For those unfamiliar, GrapheneOS is a privacy and security enhanced custom ROM endorsed by Snowden. Despite these big names, plenty of people give it backlash
Even @TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml gives it backlash despite being a moderator of Lemmy’s biggest privacy community. A quote here: “grapheneOS trolls are downvoting every single post and comment of mine, and committing vote manipulation on Lemmy. They are using 5-6 accounts.” That was in response to downvotes on a comment posted in the c/WorldNews community, which is entirely unrelated to technology.
One of the reasons is that GrapheneOS can only be installed on Google Pixels due to security compatibility, which makes complete sense considering Android should be most compatible with Google’s own devices. GrapheneOS even lists the exact reasons they chose Pixels, and encourage people to step up and manufacture a different supported device.
One year ago, Louis Rossmann posted this video outlining his reasons for deleting GrapheneOS. Mainly, he had multiple bad experiences with Daniel Micay (the founder and main developer of GrapheneOS) which put his distrust in the GrapheneOS project. Since then, he has stepped down and will no longer be actively contributing to the project.
So, I am here to learn why exactly people still do not like GrapheneOS.
Honestly, I think you summed up the biggest issues. As much as I look forward to getting a Pixel for my next phone solely for GrapheneOS, it’s understandable for people looking to degoogle to not want to buy a Google phone. The developer I think is the bigger issue. Despite having since stepped down, his behavior went unchecked for long enough to make quite a bad reputation and leave a bad taste in a lot of people’s mouths. While recovering from that will simply take time, I have wondered why they haven’t taken the opportunity to come out with a Graphene-lite for non-Pixels. Something like CarbonOS as secure as possible sans Google hardware. Could easily overtake Calyx/Lineage.
I have wondered why they haven’t taken the opportunity to come out with a Graphene-lite for non-Pixels
The issue I see is simply a lack of developers to do so. Trying to split the team between two mostly different projects would most likely cripple both.
They tell you why right on their website. They dev for Pixels because it’s a stable platform with a predictable future.
If you’re not going to listen to the devs, I don’t know what to say.
@Charger8232 @DARbarian I don’t think that’s it, it’s more that they’re a project where you’re expected to buy a device for it, in this case a Pixel.
Pixels have amazing security features and they don’t want to lose that.
I think the issue is Play Integrity/SafetyNet. If you can’t lock the bootloader, you can’t get it without using illegal hacks. GrapheneOS only passes Basic Integrity but that’s just details
Removed by mod
It’s likely because the developers are highly opinionated, and this is true even for topics they don’t know very much about. See the entire discussion about implementing battery charge limiting in GrapheneOS. This makes for a lot of friction for people who would like to see more focus on usability in GrapheneOS as opposed to it being purely focused on security.
I stopped reading threads on their forums because the developers are so abrasive even though I still use the rom, because I don’t mind the loss of usability compared to other roms. I can completely understand why there is a lot of negative sentiment around it though.
Wow, Graphene really doesn’t have charging limits?
I assume this is the discussion you referred to, and I think it broke my trust in the project.
Edit: As far as I can tell, many of the frustrating parts of that thread are from random posters and not devs. I’m still annoyed that such a basic feature is considered controversial.
Oh, wow, that dude in the thread is proud in his ignorance.
deleted by creator
Interesting! I assume it involves a smart plug and an automation script that monitors battery level?
deleted by creator
Personally is due to the toxicity of their dev and socials team, basically if you ask something, you are wrong and they are right, if you recommend other options, you are wrong and they are right. They have been publicly raging war against cybersecurity content creators that dare question some decisions or do honest reviews (OS Is good but has it’s but scenarios) … Once they get better with their PR relationships most of the hate will go away.
Groups like this need to understand that their PR would do better if they said nothing at all rather than just being an asshole.
See also: CEO of Kagi search who thinks he can browbeat people into agreeing with him. It makes me never want to use Kagi.
Just shut up and let your fucking products speak for themselves. The more you rant about your philosophy to others, the less they actually want to use your products.
People have to learn to separate software from its developer.
For example, I don’t care about Hyprland lead dev being an asshole sometimes, if the WM he’s developing works good. I don’t care about Cider’s devs political positions if it doesn’t directly affect my experience with the software.And people also have to learn, that if someone uses any particular software, they aren’t necessarily using it the way developer pointed out they should.
I use GrapheneOS on my device, but that doesn’t mean that I completely follow devs philosophy. I don’t use Vanadium, 'cause I don’t wanna support Chromium monopoly. I use F-Droid to install my apps, even if developers think, that I should get my apps directly from its devs.Does GrapheneOS founder or developer philosophy that you don’t agree with makes Graphene a bad OS? Of course it doesn’t. GrapheneOS is still one of the best options on degoogling your device if not the best.
I know this is somewhat controversial but I agree with this when it comes to FOSS software. Proprietary is a different story. But for foss software, the developer literally gains nothing from you using their software. So if the software is good and works to your benefit, why not use it? Yea okay the developer is a POS but how does that affect the product? And you using GrapheneOS does not mean you are supporting the developer as again, this is a FOSS product, you are not paying them with money or data or code.
It was never so much about the hate for GOS as it was for Daniel. Daniel is a absolute genius but has some mental and paranoid issues. Which hurt GOS reputation in the proces, Dont get me wrong I do not hate the guy or GOS at all but I do agree Daniel has some serious issues.
It’s unfortunate the grapheneos community has a bad reputation, but I think the fact that Daniel stepped down and that the project is very committed and ticking all my personal boxes (and more) really keeps me devoted. I wish there were more options of phones, but I have no issue personally with it requiring google pixels as they have convinced me with what seems like rational and well supported arguments. I do wonder if as someone else mentioned, it may be interesting to have a GOS-light for other phones, just to give them a chance to get into GOS and try it out before getting a dedicated phone. It feels like a high barrier to entry, and a limited version may still be better than anything else available to those people? Just a thought.
I use it on my phone and my wife’s. I would like to get a Pixel tab too with Graphene. There is no other phone OS like it and it’s open source. I have had Lineage on an old phone and on a tablet currently and while it’s nice, GrapheneOS just works amazingly. I’ve also briefly tried Calyx but it had various small issues that Graphene doesn’t.
Lol, this same mod banned me for a few days from this community because I was trying to tell him that he’s just making shit up about GrapheneOS
People like to ntpick and fight. GrapheneOS is one of the best options (realistically of just a few) out there, and it’s pretty damn good and simple to get into.
@Charger8232 The main dev is definitely still there it seems, (and still making claims) more over the harassment comes from all the devs (and by consequence, users)
@Charger8232 It makes it worse because they keep trying to make points and compare with others, like, OK, WE GET IT. Go on, continue fueling hate and then claim to be the victim.
@Charger8232 I shouldn’t even say anything but it’s too much.
People like to take sides on the internet without doing proper research too, I think. I had this idea that Micay was toxic and kind of avoided the project for a long time. My conclusions after doing more research is that he is someone that lacks social skills and is indeed very opinionated. However, GrapheneOS isn’t made for privacy activists that can afford to use Mull instead of Vanadium, for example. GrapheneOS is made for people that cannot afford to have a phone that might leak information that could endanger their lives.
If Mikay was someone like Palmer Luckey which is a biggot that’s a whole different story. I am glad I gave GrapheneOS a try and I am very happy using it, even if it is kind of overkill for my privacy needs.
“grapheneOS trolls are downvoting every single post and comment of mine, and committing vote manipulation on Lemmy. They are using 5-6 accounts.”
Is that really criticism of graphene os? or is it complaining about specific users who like graphene os?
It stems from a blind hatred for GrapheneOS and its users as a whole.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
They do?
I dunno, maybe ask the person that says they hate it?
Your title is a sophist argument tactic called “begging the question”.
Uhhhhh it’s an OPEN question available to people who DO dislike the OS, so no. No just ASKING a question is NOT “begging the question”.
It’s asking a question.
It’s very close to begging the question, though. It really depends on OP’s actual intent, which is hard to determine through text. But it does seem like it could have a, “Those of you who still hate GrapheneOS, why are you wrong?” tone to it.
Edit: Reading through OP’s comments, they do sound genuine to me, I’m mostly just explaining why someone might mistake the post for begging the question.
Being hostile to a real question’s answers is also not begging the question.
Begging the question is a logical fallacy where someone is purposefully leaving out info or otherwise twisting things to end at a conclusion that was never properly supported. The point is there is an unsupported conclusion they’re trying to jump to.
Simply asking a question, even one with an obvious or sarcastic answer, is seldom “begging the question”.
Bruh he’s literally asking the question
