Hacker News Reader

I use Sailfish OS and the android compatibility layer is decent, but not perfect. Some apps have issues understanding the network connectivity state, and photos taken with the Sailfish camera app sometimes don't show up in the Android file selector until the compatibility layer is restarted. Other than that, most apps work fine. (I mainly use it for spotify, slack and maps.)

> It's a "vendor lock-in" ecosystem that's worse than the Windows lock-in of yesteryear IMO.

For regular companies, if they want to shoot themselves in the foot by not being on the web, they're welcome. It's not such a huge issue as it would be with government for example.

Also "any chance of any form of adoption" is a bit overstatment. I still use a dumbphone, and if I migrated to pinephone, lack of the kind of apps you mention would certainly not concern me. Even then, many apps have web alternatives here, or alternative GPLed clients for Linux (that includes whatsapp, apparently), that can be made native on pinephone.

"Not being on the web" doesn't seem like a huge footgun. There are probably more people with a mobile phone and no traditional computer than the other way around, especially if you go outside of the US and Europe.

Revolut, Grab, Gojek, Tinder, WhatsApp, and many more are all successful that offer a mobile-first solution, with either no web/desktop client or just as a an additional client (usually with fewer features, and/or still requiring access to a smartphone).

> Also "any chance of any form of adoption" is a bit overstatment. I still use a dumbphone

Of course it's possible; but depending on what your interests in life are you will pay a price, and in practice for the vast majority of people the price is too large to use a non-Android/iOS compatible device.

> many apps have web alternatives here, or alternative GPLed clients for Linux (that includes whatsapp, apparently), that can be made native on pinephone.

Unless they somehow hacked the encryption, you're still going to need a connection to the phone's WhatsApp client.

If you're using Whatsapp, you've got zero interest in privacy anyhow, and so you're never going to consider these issues in the first place.

Well first of all that's just total BS, but secondly this thread isn't even about privacy. None of this is. In fact your comment is the very first mention of that word in this thread.

> Unless they somehow hacked the encryption, you're still going to need a connection to the phone's WhatsApp client.

Apologies if I sound a bit naive, but what would be there to "hack"?

WhatsApp clients are available for many platforms, whatever encryption they might be using can easily be figured out by decompiling the code, and if they are using a key on the client side to do any encryption, that key is available for extraction from the distributed client too.

Basically, my question is what can a closed source downloadable client do to protect the encryption it uses to connect to a public network?

Yes, technically I'm sure there are ways around it if you try hard enough. No one does that though AFAIK.

I dream of a dual phone (conceptually 2 phones glued back to back) where you do web and open stuff on one side, and the inevitable proprietary apps on googled-android on the other side, with a quick button to freeze the prop side (for power saving and mitigating spying).

(Or same where the 2 phones are somewhat multiplexed on a single screen, preferably in hardware.)

You can do it on Pinephone with two different independent operating systems, one on the eMMC storage and the other on the microSD card. When you put in the microSD card, the devices boots from it. Otherwise it boots from the internal storage.

You can do the banking (from most banks) and food ordering from a web browser on your smartphone. No apps required. Grubhub, Uber Eats, Doordash, all those sorts of things. Most of them have a web version, and you can use that instead of an app most of the time. Just shake loose the Apple-induced app mentality that keeps you locked in.

Aside from that most of those specific services aren't available in my location, you really can't. Do you think I'm stupid and haven't tried?

A lot of hardware devices require use of an app these days. Any with wifi will also require use of location on ios and are thus unusable if you have location services disabled systemwide.

I just returned some IP cameras recently because of this.

Unless PWAs really took off, in which case, you wouldn't need to develop for the custom linux phone - you would just need a supported browser.

PWAs will continue to be neglected. They don't allow invasive tracking like native apps, and they don't get a 30% cut.

The web is dead. Kids today grow up using the "google app". They did what AOL couldn't.

I'd love to be wrong.

No, it's the bad hardware. With high-end hardware, it would be no problem to just run something like anbox and immediately have most of the important apps running. Except asshole apps that require DRM/safetynet of course, but I don't use them on my current android phone anyway.

> The biggest problem with "alternative" platforms is just the lack of app support.

Websites.

Because of this issue, open APIs should IMO be mandatory for all commercial services.

I keep hearing this and it's totally wrong. Desktop Linux has a huge app ecosystem and arguably has more high quality software than Android does. All of this works on the pinephone and other similar devices.

Okay, so how can I chat to my friends or companies with WhatsApp on Linux? How can I order food similar to Grab or Gojek on Linux? How can I get a date on Linux like Tinder?

You can't. Sure, there are technological solutions to all of those, but in the real world that alone is pretty much useless.

Tinder does have a web interface, so does doordash (I've never head of Gojek but I'd imagine it does too.)

I thought WhatsApp also had a web interface but I wouldn't use it anyway and there are similar chat apps that do so why would you?

> I've never head of Gojek but I'd imagine it does too.

You imagine wrong.

> I thought WhatsApp also had a web interface but I wouldn't use it anyway and there are similar chat apps that do so why would you?

The web interface is just a proxy to the phone app. The other "similar apps" don't have all my contacts on it.

You can use Watshapp multiple ways on Linux, including the web browser version [https://itsfoss.com/whatsapp-linux-desktop/].

Although, if you're using Whatsapp at all you're either massively ignorant or stupid. I mean, giving Facebook your phone number is just not wise.

And you still need the phone app for that Linux client; everything is routed through that.

Good grief, I keep bloody repeating this. Do you people actually read anything?

> Although, if you're using Whatsapp at all you're either massively ignorant or stupid. I mean, giving Facebook your phone number is just not wise.

I'm a normal human being who values social contact and doesn't want to pester all my friends in using some other app, and a lot of businesses use WhatsApp here too.

I am neither "ignorant" nor "stupid". This is literally the worst of HN right here. Do you even listen to what people have to say and consider perspectives outside of your own?

I can't help but notice that it's not a “Linux”'s job to do something about WhatsApp demanding this and that from you. It's a problem (let's not belittle it), and it's yours (well, you share it with others).

Also, people who can't get in touch with you because you don't use some fad-of-the-year app are not your real friends. Tell them that you still use MySpace (wearing a Myspace T-shirt), or prefer WeChat (a billion of users can't be wrong), and see how it goes.

> Also, people who can't get in touch with you because you don't use some fad-of-the-year app are not your real friends.

I'm in touch with many people, most of whom are not close friends. To break up a social contact just over this is too high a price to pay (and acquittances can be upgraded to close friends over the years, too, but not if you start by badgering them in to using some other app).

I think many would argue that thinking Facebook doesn't have your phone number is either massively ignorant or stupid. After all, it only takes one person you know signing up and allowing access to contacts.

That said, I am considerably less concerned about Facebook having my phone number versus Facebook being able to mine all my conversations to create a pretty complete profile of who I am and what I do.

I have never uploaded my phonebook to WhatsApp durring the short period I used it nor did I give my number to Facebook (either by entering it into my profile or by answering the nags to enable 2FA when I used to use the site.) It was not included in the recent leak (which doesn't mean they don't have it.)

> if you're using Whatsapp at all you're either massively ignorant or stupid.

Lets not name call here. Many people have different motivations and concerns different than you. Most people likely already gave facebook their number, or someone else did for them through contact book sharing.

You can use Anbox if you really need some Android app.