But parent was talking about a comparison with running a Linux mobile distro on a PinePhone. Using PostmarketOS or similar (and don't get me wrong, I find PostmarketOS very cool) is still orders of magnitudes harder than using a custom ROM like /e/OS or CalyxOS. And those custom ROMs are improving fast, too.
> Mobile Linux does not add hoops to jump through. The intent is making things easier as time passes.
Same for custom Android ROMs. Except that they are already much more usable than Mobile Linux.
> Yes, the base system is still maintained, but the concern is that Google increasingly adds features into proprietary gapps instead of AOSP proper.
Google's strategy and lock-in with the Play Services is nothing close to a surprise. But again, I think dropping support for those two (basic, let's be honest) apps is really not a problem.
Actually a bigger problem, to me, is app developers who rely on the Play Services because it's easier for them, and because they don't care about custom ROMs. And of course Google pushes for that, but in the end, app developers can pretty easily do their part to not make life more difficult for custom ROMs.
> But parent was talking about a comparison with running a Linux mobile distro on a PinePhone
But the comparison works. No mobile linux distro adds hoops to jump through.
Of course (Almost?) nobody thinks that mobile linux is as convenient / usable as Android right know.
For many of us it's about developing an ecosystem that's truly open source / that does not rely on Google.
> But again, I think dropping support for those two (basic, let's be honest) apps is really not a problem.
No, indeed. The custom rom will survive. There seems to be correct alternative apps, and someone might even put the effort in maintaining the AOSP ones.
It's just a symptom / a clue of the broader issue.
> But the comparison works. No mobile linux distro adds hoops to jump through.
Right. Sounds a bit pedantic to me, but okay :).
I guess my point is that AOSP is open source, and in a much better shape for mobile than Mobile Linux.
It is great to see work going on with Mobile Linux, and I find projects like PostmarketOS really cool. I just don't like how (some) Mobile Linux fans apparently seem to jump on every opportunity to say that Android is doomed and Mobile Linux is the only way.
Ah, the distinction is important indeed :-)
The expectation is that things are improving.
I think many people in the mobile Linux do think Android is doomed, or at least is not an interesting path anymore for the long run. That's what drives them. Android works, but has some flaws this ecosystem can't see being avoided. Being stuck with the custom kernel and the proprietary drivers is one of them.
Personally, I'd be happy with an Android phone that can run free of proprietary drivers with the mainline kernel.
Most Android devices use a downstream kernel that has modifications that were made specifically for the device. In other words, most Android devices are not mainlined. I guess it is reasonable to call "custom" anything that is not the mainline kernel, isn't it?
What's your point? If free drivers are available you have the freedom to use free drivers. If they aren't available you don't unless you make them yourself.
My point is that for Linux phones you are free from those Googe-created problems of the long-term support. You simply use the mainline kernel and your device works forever.
> unless you make them yourself
You almost never can write free drivers yourself, because the hardware specs are closed. You would need to do reverse-engineering, which is too costly.
But parent was talking about a comparison with running a Linux mobile distro on a PinePhone. Using PostmarketOS or similar (and don't get me wrong, I find PostmarketOS very cool) is still orders of magnitudes harder than using a custom ROM like /e/OS or CalyxOS. And those custom ROMs are improving fast, too.
> Mobile Linux does not add hoops to jump through. The intent is making things easier as time passes.
Same for custom Android ROMs. Except that they are already much more usable than Mobile Linux.
> Yes, the base system is still maintained, but the concern is that Google increasingly adds features into proprietary gapps instead of AOSP proper.
Google's strategy and lock-in with the Play Services is nothing close to a surprise. But again, I think dropping support for those two (basic, let's be honest) apps is really not a problem.
Actually a bigger problem, to me, is app developers who rely on the Play Services because it's easier for them, and because they don't care about custom ROMs. And of course Google pushes for that, but in the end, app developers can pretty easily do their part to not make life more difficult for custom ROMs.