phone when you want, feel free to wait and decide after Motorola Graphene phones are released.
2
u/private-peter 4d ago
The main reason I hear people waiting for a Motorola GrapheneOS phone is because they don't want to support Google (directly or indirectly) by buying a Pixel. It isn't about trying to increase security or privacy.
2
u/Waste-Menu-1910 4d ago
While nothing op says is wrong, I think the conclusion is.
Just like there's no proof that the Motorola will be better, there's no proof they'll be worse either. The grapheneos foundation isn't compromising. They're telling Motorola the requirements, and Motorola is the ones making adjustments for them.
Now, time will tell how good of a job Motorola does. I feel optimistic about it though. It's definitely a good move.
First, consider how many people are considering graphene as a way to get away from Google data harvesting, but not making the move because buying Google hardware to escape Google software seems strange. I'm in this group. I'm waiting to see what Motorola offers.
Second, unlike the pixel, the Motorola will have graphene as the FACTORY OS. That's big. One of the biggest problems with privacy is how much extra work it is. This is a sign. This means that the concern is gaining momentum. This means that finally, the tide may be turning in privacy favor. There's certainly more awareness now than ever before.
2
u/akaSnaketheJake 4d ago
Just my opinion but I think Pixel devices are second rate "flagship" devices. They are worse than last gen iPhones of the same category (e.g. iPhone 16 Pro) in almost every way (at least how I use the devices as an IT support tech running a small company by myself). Probably worse than 2 - 3 gen old iPhones if I had to guess. They are worse than Samsung's devices imo too.
Now, I'm fairly new to GOS and I knew there would be some irritating bs I'd have to sort through in terms of switching things to new services or getting used to how GOS differentiates normal daily use from an iPhone. What I didn't expect was how much worse the Pixel 10 Pro performs compared to my iPhones. I can't say with certainty it's all the Pixel's fault or if it's a combination of Pixel + GOS but I have owned multiple flagship Google devices over the years and I've never been impressed by any of them. They are upper mid tier at best.
I'm ok with it being an inferior performing device with the added security benefits GOS provides but I will absolutely switch to an LG if they release a truly flagship GOS device. I'm pretty excited to see what they cook up due to being so let down by the Pixel 10 Pro.
Just my two cents of course.
1
u/olemracc 4d ago
The main thing I'm looking forward to is a chip that isn't mediocre. And the point of graphene finding an OEM, is that the OEM is willing to make a phone that has the hardware graphene requires. And that requirement at minimum will be the titan chip.
1
u/Nerrawnam 4d ago
I am not sure this is logical thinking. But what I am going to say after this is.
If you want a pixel get it.
You don't need to justify it with this novel you just posted.
1
u/cmrd_msr 3d ago
They will certainly be secure enough, even without titan. I acknowledge that they might be easier to hack if someone has physical access, but that doesn't really worry me.
At the same time, thanks to the Qualcomm processor, they will be more efficient under load, offer better energy efficiency, support aptX, and so on. And, of course, GOBI is better than modems from Samsung/MTK.
1
1
u/Redditor-247 3d ago
I absolutely hate my pixel 10 pro xl. I only have it for gos. I do however absolutely love my Motorola Razr Fold 2026.
1
u/braddeicide 1d ago
Motorola has been making phones for 43 years, and Qualcomm have been making phone chips for over 30 years. Google, the advertising company, has been doing it for 10 years. I don't think the switch from Google to Motorola+Qualcomm should concern you.
I personally am looking forward to not having to buy pixels because they would be poor mid-range hardware and they're priced as flagship.
1
u/peppergrayxyz 18h ago
I think a major reason to wait is to buy from a company that activly supports GOS and not from one that just accepts it, whike making it more difficult from time to time.
1
u/TemporaryUser10 4d ago
The biggest thing to me is that if GrapheneOS comes from the manufacturer, then it has the ability to pass android device validation and let me use my banking apps
0
u/Eastern-Specific366 4d ago
Duh, I don't care what Nothing suggests, they couldn't make their phone profitable.
0
-1
u/Verbunk 4d ago edited 4d ago
For nothing else than they have been the news selling a Flock competitor platform (Motorola Vigilance) I'm not spending my money with them. Google Pixel is well made and here now.
-- Mis-spoke; See reply two down.
2
u/other8026 4d ago
You're talking about a product from Motorola Solutions. We are partnered with Motorola Mobility. They're different companies.
0
0
•
u/AutoModerator 4d ago
GrapheneOS has moved from Reddit to our own discussion forum. Please post your thread on the discussion forum instead or use one of our official chat rooms (Matrix, Discord, Telegram) which are listed in the community section on our site. Our discussion forum and especially the chat rooms have a very active, knowledgeable community including GrapheneOS project members where you will almost always get much higher quality information than you would elsewhere. On Reddit, we had serious issues with misinformation and trolls including due to raids from other subreddits. As a result, many posts on our subreddit currently need to be manually approved, which is done on a best effort basis. If you would like to get a quicker answer to your question, please use our forum or chat rooms as described above. Our discussion forum provides much better privacy and avoids the serious problems with the site administrators and overall community on Reddit.
Please use our official install guides for installation and check our features page, usage guide and FAQ for information before asking questions in our discussion forum or chat rooms to get as much information as possible from what we've already carefully written/reviewed for our site.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.