This is why your phone doesn't have a matte display - GSMArena.com news

ijeff@lemdro.idmod to Android@lemdro.id – 110 points –
This is why your phone doesn't have a matte display
gsmarena.com
64

You are viewing a single comment

What I dislike is the constant stripping of features lately - between OEMs stripping stuff like SD card support, and box contents like ear buds and wallwarts; and Google stripping core features like the ability to cat system logs... It's getting fucking dumb.

These companies learned their lesson with the open BIOS of pc's preventing them from really controlling DRM.

Android, not having a standardized BIOS, really gives them the opportunity to provide devices they can fully control.

If you can't unlock boot, you can't root, so you can't fully control the device.

That's the long-term goal: get people used to devices they don't actually control.

Lots of people already don't know the massive difference between using a full desktop app and a limited mobile app, many actually prefer the mobile because it's simpler! (I admit I do too, for certain use cases and maybe day-to-day use, but not for all use).

And then all the people who argue against having root access on your own device. 🤦‍♂️

There are good arguments for much of what Google does to improve Android security, it's just very frustrating to know their real agenda is to lock us out.

Fortunately, businesses will always need MDM (Mobile Device Management), which will require root access in some fashion, and there are already Open Source/low cost/free versions of MDM out there, and plenty of smart devs always working on root, like Magisk by topjohnwu and the new KernelSU by tiann (which gets root at the kernel level!)

It really sucks how fucking stupid people have gotten. The complacency and supporting of companies stripping away access to things you're selling out big money on? It's like ownership pricing for a rental experience.

Then when nobody can repair the stuff but the OEM's they'll be shocked at the cost and blame the people who used to repair the items for not doing enough to push back or something stupid.

I frustratingly have to agree.

I've been a privacy advocate for 20+ years, and people kept calling me paranoid. I may be, but (as my hillbilly uncle would say), "ya gotta look at who's ox is gettin' gored" (kind of a redneck version of no such thing as a free lunch).

No one does something without an angle (that is businesses, and many people too).

I post about rooting and people reply with "you don't need root, it's a security risk". Right, because all the Linux and windows boxes I've touched over the years, with root access, are insecure 🤦‍♂️.

This is my phone. Not Google's, nor anyone else's.

Too many people are content viewing anything as complex as a toaster as magic. They just want the results.

"that's a security risk"

My reasonse is always along the lines of "Yeah and? It's a pocket-sized PC with PC-like specs being sold at PC-like prices. I'd like my workhorse to be functional. I can monitor my device as best I can, and vet the things I install."

Yep.

I keep telling them that security isn't one thing, it's layers.

There are many unrooted phones that have had malware installed courtesy of the Play store... I've never had any, and none of my pc's since about 1990 have never had a virus.

For as long as Magisk has been going, that's been my root strategy. I'm new to hearing about KernelSU though. Any advantages?

I'm not the best person to ask, but I think the difference is where each obtains root perms.

Magisk gets root by modifying the boot image, while KernelSU modifies the Linux Kernel. I think being in the kernel it'll be harder to detect and it'll be more stable, protected from system updates.

Plus the kernel is more constant across devices, it really doesn't change much from what I understand. My boot image is different per version of Android, but I think the kernel doesn't change.

Most Android updates take place in what I'd call the Android Subsystem, since it's really a shell on top of Linux.

That's what I've been able to glean so far, but I'm no developer.

I like SD cards and headphone jacks, but I don't quite understand the fuss over box contents. If you need another pair of low-end earbuds at the time you're buying a new phone, just buy them. If it helps with the mental accounting, consider whether you'd buy the same phone if it cost $15 more.

It doesn't make sense to me to include earbuds and chargers in every box. That's wasteful, and everybody ends up of drawers full of unused shit.

This is us. Up til recently they just gave out too much stuff. At this point I have given chargers away to homeless people because I have so many. My husband and I buy phones every two years generally (because android's update BS until now). It's ridiculous. And we never used the headphones when they came in the box.

My earbuds were replaced before the end of my phone's life. Also, my kids who just got phones for the first time now need to also shell out money for a wall wart and ear buds? Considering there seems to be $0.00 savings passed on to us from all the shit they've cut out, it's a bit ridiculous.

Maybe there should be a voucher for free earbuds and charger, but I think it's a waste for most people.