Hacker News Reader

Comment by charcircuit | Hacker News Reader

>I've become more and more dissatisfied with the path Google has taken with the Android Open Source Project (AOSP). Be it the dependency and insane tracking of Google Play Services

AOSP does not include nor depend on Play Services.

>locking down of device trees to hinder custom ROM development

Most manufacturers do not distribute these either. The user doesn't even have a pixel so it is not relevant.

>all the AI stuff being put into the system

The AI stuff is not part of AOSP.

>or most recently (and perhaps worst), removing the ability of installing apps per your own wishing - it's become sort of like a "death by a thousand papercuts" situation.

Again that is not a feature of AOSP, but one bolted in on top of it.

I think the author would benefit much more by using a different distribution of AOSP.

View on HN

Well AOSP doesn't run on a single phone on earth (not even the emulator) so you also have to take into account the reality of what Android is on the ground.

AOSP doesn't even include a functional keyboard nor a proper call manager nowadays

But lineageos, grapheneos etc. are based on AOSP and do run on actual phones.

They had to put so much work to make it run on actual phones that each project is kind of it's own thing.

Aosp without Google play services is dead. You need it more and more to run apps.

This is only true of ye olde apps from shitty banks and the like.

Strange, I've been using it for about 15 years on many different devices and it works just fine. Maybe that is related to the fact that I tend to shun closed-source applications whenever possible? The few closed-source apps I do use - Swedish BankID, Deutsche Bahn 'Navigator', Dutch DigiD - also work as intended even though some of them - mostly the Swedish BankID - claim they 'need Google Services to work'. Click away the popup and it works just fine without it so that is clearly not true. On some devices I installed microG to see whether it does what they claim but while this seems to be the case I don't think it is needed for those keeping their devices mostly free from proprietary applications. This is not a hardship, far from it. Nearly all the types of applications I want to use are available as free software which also tends to make them ad-free, spyware-free and generally less of a nuisance than proprietary alternatives.

>You need it more and more to run apps.

Realistically nobody is developing apps for linux phones, so the options are android or no apps at all.

I have run graphene OS on my phone for 3+ years and I don't use Google Play or Google Play Services. You use F-Droid to install Aurora Store and anonymously download real apps. I can use my bank apps and it's quite functional. My wife even doesn't complain about it. Camera is decent, not as good due to the software being non-proprietary, but decent.

Many banks don't run with Google play services, and even with them on grapheneos some still won't run because of play integrity.

Don't tell me about grapheneos, I have a pixel phone and did run it for a few months with/without play services.

At the end, you're always going to absolutely need that one app that won't run without Gplay.

>At the end, you're always going to absolutely need that one app that won't run without Gplay.

Then you can install GMS into its own user profile with that GMS-dependent app, and when not using it you can log out of that user and put it fully at rest.

Play integrity.

Yes, Google is trying their best to make sideloading apps harder and harder. They also are giving the ability to some apps to only allow to be run if it's verified by Google through their Google Play Store. At the same time, Google keeps losing lawsuits forcing them to open up and allow third party app stores. GrapheneOS also sandboxes Google Play and Google Play Services so you can turn it on and off difference access at your pleasure to prevent God mode and super spy mode, so this mitigates issues even if you use Google stuff. It's a losing battle, but the phone is the battle to fight over

Reply on news.ycombinator.com