AOSP isn't dead, but Google just landed a huge blow to custom ROM developers
Technology
99
Beiträge
66
Kommentatoren
363
Aufrufe
-
Do you think it may be related to the monopoly issues they are currently facing?
Quite possibly, the GrapheneOS team seems to think so:
GrapheneOS (@GrapheneOS@grapheneos.social)
Google seems to be in the process of splitting up Android and Pixels along with moving towards treating other Android-based platforms as their competitors instead of their partners. Pixels retain first class alternate OS support with Android 16 firmware so it's not about that.
GrapheneOS Mastodon (grapheneos.social)
GrapheneOS (@GrapheneOS@grapheneos.social)
Our speculation about this is that a result of Google losing a US antitrust case and likely losing several more soon, they're preparing for Android and Chrome being split into separate companies. If Android gets split off, they want to retain Pixels. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/21/technology/google-search-remedies-hearing.html
GrapheneOS Mastodon (grapheneos.social)
-
TL;DR
-
Google has made it harder to build custom Android ROMs for Pixel phones by omitting their device trees and driver binaries from the latest AOSP release.
-
The company says this is because it’s shifting its AOSP reference target from Pixel hardware to a virtual device called “Cuttlefish” to be more neutral.
-
While Google insists AOSP isn’t going away, developers must now reverse-engineer changes, making the process for supporting Pixel devices more difficult.
huh, look at that. the thing people were warned about when buying pixel phones happened.
-
-
Yeah, I'd totally buy a phone running one of those provided it does all the phone things properly: SMS/MMS, reliable calls, all day battery, etc. I don't need fancy apps, I just need a working phone.
If I can get that, I could probably donate some time porting apps.
It's so crazy (technically understandable, but still crazy) to me that reliably receiving calls is still such a major issue
-
Does this mean Graphene is dead? Probably the real reason they would do this is to kill Graphene.
This fits into Google tying Android closer to them, same with the recent move of only making release source publicly available.
They're regretting having started Android as an "open" platform and want to gain control fast, maybe preparing for the current anti-trust trials they are facing in the US.
-
TL;DR
-
Google has made it harder to build custom Android ROMs for Pixel phones by omitting their device trees and driver binaries from the latest AOSP release.
-
The company says this is because it’s shifting its AOSP reference target from Pixel hardware to a virtual device called “Cuttlefish” to be more neutral.
-
While Google insists AOSP isn’t going away, developers must now reverse-engineer changes, making the process for supporting Pixel devices more difficult.
I swear to god how many time it has to pass until developers realize open source is just a facade only Free Software licences are free as in freedom
-
-
If Pine64 can spec out a reasonably decent prototype of a phone and Purism can sell theirs for 2 grand (not worth it), then somebody else can legit come out with something just the same. Pine64 project and Purism cannot be the only communities that can somehow come out with these kinds of tech. Better yet, more people should be jumping to help out these guys to be free from Google and Apple dominance.
Teracube just came out with their 3 phone Teracube 2s, and of course there is Fairphone
-
huh, look at that. the thing people were warned about when buying pixel phones happened.
I was about to buy one next year… what do you recommend instead?
-
I mean, you're getting a lot of downvotes, but I've gone Motorola -> Motorola -> Motorola -> Pixel -> Pixel -> Motorola.
Both my Pixels died in less than a year. Each had battery life which, while it did improve over a few weeks as Pixel's optimization stuff took hold, never reached an entire day. Both were unacceptably fragile. Both failed randomly, just out of warranty.
And the Motorola I'm using now has none of those problems, was cheaper, is faster, has a better battery, has a better screen, and in some ways is more customizable (fuck that unmovable search bar).
Like, really. Motorola is a sleeper brand. Not perfect, but damn good.
Which motorola?
-
I agree with you, it's insidious.
Given you've got a Pixel phone, you can save at least yourself from this problem by running Graphene or Calyx on it.
I'm not worried about me. I can manage. But I had to intervene and make it a Project for my immediate family. Which is always unfun, because who wants to expose all their personal data that way, especially photos.
Crazy that Google just screwed over GrapheneOS like this.
-
I was about to buy one next year… what do you recommend instead?
fair phone has treated me well enough.
I have a FP4 that runs e/os. won't lie, the software has bugs, but the hardware is pretty solid.
-
I swear to god how many time it has to pass until developers realize open source is just a facade only Free Software licences are free as in freedom
Sorry how would have a GPL`d aosp helped here? Google would and could still have not published their drivers for the pixel. You'd need pixel drivers licenced by someone different from google to make them publish their changes to the drivers
-
huh, look at that. the thing people were warned about when buying pixel phones happened.
Google doing something bad? SAY IT ISN'T SO
-
TL;DR
-
Google has made it harder to build custom Android ROMs for Pixel phones by omitting their device trees and driver binaries from the latest AOSP release.
-
The company says this is because it’s shifting its AOSP reference target from Pixel hardware to a virtual device called “Cuttlefish” to be more neutral.
-
While Google insists AOSP isn’t going away, developers must now reverse-engineer changes, making the process for supporting Pixel devices more difficult.
apple and google are doing their best to promote linux phones at this point.
dont buy american
-
-
TL;DR
-
Google has made it harder to build custom Android ROMs for Pixel phones by omitting their device trees and driver binaries from the latest AOSP release.
-
The company says this is because it’s shifting its AOSP reference target from Pixel hardware to a virtual device called “Cuttlefish” to be more neutral.
-
While Google insists AOSP isn’t going away, developers must now reverse-engineer changes, making the process for supporting Pixel devices more difficult.
It's the year of the linux phone. /s
-
-
This is not a selling point but rather a unfortunate but comprehensible circumstance. Nexus and later Pixel phones have not been anything more than reference hardware without significant sales until the Pixel 6. Google has been a software company that has greatly benefited by android being an "open" platform you could contribute to and use their services on.
The App / Cloud ecosystem has gained a lot of competitors, so Google is doing their best to reverse this course of action by pulling more and more functionality out of AOSP into Play services and now into Cuttlefish. We can only wait and see how other phone manufacturers react to this.
We can only wait and see how other phone manufacturers react to this.
Honestly, it's obvious how they will react. After all, they'd have to pass a certification process if they want to be able to ship Google stuff.
-
Nah, you have it backwards. GrapheneOS didn't choose Pixels for any reason other than they're the only acceptably secure devices out there. I can't imagine they want this to be the case.
That still sounds like choosing to me. Like, if your project requirements are so strict that it only works on the mornings of a Tuesday that falls in a prime number day that has a blue moon and where there are no ATP tennis matches going on (all pre-existing things you have no vote on), maybe you should re-evaluate if you actually want your proyect to have a viable audience.
-
That still sounds like choosing to me. Like, if your project requirements are so strict that it only works on the mornings of a Tuesday that falls in a prime number day that has a blue moon and where there are no ATP tennis matches going on (all pre-existing things you have no vote on), maybe you should re-evaluate if you actually want your proyect to have a viable audience.
Is it really so outlandish to want my phone to be unbreakable by cops?
-
Which motorola?
I had a model I can't remember which was an emergency replacement from my OnePlus 3T years ago, then two G Powers of... Some years, then my Pixel 5a and then 8, and now a Razr 2024.
-
See? Pixel devices are nothing but a trip to the lemon grove, but people with debilitating chronic ass pain tearfully refuse to accept that they wasted their money on GETBRAND. I take those downvotes as an unofficial census confirming how many people don't know ball.
You might be a tad zealous, but you're not wrong.
-
Is it really so outlandish to want my phone to be unbreakable by cops?
In this year of 2025? No. But it still is basically setting oneself for failure from the perspective of Graphene, IMO. Like, the strongest protection in the world (assuming Graphene even is, which is quite a tall order statement) is useless if it only works on the mornings of a Tuesday that falls in a prime number day that has a blue moon and where there are no ATP tennis matches going on. Everyone else is, like, living in the real world, and the uniqueness of your scenario is going to go down the drain once your users get presented with a $5 wrench, or even cheaper: a waterboard. Because cops, let alone ICE, are not going to stop to ask you if they can make you more comfortable with your privacy being violated.
