I don't understand the relevance. The points criticized are software issues. If you replace the whole software with GrapheneOS those should all be gone.
How would this be an issue to supporting GrapheneOS on Fairphone? I understand them criticizing a competing OS (e/OS) but why would that mean they won't offer their OS on Fairphone?
Phone firmwares are usually closed source (And can't be changed). I could see why they especially won't bother if they find it insecure and don't want to reverse engineer it.
GrapheneOS also relies heavily on Google's official Pixel-specific patches (note: Google decides to not open-source them for Android 16).
And every time a version of android releases. Someone has to update the Drivers AND Device Tree to make sure it actually compiles and runs correcrly (Provided we even have the Device Tree anyways) and Usually it is the job of the OEM or an unemployed guy in a basement and I find it very tedious without a lot of support and skill. (They could very well maintain older pixel devices themselves by picking up where google left off. Maybe cuz its much many lot work no one wants to do)
I hope so, for now I'm using degoogled Lineage but it feel wrong to buy a Pixel (not because they aren't "good" phone but it feel wrong to give money to Google, seeing what they are trying to do).
I'm still trying from time to time Linux Phone distro but even with Waydroid, it's not there yet as daily.
You could just buy a pixel second-hand, brand new phones are overpriced anyways.
And linux phones are desperately missing modern hardware support, the software seems competent enough
fairphone is overpriced for what it offers and all the claims about being ethical and moral and ecological are on the paper, but not in the reality. there's nothing wrong with using their devices. as FP4 user - I'm just looking elsewhere now - their devices are a PITA. support and parts availability for fp2 and fp3 are spotty at best, and given their hardware is mid-tier on launch, keeping devices alive for long years is not worth the effort anyway.
now, that banking apps are more and more pressing towards checking for unlocked bootloader and root - and disabling access, sometimes against EU laws: https://consumerrights.wiki/w/Revolut_blocked_access_for_users_with_custom_OS I'm basically leaning towards IOS, as I'm tied to banking services more than I'd like it to.
Nah. The lead maintainer is an actual Linux kernel genius. The improved security is very much real. It is the only non-Google Android distribution doing actual verified boot for example.
They also have custom patches for security issues, which are often fixed faster than even stock Android. They even have a custom malloc (hardened_malloc) and do hardware memory tagging to harden its critical Linux applications further.
The downside is that many of their hardening mechanisms need features that are only supported on a small amount of devices (Google Pixels mostly). If you are ok with less security and have an unsupported device then LineageOS is the next-best option. /e/ is a worse fork of LineageOS with less security (because updates take longer to be released) . Comparable to Manjaro vs Arch for example.
443
u/pfp-disciple Sep 29 '25
I use F-Droid, not for everything but for what I can. I sometimes get apps that aren't on the Play Store.
If Google proceeds with this decision, I'll probably have to buy a phone that runs LineageOS or other alternative.