Comments by "Winnetou17" (@Winnetou17) on "GrapheneOS; the greatest mobile OS of all time. Common usability misconceptions DEBUNKED!" video.

@rossmanngroup I want to challenge that decision. Why is it more important to have foolproof levels of security, but only for a handful of users, rather than focus on making the OS widely available, even if the secutity features drop by half (maybe the privacy ones too). I'm sure it will still be much better than what those other phone have originally (cough Samsung cough). Making it mainstream, not just for Pixel phone would mean, what, 10 times the potential users ? Isn't that much better for the goal ? Isn't that much more helpful for the global phone landscape ? Wouldn't that more easily bring people to also contribute (bug reports, code and financially) ? Of course, it would also increase the stress, from more exposure. But I think it would be tolerable.
12
You can't call something the "greatest OS of all time" if it doesn't work in the majority of devices (phones in this case) on the current landscape. Fight me! For real though, I want it, but don't want to buy a Pixel phone, neither new nor SH. And saying it's supported just on Pixel because it has extra hardware security features - bullshit! I mean, I don't challenge that it's not, but I want to point out that it's a very stupid argument. Maybe in alpha and pre alpha stages it would be ok. But on the full release, it's MUCH MUCH more important to have people onboard and even with just like 90% of the privacy and 50% of the security (and still much better than what the original phone has) than to have only one line of phones that limit the exposure to 10% of the potential users. That's bad prioritisation at this point. At least if they care more about raising the global security and privacy. It's not an easy decision to make, and I can't fault them, I'm just saying what I think would be more important (maybe a bit in a harsh matter, but, meh). I do think a lot of people would rather actually be able to use Graphene on their current phone, without the full security suite, than to have the Graphene OS team develop 3 security features extra, but keep the Pixel limitation (which means that people have to wait more until they try it, or switch to a Pixel phone - and maybe lose some features, like Louis does now) Other than that, I agree, it's awesome! Won't try it on a Pixel, sorry. Can't wait for it to become more popular and branch into other models, hopefully Fairphone and Pinephone.
1
@Gandalf721 a) that's what they say, that they don't focus on other phones, because they lack security features. And b) many others said that if I want it on my phone, I can take the source code and make it work. From the two above it's obviuos: the devs of Graphene OS decided to not support other devices, not even in a lesser way, say, just a minimal install that works, though there we're getting into the realm of if it's even worth the time. Also, in their FAQ they mention that "Broader device support can only happen after the community (companies, organizations and individuals) steps up to make substantial, ongoing contributions to making the existing device support sustainable." So it's not just "other cell phone companies" (a thing you should've known already, when you replied me). The only valid reason I see so far is that supporting more phones would be too difficult/impossible to do at the moment. But it should have been mentioned in the first place, not the "because it lacks security features". Also, stop assuming somebody is a perfect idiot just because it doesn't want to buy a specific line of phones.
1