[II2II]

> I use proprietary stuff like Apple for these parts of my life. A new Apple device is usually a non-event: charge it, authenticate, wait for the back to restore while you go about your business.

Most of the author's criticisms were centered on avoiding account creation and third-party apps. I'm not sure I would give Apple the benefit of the doubt here since the motivations are different: Apple is far more interested in locking customers into their own ecosystem. On the Android front, that isn't all that different from getting a Pixel. Of course, getting an Android based Samsung adds an extra company who wants to do the same as well as selling space to third parties.

While Android being more open does add complexity, it is mostly limited to those who buy devices produced by another vendor or those who choose to exercise their freedom (e.g. by choosing to install a third-party version of Android, or installing a third-party "app store", or developing their own software).

[t0bia_s]

that isn't all that different from getting a Pixel.

Paradox is, that with Pixel device you can get most freedom and security togather. Installation of GrapheneOS is easiest custom ROM installation that could possibly be.

[n8cpdx]

I tried it, Graphene isn't really a good alternative because the built in apps are so bad that you end up needing to install the Pixel/Google versions anyway.

If I have to install Google Messages for RCS, Google Calendar, Google Contacts, Pixel Camera (which forces you to use Google Photos for basic functionality), … where is the benefit?

If I have to turn Graphene into a Pixel to make it usable, and I did, there’s not much point. And the apps are 90% of the time very noticeably better on iOS, so overall turns into a very bad trade.

[ninjasmosa]

You still get much better privacy with GrapheneOS even if you install Google apps since they are sandboxed; they don't have access to unique device identifiers and you can control what Google can access by adjusting its permissions, as opposed to having full reign to do whatever it wants. Also you don't have to use all the Google apps, plenty of open source and/or privacy respecting alternatives out there. Pixel Camera only needs Google Photos for the photo previewer, everything else works without it or you can install gcam services provider to use any gallery you want

[prmoustache]

> If I have to install Google Messages for RCS, Google Calendar, Google Contacts, Pixel Camera (which forces you to use Google Photos for basic functionality), … where is the benefit?

I am not sure why would you have to install messages has nobody uses RCS these days.

As for calendars and contacts, I am struggling to see the added value over the fossify alternatives, hence I don't have them anymore on my smartphones.

Pixel camera and google photos are nice to get the most out of tye pixel camera but thanksfully grapheneOS lets you use them without access to network. Stock Pixel rom doesn't allow you to do that. That is a major difference imho.

[LostMyWords]

> Pixel Camera (which forces you to use Google Photos for basic functionality)

I disabled Google Photos but I didn't notice any issues with Camera except for not being able to open the photo just taken from the camera interface. Am I missing something else?

[popol12]

You can install this to fix it, btw

https://github.com/lukaspieper/Gcam-Services-Provider

[microgpt]

That's basic functionality?

[throw-the-towel]

I replace Google Messages with a FOSS version precisely because it doesn't bug me about RCS.

[wolvoleo]

Which one if I may ask? I'm looking for one to get out of RCS reminders and also to avoid receiving emergency messages which come through even if I turn them off in Google messages. The local authorities overuse it, I get several per month now.

I think it's because they got blamed for not warning everyone with the Valencia floods last year but it's really ridiculous now. Now they blow up everyone's phone just when there's going to be a bit of wind.

[throw-the-towel]

I like org.fossify.messages from F-Droid, but there are other good SMS apps over there.

[t0bia_s]

Benefit is in sandboxing gapps. Less data to collect and more battery to save.

[cyberax]

JFYI, Pixel Camera works without a Google Account. Contacts and Calendar work fine through CalDav and Fossify Calendar.

I avoid RCS like a plague, so I can't comment about that.

[clearleaf]

Unless you live in a place where your phone needs to be a regional variant and there are no custom roms that support it.

[iririririr]

> Installation of GrapheneOS

and you get absolutely nothing in return. Yeah you will have root access sometimes. But other than that, android is not opensource anymore.

I mean, it never was because you had hundreds (no exaggeration [1]) closed-binary blobs running (not to mention a whole OS on things like radio and camera, running on their own SoC), but now you cannot get even close to a proper of the userspace since google already anounced they will not be mainlining anything back to AOSP

[1] zero source for kernel pieces, even for pixel https://github.com/GrapheneOS/device_google_laguna-kernels_6...

[II2II]

> and you get absolutely nothing in return. Yeah you will have root access sometimes.

You get improved privacy and security, at least on some fronts. By default, GrapheneOS does not provide root access and recommends against rooting the device. Is there a trade-off? Certainly. Security and privacy are always at conflict with what a completely open platform can provide. Given the amount of access to personal information that goes through our devices and the number of bad actors out there (both behaving legally and illicitly), some people believe it is worth the price. At least GrapheneOS offers more transparency than Android or iOS.

The bit about clamping down on open source, that is very much disappointing. I doubt that it is going to go away entirely in Android. On the other hand, hopefully it will provide incentives for companies to explore developing more open alternatives and consumers to explore buying more open alternatives. It won't be a huge market, but many of us have avoided growing so dependent upon the current platforms that we couldn't simply walk away.

[qn9n]

You can actually use most Apple devices without signing in. There are obviously a lot of benefits to the ecosystem but you can enjoy the hardware etc. without signing especially on Mac. For iPhone you'd need to learn to side load apps but it's doable.

[zadikian]

You don't need an Apple account to back up an entire iPhone and restore it onto a new one, keeping almost all settings. They've kept the local iTunes method working from day 1. Idk how you do this in Android, sounds like most people sync everything to Google.

[LoganDark]

At least Apple's ecosystem is genuinely better in certain ways. Everyone else wants a piece of the pie that they didn't deserve.

[iguhhyfchh]

Getting downvoted for speaking the truth. HN loves to twist its nose every time someone praises a closed-source solution but falls head over heels for anyone claiming to work for a FAANG. Hypocrisy thy name is HN.

[LoganDark]

I got downvoted one single time. Ow owie ouch my fake internet points.

It was probably for saying everyone else doesn't deserve the piece of the pie. That's incredibly subjective on my part.

[iguhhyfchh]

Ah, well, with that attitude it was well deserved then. Don’t mind me.

[LoganDark]

How ironic...

[recursive]

I've used Android phones for a long time. A couple of years ago I got an iPad to run an app only available on iOS. Getting that iPad running was more painful and frustrating than any of the dozen Android devices I've set up over the years.

[NetMageSCW]

That sounds like Linux users complaining about Windows Server or vice versa. iPad is trivial to get running but it is not the same as an Android tablet, and if you try to use your Android experience you will have issues.

[recursive]

Not so trivial that I didn't struggle with it for an hour. I'm not an Android power user. (I think?) I'm not even particularly a fan of Android. It's just the (hot take) least bad option I've tried.

More to the point, it seems reasonable to design for onboarding brand new users. That was never a strength of Linux, which most Linux fans would probably acknowledge. What ever happened to "it just works".

[II2II]

> That was never a strength of Linux, which most Linux fans would probably acknowledge.

If you are comparing apples-to-apples (e.g. setting up pre-installed Linux verses pre-installed Windows, or installing Linux to installing Windows), I would argue that Linux has been in the lead for many years. Setting up a reasonable desktop distribution (Fedora, Ubuntu, etc.) is no more and no less technical. Linux distributions won't encourage you to create online accounts, try to upsell you online services, or bombard you with questions about privacy settings.

From my last experience with macOS: on a technical front, macOS is simpler to reinstall. The online account setup and upselling is far less intrusive (perhaps to the point where you can legitimately consider it as a beneficial setup step for the end user). Perhaps macOS has the lead, but it is a marginal one.

[pdimitar]

You should do a blog write-up on that, many would find it fascinating.

[recursive]

Believe me, I wish I had documented it. I didn't realize that this would be surprising or controversial until I described the experience later to others. Some people basically didn't believe me.

The basic flavor was that I spent at least an hour getting a working apple account and getting signed into it, and I used at least two other devices to achieve that.

I do vividly recall that whenever I performed the final successful account verification, rather than seeing a success message, I saw a page or webview that just had a huge XML document in it. I only knew that attempt worked after I just tried logging in again. But that was one papercut out of dozens from my hazy recollection.

If I ever set up another Apple thing, I'll take photos, but it will probably work perfectly then. Oh well.