A simple question

[deleted]

GrapheneOS has been around for a while. Can anyone explain me why has the most (recommended) secure mobile OS (or let's call it a custom ROM+) hasn't received a much wider adoption by now? As far as I know it has _100k installs worldwide. That's like one larger town. Although it's gaining popularity, it's hard to say whether it is going to make a dent in general use. Nevertheless I like my freedom with it and enjoy how straighforward it is. Go on knock yourselves out with your comments, after all this is a forum. No technicalities please

[deleted]

[deleted] Can anyone explain me why has the most (recommended) secure mobile OS (or let's call it a custom ROM+) hasn't received a much wider adoption by now?

Because to have GrapheneOs user have to do something extra in comparison to use default. As an example we can take Google's multibillion deal with Apple to just have Google set as a default search engine.

The other factor is, I believe, that technology in this case mobile OS is widely used, yet the rules and implications are obfuscated, hidden or not as easy to realize in comparison to simply use the technology.
What I mean by that is that a person can be given a phone and even though the person never had a phone before, s/he can use it successfully. So s/he can send e-mails, call, text, play games, do banking and everything that you can do with a phone, yet that person can be completely unaware that the little thing in its hand (no joke intended) can collect and share incredible amount of personal data. The two main company in the field Google and Apple do so little or even nothing to stress this important point. Google in this case is more transparent, but do not use it to its advantage. Apple is a marketing company, so they usually do not comment or simply lies about its practices.
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/05/apple-brass-discussed-disclosing-128-million-iphone-hack-then-decided-not-to/

It is really easy, simple and comfortable to stay with defaults and not to care. Once you start caring, you do something.

Graphite

1) It's newer than many of the more popular "custom ROMs" like LineageOS (which has a lot of legacy good will from the Cyanogenmod days).

2) When I first researched GrapheneOS, I didn't jump on board right away as I was really turned off by the drama with CopperheadOS and that whole battle.

3) Gatekeeping is rampant with these kinds of projects. "General Use" seems to have a very strict definition if you ask some people. The "custom ROM" communities that are really popular, for example, can be turned off by the attitude that doing something against the "usage guide", is a mortal sin against the core values of the project. They cannot even mention the "R word" without being shunned.

Blastoidea

I think that many miss the whole point, because they install this minimalist and secure OS, then load it up like a tinker’s caravan, with all the garbage they think they ”need”.

Graphite

Blastoidea

But those people who miss the "point", would still count towards the low number of installs. I think the OP was asking why AREN'T installing GOS.

Blastoidea

Graphite
Because they can’t accept its “limitations”.

They want mutually exclusive things, so they reject theOS.

Their expectations are unrealistic.

matchboxbananasynergy

I imagine that GrapheneOS would have a lot more users if it supported more devices. However, it doesn't do that for good reasons, and I wouldn't want to see the project compromise what it stands for to do that.

People are pretty much expected to buy a device to use GrapheneOS, which not everybody can just do today.

Blastoidea

matchboxbananasynergy
Not if they buy that device in the first place.

Graphite

Blastoidea

But again, they did install the OS, and thus would be counted.

matchboxbananasynergy

Blastoidea As far as "limitations" go, GrapheneOS doesn't really have many nowadays. App compatibility between Sandboxed Google Play and toggles for additional hardening such as the exploit protection compatibility is near perfect nowadays.

And no, using Sandboxed Google Play does not "defeat the purpose of using GrapheneOS". People using the OS are free to not install it, which is why it will never be on there by default, but people who do need to use it to use apps that help them get what they need to do are always going to be much better off using them on GrapheneOS rather than Stock OS.

I don't think gatekeeping GrapheneOS in this manner is productive; loads of different kinds of people with completely different needs use GrapheneOS, and your needs may not be their needs, which we need to respect.

zehyani

one thing i notice is there is no press about Graphene. i was just on Ars Technica reading an article about tracking and cookies, and not a single comment about anything but android and Iphone. Not even in the comments section. Some of this is likely due to the inherently private people using this system who do not want to mention it. I think it is a shame however as this is a robust ecosystem that deserves to be nurtured.

brookie229

The reason is that 99.98% of us do NOT like to fiddle with their devices. Turn it on and use it. Pretty simple. We are a tiny, tiny minority here folks.

[deleted]

Thank you for your answers, I suppose it is the fact it currently makes sense running it only on 5 devices (and not cheapest at that) that is the biggest limiting factor. I read somewhere that devs are working on getting a vendor to produce a device that would come with GOS preinstalled. I can imagine that any such talks must be difficult, because and let's admit it, in attempt to cut the production costs the resulting device would underperform. So I reckon GOS in foreseeable future will remain highly specialist and very limited distribution that is not going to affect/change lives of many. When I talked to people about using Graphene, they were looking at me like where do I come from, what they use is what they know and they don't feel comfortable stepping out of their confines. They don't even seem to be aware that they have any privacy issues, that anyone might be eavesdropping on them. I am just a regular Joe but support the idea that security and privacy is a fundamental right everyone should have. And if Big Tech can't give me both at the same time, I don't want it. I suppose this is how I end up here and I put my trust in the hands of a few individuals. So far it has worked well for me, only time will tell. Again, I wish Team GOS the best of luck and I hope they will find enough support to keep them going and prevent us poor souls from switching back to stock.

Albatross

It really does just come down to simplicity and money. The money is all out there pushing Google/Apple, that's what everyone sees and wants. Second, even people I tell about GOS are pretty put off by the technical hurdles of changing things up, even if they like the benefits. I have been "converting" family members by buying the phones and setting them up for them so that they don't have to deal with anything but using it. Obviously I have them reimburse the cost of the phone, but there's almost no one outside of the tech industry that would even consider switching on their own, unfortunately.