▲ | strcat a day ago | |||||||
> OP has found Graphene to be unusable No, they're describing heavily using user profiles as not being usable. User profiles are a standard Android feature. GrapheneOS provides small improvements for user profiles as a tiny part of what we do. Using user profiles is in no way required to benefit from what GrapheneOS offers. They're describing a specific way they chose to use the device that's not GrapheneOS related as not being usable. What does any of what they said about user profiles being inconvenient and painful to heavily use for isolating groups of apps have to do with GrapheneOS specifically? > my experience has been similar Your reply shows you lack experience with GrapheneOS. > In contrast, I find /e/OS to be friendly and approachable as a daily driver. This is the direct opposite of nearly everyone's experience who has tried both, which you do not appear to have done. > To be honest, I don't care if it's a few weeks behind on ASOP patches, it's still far better than the average OEM Android distribution. /e/ lags many months and even years behind on privacy and security patches, not a few weeks. The amount it's behind depends on the device. On the Pixel 7, they're multiple years behind on kernel, driver and firmware security patches. > A lot of the rest of this post reads as hostile FUD No, it's your inaccurate claims about GrapheneOS privacy and usability which are accurately described that way. Everything in my posts about /e/ here is accurate and verifiable information. People should check the third party sources I linked and do research on it. > /e/OS ships with microg Our sandboxed Google Play compatibility layer is also open source. Both microG and sandboxed Google Play exist to provide compatibility with closed source code running on the device. microG receives substantial privileged access and the closed source code which it downloads/runs as part of itself and which runs in the apps using it has much more access to your data than it does on GrapheneOS. The Google services themselves don't become any more open source and neither do the Google Play libraries within apps, which often don't require Play services to function. > users can optionally choose to log in with their Google account GrapheneOS has no Google services built in and installing/using sandboxed Google Play does not require an account. > Providing this choice out of the box is controversial for people who want a complete and total break from Google. GrapheneOS provides the option to use Google apps and apps depending on them but doesn't bake in privileged Google services to the OS which are always enabled like /e/. On /e/, there's no way to avoid connecting to multiple Google services or to avoid how they're baked in with privileged access. A subset of these are covered in https://eylenburg.github.io/android_comparison.htm but not the ones added by /e/, only the ones present in AOSP which are not replaced by it. | ||||||||
▲ | ForHackernews a day ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
FYI https://community.e.foundation/t/e-os-and-security-updates/7... (I googled this, cannot attest to the accuracy of these rebuttals) | ||||||||
| ||||||||
▲ | ForHackernews a day ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
> Our You are a partisan. I'm sure all your points are correct in some narrow technical sense, but I agree with OP: Graphene is an OS for geeks who want to geek out about security, not for normal people who want to use a smartphone without surrendering all their digital privacy. Independent researchers have confirmed that /e/OS leaks very little data, and that's good enough for me https://www.tcd.ie/news_events/articles/study-reveals-scale-... If you're a security nerd, live in an authoritarian state, or you're a targeted activist, Graphene is a better choice – although, really, you should be using a burner phone or staying offline. | ||||||||
|