• General
  • «hidden bottom pill» challenge

Please,

Input points on hiding bottom pill so the conservative GrapheneOS team will finally add this setting.

From my point of view it's time to get rid of the pill for immersive mode because of #android-bottom-toolbar flag in Vanadium.

Peace

    01123581321 Input points on hiding bottom pill so the conservative GrapheneOS team will finally add this setting.

    The GrapheneOS team generally does not make tweaks to the UI, instead shipping the UI Google ships in AOSP. So lobbying Google for their UI team to add the option to AOSP may well be more productive than lobbying the GrapheneOS team. Google makes UI changes frequently.

      5 days later

      de0u everyone on this forum knows that GrapheneOS team is conservative and that's why it's a challenge to find the right point.

      • de0u replied to this.

        01123581321 To my eyes the GrapheneOS team is not at all "conservative" when it comes to making changes that improve security and privacy (storage scopes, contact scopes, duress PIN, PIN scrambling, and many others). But they appear to be actively disinterested in UI tweaks unrelated to security and privacy.

        Every GrapheneOS change must be re-merged against each monthly Google release. This takes some time (at least computer time) for every GrapheneOS change, so fewer is better.

        Other Android variants work the opposite way: they prioritize their local changes, including UI tweaks, even if that limits their ability to merge security fixes promptly.

        In a sense the GrapheneOS project was founded to work on the opposite of the kind of feature you are requesting, and in a sense shipping that kind of feature opposes the project's core goals. So it might not happen.

        Please note that I do not speak for the GrapheneOS project.

          de0u to me, and to all following this forum, your point is obvious, but, bud, this bottom pill burns into eyes.

          Should we leave google alone and let it continue bad practices just because they only choose some of what others do — to imprint bottom pill and front camera black hole to mind, burn eyes with blue light and temporal dithering PWM but not with lidar lasers?

          One can hide camera hole by disabling part of display, minimize blue light by enabling Night Light, disable temporal dithering by enabling black and white mode via Color correction and fight PWM by enabling Dark mode and Extra dim with 100% brightness, instead of reducing brigness percentage. Fix display refresh rate, use airplane mode, auto restart, BFU and duress PIN, restrict permissions and background usage, clean home screen and status bar, disable interface animations, google play services, unimportant notifications, javascript and one's almost there, but can't hide bottom_pill.

            01123581321 If you are indeed bothered by it, you're welcome to use a different browser. The project can't make cosmetic changes for one person, resulting in distraction from priority work and future problems with merging updates, etc.

            01123581321 One can [...] and one's almost there, but can't hide bottom_pill.

            Besides duress PIN/password and auto reboot, all of those features are from AOSP.

            01123581321 disable interface animations

            Theres currently a bug with widgets thats hitting some people who have animations disabled.

            https://github.com/GrapheneOS/os-issue-tracker/issues/4275

            Regarding the bottom pill - the development team have always got a long list of high priority issues and features that are being worked upon. Making any modification to the OS can often take considerably more time than may initially be expected. We implement features properly rather than as fragile hacks. Any changes need maintaining as AOSP and other upstream code changes. This can take a lot of work. Every change has to be carefully considered. What is the priority. Is it worth the work. What is the potential for the change to cause us problems later.

            01123581321 get used to the fact the pill is here to stay. At least for foreseeable future and mainly for the fact the 3-button navigation is now being phased out.

            Comrades,

            As said previously — content of your comments is expected and as obvious as usefulness of incognito tab, due to mention of «security/privacy—wise» nature of decisions in GrapheneOS project in every feature request, so I called core team conservative and finding the right point of argument a challenge.

            • yore replied to this.

              01123581321 Bear in mind GrapheneOS is a non-profit organization that has limited resources compared to Google or any major corporation. Despite that, the project has successfully implemented features that Google has yet to merge into the stock OS with the help of the team who have been known to do overtime to finish upcoming features, for us to enjoy without expecting any form of payment in return.

              While I understand you don't like the browser's appearance, I don't think it's fair to call the project "conservative" as you will encounter the exact same situation on the stock OS. If you would like, you're welcome to contact Google's Chromium project to make changes to their browser, which Vanadium is based on, and you would have a much higher likelihood of these changes being made this way.

              As I mentioned earlier, you are allowed to switch browsers to one that suits your looks better, and this is really the only solution I have for you.

                01123581321 One can hide camera hole by disabling part of display, minimize blue light by enabling Night Light, disable temporal dithering by enabling black and white mode via Color correction and fight PWM by enabling Dark mode and Extra dim with 100% brightness, instead of reducing brigness percentage.

                About PWM specifically. There has been recent progress on being able to control the display PWM behavior on Pixel devices. Unfortunately as it is implemented (using a sysfs interface controlled by local root access) it would not fly as is for GrapheneOS integration but I hope at some point improvements can be made and a consensus can be reached for integration into GrapheneOS.

                I will echo the authoritative statements that any additional features for GrapheneOS need to be carefully considered. Both for the security implications and long-term maintainability as part of the project.