>Even worse, it slowing us down from leaving Android entirely.

There are zero OSes that are 1/ open source 2/ appropriate for phones 3/ with good hardware support. There's absolutely nothing. Running Ubuntu Touch isn't a viable option. Neither is postmarket, librem, tizen, they're all terrible. Security wise, for something as critically important in our lives as a smartphone, I am also not trusting any new pet project that won't be stable for 10 years.

Sure, you might be a poweruser that doesn't care about your phone burning its battery in your pocket after 1 hour because you know how to SSH on it from your watch and put it in sleep, but that's not a viable option. Leaving Android is suicide. A large part of its critical underpinnings are already into the kernel anyways, just disabled. (although a distro running binder could be a fun project). APIs are reverse engineerable generally speaking, except for the server part of play services. But then, if your issue is "my bank won't let me access their app without play services attesting me", I have great news, you won't even have an app for it on your new OS anyways, so it will not work by default. There's already not enough people working on GrapheneOS _or_ on mainstream linux OSes, what makes you think the sitation won't be ten times worse for your custom made mobile OS ?

>We should focus our efforts on truly open platforms.

Android is one, and that can never be taken away. Google pulls the plug ? cool, you're stuck on Android 17, which is centuries of work ahead of literally anything else in the open source community. Hell, for all the shit that Google is doing, they're still constrained by having to work with other vendors: the system privileged notification receiver is swappable at build time, the recent app signing/verification system also is, because Samsung wouldn't let them control it all.

> Tweaking user-hostile OSes into user-friendly ones is impressive, but not sustainable. Even worse, it slowing us down from leaving Android entirely.

Not sustainable as opposed to what, exactly? Developing and maintaining a completely different mobile operating system? Focusing on truly open platforms sound nice in theory, but completely falls apart the moment you consider what people want to do with their phones compared to the developing resources available.

> Every single chrome-fork has shut down MV2 extensions, even Brave is about to do it

That's just wrong, there are other forks that still support MV2 extensions right now, and at least brave has no plans of shutting down MV2 extensions even after Google removes MV2 from upstream completely. It will certainly add maintance effort on brave's side, but they already patch a million other things that upstream doesn't support.

I appreciate that there are people out there working on stuff like /e/OS, but the number one question I have when I learn about a mobile OS that isn't iOS or "Googled" Android is: will the banking and payment apps I need to operate in the modern world run on this OS?

A lot of people don't think this way because they haven't had any problems. But then one day it happens to you and you realize, ok, this is the one thing that matters - you're in a cashless store and the only way you can pay for your meal is to use Approved Apple or Approved Google operating systems.

Where I live, the app my electricity utility provides for viewing and paying my account DISABLES ITSELF FOREVER if you so much as enable USB debugging on your phone (even after you've disabled it again).

To their credit Graphene maintains a global database of which of these apps work and don't. They're the only ones I know of so a thousand upvotes to Graphene OS.

But for my banks, the records in that database are grim. They won't run on Graphene, and they don't respond to reports about it.

One of my banks just discontinued its web UI because "people don't use it anymore, they use the app only."

This is how they're going to get us, folks. This is how we're going to lose it all. Writing code alone will not solve this. It will require some kind of collective action to defend our liberties. Some parts of the world are already lost. So this situation will likely come to a jurisdiction near you eventually: to make a transaction you will need permission from Google, Apple, Visa, Mastercard, or it won't happen. Then that four company list will start to shrink.

At this point it is very difficult to develop truly open OSs for mobiles because so much of the hardware depends on undocumented binary blobs.

As I see it, the only options is to go for a drastically simpler design of the hardware - which means, we have to tone down our expectations especially when it comes to things like gaming performance, camera performance etc.

Over time even these things can be improved but it is going to take a few years.

In the meantime, I am not sure many people are willing to make those compromises to have a truly open hardware and OS though.

> Tweaking user-hostile OSes into user-friendly ones is impressive, but not sustainable. Even worse, it slowing us down from leaving Android entirely.

I would say we need both a sustainable free mobile OS in the long term, and a "less worse Android" today in the meantime.

Initiatives like FairPhone paying someone to upstream device support in the mainline kernel / postmarketOS are interesting for both approaches at the same time (but extra effort would be needed, the FairPhone 5 almost working under postmarketOS [1] is kinda irritating, I hope it reaches full support before Lineage OS stops being updated for this device).

Ignoring hardware support, Linux mobile OSes are quite usable now.

Hardware support is the next step, and only then we can imagine the proprietary apps we are forced to use to work there (though Waydroid provides some answer to this as well).

Another way of helping the cause would be, I suppose, lobbying for laws that forbid the dependency on an stock Google or Apple mobile OS. Or, maybe we can dream a bit, mandatory open source releases for those apps and standard APIs.

[1] https://wiki.postmarketos.org/wiki/Fairphone_5_(fairphone-fp...

> that Google spends >$1B/year to develop.

Let's see...

https://www.techpolicy.press/the-true-cost-of-browser-innova...

* Most of the personnel involved in developing web technologies are engineers, but they also include product managers, sales, marketing, legal, customer support, and other functions.

* Given the complexity of Chrome and web technologies, the engineering teams skew towards higher levels of seniority. Assume that Staff Software Engineer is the most common engineering level represented across the web technologies teams, which is towards the more senior end of Google’s software engineering job ladder.

* The average base salary for Google employees working on web technologies is $240k and the average annual take-home pay is $500k, including salary, bonuses, and stock payments. These estimates are close to the current average base salary and take-home pay for Google Staff Software Engineers listed on industry salary data sites.

* Google has approximately 2000 staff working on web technologies.

Using the above assumptions, the estimated personnel cost for web technologies is 2000 * $596k = $1.2B. Of course there are additional costs associated with these businesses. Based on this sketch, it seems fair to assume that Google spends at least $1-2B annually on Chrome, Chromium, and the evolution of the web platform.

> Even worse, it slowing us down from leaving Android entirely.

I appreciate the vibes where this is coming from, but does it really? I think that assumes that everyone that works on this would work on a true open source OS otherwise, and that if they did, that would result in us breaking free from Android where we otherwise wouldn't. I'm not confident about either of those assumptions.

Meanwhile I'll keep complaining to orgs that don't allow me to work through their website, and tell them that their app won't work on my phone.

> Every single chrome-fork has shut down MV2 extensions, even Brave is about to do it

Source?

Oh, is this the deal with GrapheneOS too? Damn, I was excited about the Moto GrapheneOS collaboration.

I wouldn't call Android user hostile. What makes most Android phones user hostile is Google Play Services.

> Every single chrome-fork has shut down MV2 extensions

Ungoogled chromium still supports MV2, and uBlock origin extension works fine.

>Tweaking user-hostile OSes into user-friendly ones is impressive, but not sustainable. Even worse, it slowing us down from leaving Android entirely.

To what?

>We should focus our efforts on truly open platforms.

De-Googled Android was/is a truly open platform. Same result. You're pointing out maintenance issues.

How many developers do we have to maintain this or any other platform without pay? That problem applies to a de-Googled fork of Android, or a complete bottom up build of a new platform.

The benefit of using an Android fork is the labor savings on what's already built.

Maintenance is not going away just because we build a new OS.

The day AOSP sources aren't relased, Google will just lose control over Android and it will be managed by a Chinese consortium instead.

8 of the 10 top smartphone manufacturers are Chinese, there's no going back from that.

> even Brave is about to do it

Why anyone ever gave that browser a second of trust is beyond be. The damn thing was built on hijacking ad revenue into some imaginary IOU crypto thing, and built by a creep.

I think this is a false dichotomy.

Basically what you’re implying is that all the people working on Android derivatives like Lineage, Graphene, and /e/ coming together and working instead on a fully open source OS like a Linux mobile distribution would result in better outcomes and actually get us closer to a daily driveable open source environment phone operating system.

That’s analogous to saying that an automotive tuning shop that puts turbochargers and body kits on Toyota Corollas shouldn’t waste their time, and they should instead design and mass produce their own sports car.

The level of effort difference between AOSP derivatives and a fully open source OS is massive.

You don't have to use Chrome or Chromium.

Chrome did not crack down on adblockers in Chrome. In fact the chromium team worked together with adblockers on mv3.

>it is impossible to maintain features that complex on a browser

While Chromium is complex, it is modularized which does make it possible for teams to maintain features.

> We should focus our efforts on truly open platforms.

But currently AOSP is very much open. That's also what the GrapheneOS devs say and why they want to continue using Android. Until it becomes clear that they will completely stop releasing the source code under a free software license i dont see why one should not use Android.

Extensions prior to MV3 were notoriously insecure and granted extension developers a very wide attack surface. Assuming that Google only has a sinister reason to switch to a better standard in an ecosystem riddled with ill-intentioned actors is a bit too cynical.

This account has three comments on HN, all of them essentially the same type of /e/OS advocacy pablum.

"I wanted to add a perspective from an LLM sockpuppet, because I know you're all not deeply cynical and mistrustful yet."

I can vouch for your experience as mine has been the same, also on a Fairphone on which I installed /e/OS. I could have literally written the same comment myself — em-dash usage included!

Same here! I've not had any compatibility issues when using /e/OS on a Teracube 2e. It's a smooth experience all along.

This is an astroturfing account.

I too have used Fairphone + /e/OS for years and have had literally zero issues with it.

This is related to Firefox unwilling to add support for WebUSB because, I suppose, they believe that a browser is not a general purpose application launcher and the scope of what it can do should be limited. As such, it should not be allowed to e.g. control peripherals like the USB devices.

Which is in my opinion a fairly reasonable take.

But given the current situation, I would assume that the companies providing WebUSB tools like installers would also spend a few moments to create e.g. a Python script that would do the same thing but locally. So that anyone unwilling to use WebUSB within their browser can have a vetted and transparent way to get the same thing done.

And, to counter the arguments that "the site tells you that you need WebUSB support": you get to the https://e.foundation/installer/ when you click "Check device compatibility" on the main page. Personally, I'd expect either a check that works in any browser or a simple compatible device list. Why would I need a special browser just to check if I can use this OS?

This is especially strange considering they have the list of supported devices in their docs https://doc.e.foundation/devices

So I think the issue is that the button on the main page is poorly named

Hmmm, It seems to require the WebUSB API: https://caniuse.com/?search=webusb

same for grapheneos. only difference maybe that you can choose to also manually install it without WebUSB

But GrapheneOS doesn't exist. It works only on a few devices created by Google, so their claim of being degoogled is a bit funny.

As someone who switched from FP4 with /e/OS to GrapheneOS - absolutely not true.

My reason for switching was a bug where the phone calls didn't display the caller number. So I switched to GOS in hope it would be better... and it is, but not in all areas. For example their insistence on not supporting MicroG leads to poor UX, because let's face it, you can't trust Google services, even sandboxed, to not syphon tons of data into the cloud. MicroG was easybto use for privacy. They also seem to be very opinionated about (not) using a firewall for privacy, like NetGuard, instead recommending some weird alternatives like DNS firewalls. And don't get me started on their icons - I don't mind ugly-ish icons, but they are taking the ugliness to a whole new level.

GrapheneOS is not a bad OS, but it is very opinionated, and they (heavily) prioritize security over privacy. When I turn FP4 on, I still like it way better than GOS. Still, I like seeing who is calling, so I'm not going back... Ymmv.

Not everything have to be perfect.

For some user, /e/ is more approachable (Friendly and colorful UI)

I could not get my mother to use GrapheneOS, /e/ is a lot simpler.

Still miles better than to use a Default ROM from most OEM.

Even on non-pixel devices, unless you really want to use the /e/ "ecosystem, there are probably better options like LineageOS for microG iodéOS.

(/e/ used to be heavily based on an outdated version of LineageOS for microG. I'm not sure what the current state is after I settled on second-hand pixel with graphene)

There absolutely is when your concern is not only moving away from Google but also using sustainable hardware like Fairphone, which GrapheneOS doesn't support afaik.

There is when you have a phone that isn't a pixel.

Unless you own some obscure phone that is not supported by GOS, Calyx or Iode, but is by /e/... Not sure how many of those exist...

is "/e/ supports my phone while graphene only supports google pixels" not a good reason?

And even if GOS doesn't support your device (due to minimum security requirements) why not use upstream LineageOS?

Yeah, not a fan of having to plug my phone in for detection.... That page should at least include a link here: https://doc.e.foundation/devices

I you ever cross a border or attend a demonstration, privacy requires security. Unfortunately, /e/OS (and most hardware) is severely lacking in that department.

Pixel's "deep integration with Google" is in the OS, so if you replace the OS with GrapheneOS, there is no deep integration anymore.

GrapheneOS has sandboxed Google Play, which allows using most Google services (including Android Auto) while limiting their deep OS access.

Even more, Murena seems to be owned by Qwant

Source? (would be interesting if it was)

https://commerce.jolla.com/products/jolla-phone-preorder

Tell me how you can set up an Android device and install apps that require Google Play services (like all the most popular and important apps) and not have Google syphone all your contacts details. I mean everything: name, date of birth, addresses, emails, websites, relationships,etc.

Answer: you cannot.

Any time you log into a Google account just to use the Play Store, Android will instantly starts syncing all your contacts and you can't prevent that. You can't even toggle airplane mode as a network connection is required to login. And you cannot configure Android not to sync all contacts data with new Google accounts by default.

I bet Google has syphoned the details of every single person on Earth (without their consent) and I have to trust them not to use that?

F** em

That is all nice and well, but Google is primarily an advertisement business. A huge corporation that gained enormous power that operates only to satisfy its own self interest. So that gives us non-Googlers more to think about than just that consideration to take into account.

What do you mean by "better [...] at handling sensitive info"? As in, they are more technically competent, or they will treat your data more ethically?

I don't think these projects claim they've got better infrastructure for handling private data, just that they won't sell it to advertisers. I trust Google are experts at handling my data, I just don't want them to.

On the other hand, I would trust a randomly chosen organization more than the world's largest adtech firm.

Better at siphoning out all the sensitive info, maybe.

The installer page requires WebUSB which Firefox wont support. There are a list of supported devices here: https://doc.e.foundation/devices

And they give privileged access to a bunch of Google apps if you need them for e.g. Android Auto:

https://gitlab.e.foundation/e/os/GmsCore/-/blob/a9e102567518...

I am on e/OS since 2021 with a FP3 and, for what is worth, I never had to reinstall, wipe or anything. My phone just had it's 5th birthday and it has been a single continuous set of updates.

I know the versions differ by model, so perhaps your model was not as well supported.

> I wonder how this compares to GrapheneOS in practice.

https://eylenburg.github.io/android_comparison.htm is a fairly complete comparison. One of GrapheneOS' biggest features is that they sandbox Google services (if you choose to install them), whereas e/OS gives them privileged access by default (via microG). Calling it a "degoogled" OS while microG uses Google's proprietary blobs is... a choice.

The GrapheneOS developers are very sceptical of e/OS (https://xcancel.com/GrapheneOS/search?f=tweets&q=e/os), but you should obviously take biases into account here. Murena's CEO occasionally participates too: https://xcancel.com/gael_duval/search?f=tweets&q=grapheneos

I'm on /e/OS and don't use Murena Workspace (which I think is just a Nextcloud instance that they host). For the past couple of years in which I've used it, I have felt zero pressure to use Murena Workspace. Though I imagine it might be neat if you host your own Nextcloud instance, which might be nicely integrated too.

(That said, yes, I don't quite trust their VPN or app store, since it's unclear who's running it - in the latter's case, I imagine that's also a legal matter.)

Yeah it really looks like they are trying to solve too many things.

This is usually not a good sign.

I'd prefer to have an OS provider that does one thing well.

The hide your ip address feature routes your traffic through Tor: https://doc.e.foundation/support-topics/advanced_privacy#hid...

You can do this on any other android device using an app like Orbot or Tor VPN beta

I'm an /e/OS user with a Murena account and I had never even heard of Murena being "a search engine". After searching (on DDG), I see that they in June 2025 they launched a collaboration with the Qwant search engine to launch a Murena-branded version: https://murena.com/discover-murena-find-your-new-privacy-fir...

That does not make it "an OS owned by a search engine".

Overall, everything works pretty well for me (user for multiple years), except all apps which are too bound too Google Play Services as microG is not stubbing/implementing all APIs.

So all apps with premium subscription you can only handle through in-app purchase, usually won't work.

I've heard that some banking apps are not working correctly either as not "secured" enough device, in my personal experience, they all worked, it's really a case-by-case logics here.

For the upgrade, OTA upgrade around every month, and it has always worked smoothly

What "dependency"? I don't use the Murena cloud at all on my /e/OS device.

> Updates lag behind GrapheneOS significantly.

You might be right but there are new /e/OS releases every month, that's enough for me: https://gitlab.e.foundation/e/os/releases/-/releases