The choice of only supporting Pixels comes from GrapheneOS’s side, not Fairphone.
Fairphone got some great ROMs support, and even have an official partnership with one of them (e/OS).
I love Fairphones, but GrapheneOS developers are very clear on why they son’t support phones other than Pixels. If other phones complied with those requirements, they would support them. I really hoped the OEM they’re working with to support from another brand would be Fairphone, but the most educated guess I’ve seen is Motorola
GrapheneOS developers are quite dickish about what they are willing to implement. They work under the assumption that GrapheneOS is for people afraid of being hacked (like actively targeted by state level actors) and refuse to add anything that in their view compromises security. So for example they refuse to add pattern unlock because they think it’s less secure than PIN which is silly because I can just use ‘0000’ PIN which is as insecure as any pattern. It’s the same with supporting other phones. Personally I’m not worried about police trying to hack my phone, I just want deGoogled system with tracker protection. GrapheneOS devs don’t care. It’s all or nothing with them. I would recommend iode over Graphene to anyone not as paranoid as the devs.
They can be dickish about several things, but they will implement whatever they want, it’s their project LOL! They actually develop a mobile operating system for people afraid of being hacked, and with the utmost security in mind.
The thing with pattern unlock is that it is inherently less secure than the other options, despite the fact that you can use one of the other options in bad ways (like the ‘0000’ PIN). Expecting them to change this is using the lowest common denominator possible, which is against their philosophy.
You do have other options if you want to deGoogle, like LineageOS, that supports a much wider range of devices (altough the extent of deGoogling can be limited). It’s good we have one ROM (among others) with paranoid devs - we have more options
That’s exactly what I said. GrapheneOS devs target very specific group of users and most privacy focused users will be served better by other ROMs. They can do whatever they want but they clearly don’t care about wider community and I think wider community shouldn’t care about them as much as it does.
Yes but also no, the fairphone doesn’t meet the extensive list of requirements required to maintain the goal of GrapheneOS - List of requirements for devices
Some of those requirements are really hard to get for non-Google devices. EOM don’t get updates as early as Google engineers gets. It takes time to validate everything, especially since their don’t control their own hardware.
Those requirements are more a way to not appear like dicks by telling that they’ll only supports Pixels.
If it supported GrapheneOS I would be using one too.
every post about fairphone, there’s always one comment like this
The choice of only supporting Pixels comes from GrapheneOS’s side, not Fairphone. Fairphone got some great ROMs support, and even have an official partnership with one of them (e/OS).
I love Fairphones, but GrapheneOS developers are very clear on why they son’t support phones other than Pixels. If other phones complied with those requirements, they would support them. I really hoped the OEM they’re working with to support from another brand would be Fairphone, but the most educated guess I’ve seen is Motorola
GrapheneOS developers are quite dickish about what they are willing to implement. They work under the assumption that GrapheneOS is for people afraid of being hacked (like actively targeted by state level actors) and refuse to add anything that in their view compromises security. So for example they refuse to add pattern unlock because they think it’s less secure than PIN which is silly because I can just use ‘0000’ PIN which is as insecure as any pattern. It’s the same with supporting other phones. Personally I’m not worried about police trying to hack my phone, I just want deGoogled system with tracker protection. GrapheneOS devs don’t care. It’s all or nothing with them. I would recommend iode over Graphene to anyone not as paranoid as the devs.
They can be dickish about several things, but they will implement whatever they want, it’s their project LOL! They actually develop a mobile operating system for people afraid of being hacked, and with the utmost security in mind.
The thing with pattern unlock is that it is inherently less secure than the other options, despite the fact that you can use one of the other options in bad ways (like the ‘0000’ PIN). Expecting them to change this is using the lowest common denominator possible, which is against their philosophy.
You do have other options if you want to deGoogle, like LineageOS, that supports a much wider range of devices (altough the extent of deGoogling can be limited). It’s good we have one ROM (among others) with paranoid devs - we have more options
That’s exactly what I said. GrapheneOS devs target very specific group of users and most privacy focused users will be served better by other ROMs. They can do whatever they want but they clearly don’t care about wider community and I think wider community shouldn’t care about them as much as it does.
Yes but also no, the fairphone doesn’t meet the extensive list of requirements required to maintain the goal of GrapheneOS - List of requirements for devices
Some of those requirements are really hard to get for non-Google devices. EOM don’t get updates as early as Google engineers gets. It takes time to validate everything, especially since their don’t control their own hardware.
Those requirements are more a way to not appear like dicks by telling that they’ll only supports Pixels.
I’m running e/os on my FP6 and it’s a great de googled alternative!
Yeah unfortunate that it doesn’t, I imagine the market overlap for those two things is high