I said same size or smaller though? so why are you suggesting pixel
also there is no way to do Android well
Conversation
You’re unable to view this Tweet because this account owner limits who can view their Tweets. Learn more
You’re unable to view this Tweet because this account owner limits who can view their Tweets. Learn more
They have no involvement with GrapheneOS. You can see from their replies to me that they don't intend to do something that's supportive of it here.
Quote Tweet
Replying to @hybr1z @octaforge and @mntmn
This isn't helping GrapheneOS or convincing anyone to use or support it.
2
1
Please, leave the open source project they're not associated with and which you haven't actually looked into out of it.
GrapheneOS is not hostile towards people using iOS and iPhones. That's generally our recommendation for people who don't have their needs met by GrapheneOS.
1
well, I have no strong feelings whatsoever about grapheneos and if I had an android phone capable of running it I wouldn't mind giving it a shot
so please don't take it the wrong way, I won't go and derail grapheneos twitter threads either ;)
2
1
also: despite not agreeing that forking android and mitigating the bad things in it is not a good long term solution, don't take that as me rejecting your work in any way: it is still important since it enables people with existing hardware to get something better *right now*
2
It's a far better platform for privacy and security than the desktop Linux software stack. The biggest issue for security in AOSP is the Linux kernel.
AOSP vs. iOS is a mixed bag and I wouldn't describe what GrapheneOS does as mitigating things that are bad vs. other OSes.
2
2
GrapheneOS isn't derived from an OS with Google apps and services. The app ecosystem is needed for the OS to be useful and that means improving the privacy and security of that application model / implementation.
A broken fork of AOSP in separate namespaces doesn't help things.