Language
-
Ooof; yeah: that'd be a dealbreaker for me, too. I've got a OnePlus, as well (Nord N20), and, while I can definitely tell there's some battery optimization going on, it's never killed my alarms; it's the only alarm clock I use so somewhat vital.
Unfortunately, I haven't heard anything (yet). Most of anything I've heard about them has been from "static" sources (like the above); I don't hang out in any chatrooms or the like they may have. I do know they have an account on the Fediverse, though (@[email protected]), so you may be able to ask them directly?
Nice, thanks for the tip.
Unfortunately I think the size might be the deal breaker though, just remembered how my current one literally only fits in my pocket if I rotate it in at the exact right angle. 8 extra mm in both directions and there's no hope.
I'm not ready for pants shopping again already, taking these ones in took 10 hours T_T
-
As for KaiOS, I don't think that's really a good successor of Boot2Gecko; from what I've seen they went the app route, which kind of fundamentally violates the spirit of what B2G was supposed to be.
I'm not sure what the original vision was, but KaiOS is just a fork of Boot2Gecko.
-
I finally want to switch to android and boom: Custom ROMs and "sideloading" gets swept off the platter. Well ok I guess I‘ll just wait for a good linux mobile OS
-
Let me answer your question with a question: How many things do you do with your phone that aren't also able to be accomplished with a website already? I'd be willing to bet that the answer is in the single digits. And for most of those, that limitation is likely to be entirely arbitrary, instituted by a developer as an anti-consumer form of lock-in.
Delivering application-like experiences via the web allows users to make accessibility changes to that experience without the developer needing to support it explicitly. It also allows users to implement plugins that extend and improve their experience, by removing undesirable content or adding functionality that you haven't provided. And because browsers are built on open standards, there's no longer any device ecosystem lock-in; I should be able to access all of the websites I want to from any browser on any device. Users could even build their own bespoke applications, without the need to enable a developer mode on their phone or get a certification from a megacorp.
And because downloadable and cacheable progressive web apps are a thing, as well as local storage options for browsers, the experience for an end-user of a browser-only phone wouldn't need to be any different in low-signal or high-latency situations.
The web is a mature and proven platform for delivering arbitrary code and data, plugins make the web more accessible and easier to use, and web standards make the world more open. It's not a perfect platform, of course, but it's the one we've got; I think making it the default rather than the fallback for the devices most people use more than any other would be a great boon for the world at large.
Let me answer your question with a question: How many things do you do with your phone that aren’t also able to be accomplished with a website already?
This is kinda begging the question imo. Phones are terrible anti-user devices, so I can't do the things I'd like to do with it that I can't also accomplish on a website. Wasn't that kinda the problem that was initially stated in the OP?
Delivering application-like experiences via the web allows users to make accessibility changes to that experience without the developer needing to support it explicitly. It also allows users to implement plugins that extend and improve their experience, by removing undesirable content or adding functionality that you haven’t provided. And because browsers are built on open standards, there’s no longer any device ecosystem lock-in; I should be able to access all of the websites I want to from any browser on any device. Users could even build their own bespoke applications, without the need to enable a developer mode on their phone or get a certification from a megacorp.
Almost all of this would be equally possible if the phone wasn't just a platform for a browser. I actually think a browser model limits a lot of what you say here, and browsers definitely have ecosystem lock-in problems: what Google says essentially goes these days. The browser isn't the great liberator of phones imo.
I don't hate browsers; a lot of what you said is true and great for users with respect to browsers. I do however think it's a weird way to try to fix the phone ecosystem by replacing a restrictive sandbox with a restrictive sandbox that also ties you to a really terrible development ecosystem.
-
They claim this is about security but when your system is compromised there is fuck all they will do to help you.
Fucking hypocritical, control-hungry pricks.
-
I, too, hate web dev being the standard. It's inevitable though. Mostly OS agnostic, easy to learn, etc.
I don't see why it's inevitable at all. Browsers are incredibly useful and will always have their place, but they don't have to be everything. Why would you say it's inevitable? There are plenty of other OS agnostic frameworks on which to build programs, and not everything actually has to be OS agnostic imo. I don't write anything with Windows in mind
-
I don't know about you, but my Pixel 6a already does this. When I go to install an APK not from the app store directly it warms me, requires me to acknowledge that the APK was downloaded through Firefox, and acknowledge what permissions it is requesting.
-
I don't see why it's inevitable at all. Browsers are incredibly useful and will always have their place, but they don't have to be everything. Why would you say it's inevitable? There are plenty of other OS agnostic frameworks on which to build programs, and not everything actually has to be OS agnostic imo. I don't write anything with Windows in mind
If you write desktop software and don't ship a Windows version, that's like 90% of users you're missing out on. Android vs iOS you lose half. Not everyone wants to learn C++ for qt and by the time you get to things like Flutter, might as well use Tauri and some lightweight js framework.
Not an issue if you only do FOSS, but commercial software is always about lowest possible cost to build
-
wrote last edited by [email protected]
I think they're both pretty big problems. An open OS and hardware that supports it seems to be a huge hurdle, but at least there is a clear vision of how to solve it. The problem you bring up though... It seems like we've almost gone too far at this point and it's gonna be really hard to put the cat back in the bag. It seems like something we need to solve with legislation potentially?
-
Bad analogy with cars there. A catalytic converter doesn't change what you can or can't do with your car. It would be equivalent to, say, government mandate a minimum energy efficiency for phones. Most people including me will have no problem with that.
-
Even people who are not being supported by any IT department at all? For example, home users. If they break their device they will learn how to not break their next one and therefore become more technologically proficient.
they will learn how to not break their next one
Lmao
-
my take on it is that it was a mistake to push end-to-end encryption on every chat. now the government wants to remove privacy for everyone, because some people are going to abuse it.
it would have been a better approach to make privacy through encryption possible, but somewhat technical so non-techy people aren't going to use it much.
context: EU tries to implement "chat control" (again) which is basically removing user's privacy on private chat messages by letting the government spy on it.
governments are trying to take away privacy from regular people so we never should have tried to give it to everybody
Wtf?????? That's completely asinine.
-
I finally want to switch to android and boom: Custom ROMs and "sideloading" gets swept off the platter. Well ok I guess I‘ll just wait for a good linux mobile OS
SailfishOS. Fun fact, it's also finnish.
-
Some of these comments are wild.
The OS should not at all stop me from doing what I want to do. Ever. Not even if that means I can fuck it up.
They can warn me when I attempt to do things that could fuck shit up. They can make it a bit harder to navigate to certain things so I'm less likely to fuck shit up. But it's my god damn hardware. I should be able to run and configure the software on it as I see fit.
From a personal freedom POV, I agree. But, if it was easy it would be a support nightmare.
Google and Apple scan every app that gets loaded into their app stores for malware. There's also a lengthy review process, even just for updates. Some malware does still slip through, but it's a trickle compared to what gets blocked. If sideloading apps were easy, my younger sister would be in so much trouble. She'd have various accounts phished within a day. She'd install something that drains the battery within an hour and not understand what was going wrong. And, she's relatively tech savvy. I have no idea how the older generation would survive.
Of course, since Apple and Google make 30% of every sale on the app store, they're not purely motivated to just keep their users safe. The real problem is that there is a duopoly in smartphones. Apple and Google have essentially the same policies, and if you don't like them you have no other options. If there were a dozen OSes, there could be smart phones for Granny that had everything locked down, and smart phones for h4x04z that didn't. Companies that struck a good balance between protecting their users and allowing their users freedom would do well in the market. Companies that didn't would shrink and fail.
-
Can't IT lock things down if they so desire? That is the owner of the device using it as they see fit: Locking it down so the non technical users of the device can't break it. That you keep suggesting that devices should come out of the box restricted would make your IT job obsolete and in fact impossible to perform.
Edit: And before you ask yes I have worked in IT support, although I currently do not.
Not corporate IT, but IT for home users, back in the days when things were much less locked down basically every computer i got access too was completely crawling with malware. Had tons of people lose all of their data including family photos and the like because they dowloaded something dodgy off limewire and their system just let them run it.
Why cant you guys understand that the vast vast majority of computer users are not technical? And as such need those safety rails in place to save them from their own ignorance?
-
A hidden option to unlock power user mode solves this
Yeah exactly. Though i would personally say a bit more obfuscation is needed then a simple hidden switch.
-
Because making a power user take a more complicated path to achieve something is better than having an incopetent user brick their entire machine by accident?
-
If you write desktop software and don't ship a Windows version, that's like 90% of users you're missing out on. Android vs iOS you lose half. Not everyone wants to learn C++ for qt and by the time you get to things like Flutter, might as well use Tauri and some lightweight js framework.
Not an issue if you only do FOSS, but commercial software is always about lowest possible cost to build
wrote last edited by [email protected]Sure, but imagine a world where you could run a JVM (just as an example please don't focus on that lol) on your phone (and yes I know Android is JVM-esque, but you aren't just running JVM code on there willy nilly due to the way it's designed). There is no longer an Android vs iOS in that case with respect to JVM and even desktop or laptop applications. Of course there would need to be work done on the development side to deal with screen size and all that fun stuff, but these are all solvable problems and things you already have to deal with. QT has very easy to use Python bindings if you want an easy entry to that so that's no big deal. I don't write a lot of GUI code so I don't know the landscape that well, but I've had success with PyQt6 and Kotlin + JavaFX.
Anyway that's all kinda besides the point. We know how to build VMs; we've done it plenty of times. There is nothing magic about JavaScript; it's just a VM. Are browsers incredibly complex and well designed programs? Yes, but they're not special and their role as the backbone of everything doesn't seem inevitable or wise to me.
-
They claim this is about security but when your system is compromised there is fuck all they will do to help you.
Fucking hypocritical, control-hungry pricks.
It's about the security of their brand. No sane company wants people walking around, talking about shit their phone is because it keeps getting infected.
-
I argue that would be even more of a use case for the device owner to have such control.
Then you'd have rights to control which software your mom can install on the phone.
Why, in the love of all free tech support would I ever want to do that?
I swear, people just don't grasp how normies use computers. I don't want my normie relatives to have me micromanage their devices, I want their devices to be foolproof and do the five things they need to do.
That's not what I want for every device, though, so there needs to be an alternative for people who post on federated social media and performatively use open source software. If there are only two providers in a segment and both lock down all sideloading that's not acceptable, but the concept of locked down devices by itself is not.
This is not such a challenging concept. I am convinced most people in this thread would get it just fine outside of the context of having a knee-jerk reaction to the last thing they read online.
