Hacker News Reader

Comment by k4rli | Hacker News Reader

Interestingly GrapheneOS being so good brings more money to Google as only Pixel phones are supported.

First motorola grapheneos phone i am buying to get fully off the google pain train. Grapheneos tides me over until a real linux smart phone shows up or i die of old age. Now if home assistant could get thread network join*ng working without an android phone with a google account i could ve fully ris of those eh holes.

I am patiently waiting for that one. I have been willing to move to GrapheneOS for a while, but I don't feel like buying Google hardware.

Fwiw the pixel phones are excellent hardware.

I don't care. I don't want Google hardware because I despise the company and I'm actively trying to reduce my dependence on Google.

That's debatable. Pretty much every generation of the Pixel phones have had some major issues. They've even had to do multiple extended repair/replace programs due to some of them. Heck there is even an ongoing issue where one of their updates has caused multiple generations of their devices to be bricked (and that still hasn't been fixed) - https://www.androidauthority.com/google-pixel-march-update-b...

On a technical level, yea, it may be great hardware but in practice, I don't think it is. As an Android user, I wish it were but it's not. Samsung is so much more reliable as an end user (even with their own issues).

They have consistently the worst battery endurance of any relevant phone maker since forever.

> Now if home assistant could get thread network join*ng working without an android phone with a google account

There is already a way to do this. It's fiddly, but not by much. Once set up it's a much better experience, though.

https://www.matteralpha.com/how-to/how-to-use-home-assistant...

It needs to work theough bluetooth proxy and be a button click, not massive pain like the articlec

Yeah requires a free Bluetooth radio and has a bit of setup, but in my opinion, it's well worth it to not be reliant on Android or iPhone, which has always given me problems.

> real linux smart phone shows up

What’s most glaringly missing, for you specifically, from the plethora of options available?

It seems like plenty of options are getting 7/10 things right.

Have you tried any of them? The software is painful or the hardware they work on is painfully underpowered.

And typically security is very bad, no good sandboxing, MAC (through e.g. SELinux), etc. I know that doesn't matter to everyone, but in the context of a discussion about GrapheneOS it does.

You’re going to struggle with that with most distros.

Indeed. Though in Europe is common for banking apps/auth, government ID apps, etc. to be phone-based, so they are the more interesting target.

There should be at least one Motorola phone before end of the year that has GrapheneOS support.

Motorola devices with GrapheneOS support will arrive in 2027 or later, not 2026. Likely, the 2027 Signature, Razr fold, and Razr flip, will meet GOSs hardware security requirements.

Sadly, Verizon Pixel phones, even after carrier unlocking, seem to be forever blocked from using GrapheneOS.

Carrier-sold Pixels generally don't have "OEM-unlockable" bootloaders.

Your best bet for now is to buy a new Pixel direct from Google, or a used one from eBay that the seller advertises as already having GrapheneOS on it (or otherwise guarantees that the bootloader is unlockable). These ones are worth a lot more than the ones that can only run Google/carrier Android.

https://grapheneos.org/install/web#prerequisites

I own two GrapheneOS Pixel 7 units, which should get any Google blob security updates (which GrapheneOS incorporates) through October 2027, and GrapheneOS may still support it with source updates after that. So in a year or so, I might get the GrapheneOS Motorola if it's available, or a later Pixel. (I never buy these new, since I don't want to carry a several hundred dollar phone when a 2 gen old one is still great, thanks to GrapheneOS.)

https://support.google.com/pixelphone/answer/4457705

Is this true for all carriers? Or just Verizon? Several Reddit threads say that it's just Verizon. T-Mobile users report being able to bootloader unlock after getting their phones carrier unlocked by T-Mobile.

OEM/carrier locking tends to only happen in the US. Many carriers permit unlocking after the contract has concluded, but Verizon has always blocked it. Used devices also run the risk of being improperly unlocked and making OEM unlocking remain unavailable. (Used devices may also be Verizon devices.)

I finally left Verizon after nearly 20 years. I had it with their enshittification, couldn't stand it anymore. I switched to US Mobile and on the Darkstar (AT&T) network. I have no regrets. I caught it on a black friday deal, so I'm paying basically $20/mo for top tier service. You wouldn't have caught me dead with an AT&T service or MVNO years ago because I'd seen so many bad experiences second-hand, but these days it's been a breeze knock on wood

I also did the math and determined buying a new unlocked phone outright on this plan was far cheaper than paying Verizon monthly for one.

> I also did the math and determined buying a new unlocked phone outright on this plan was far cheaper than paying Verizon monthly for one.

On any plan.

There’s a reason that as soon as you walk into a cell store they immediately try to schmooze you into signing contracts and leasing phones.

It’s the way they make the most margin!

+1 for US Mobile. Verizon was also good, but a few months ago my cofounder and I discovered we were absurdly overpaying for our decade-old small business plan and found that US Mobile offered a better end product for a fraction of the price.

Currently running my Pixel on Warp (Verizon) with zero practical difference, and starting Monday I'll also have a backup iPhone with a small $8/mo Darkstar line. The money I've saved since switching more or less paid for the iPhone, and I'll be getting 2x reliability for way less ongoing cost. The better app/website/support and extra features are just a bonus.

I’ve seen this repeated here, but:

Google's Pixel hardware division likely operates at a loss - or breaks even.

and even if every active HN user bought $100-$400 used Pixels from Swappa, meaningless money to them.

Yep, Pixels for them are entry points to Google One subscriptions, etc. The Pixel 9a is currently 350 Euro in my country, it has the same CPU/GPU (modem differs) that the expensive 9 Pro/Pro XL/Pro Fold had. Factoring in development costs, etc. at that price I cannot imagine it being more than break-even.

Also, even Pixel 9a has all the security functions of the flagship that many other Android phones do not have or are just getting, such as the Memory Tagging Extension (MTE), the Titan M2 security processor (no need to rely on TrustZone for secrets), etc.

I don't see a problem with supporting their legitimate hardware or cloud business models. But of course I see a problem supporting their illegitimate adware and spyware business models.

I agree, especially when you are buying for the used market.

So far. Other companies surely will make their devices compatible if the market share increases for it

Reply on news.ycombinator.com