[phoronixrly]

They announced a partnership with Motorola. They are not just making an OS for their devices, they are partnering with them. There is a fundamental difference between taking a device and making an OS for it, and partnering with its manufacturer. The latter leads to the assumption that Graphene condones Motorola's security practices, and Motorola condones Graphene producing an OS for their devices. The former does not.

[ysnp]

The details of the partnership are mostly disclosed in the joint announcements but GrapheneOS has no say or influence on Motorola's stock Android image and policy.

The main objective of the partnership is to do what you described in the former case, get Motorola up to a standard where GraphenOS could support the phone. They could not previously take a Motorola phone and build GrapheneOS for it because of numerous basic requirements they did not yet meet. I can guess that GrapheneOS only really condone the efforts Motorola will put in to meet their support requirements as a platform.

Motorola also gets to incorporate a subset of GrapheneOS's features and improvements as enterprise targeted Motorola features. GrapheneOS do not have any direct influence over the apps and policies for the stock GMS Android image Motorola ship with their phones. Motorola have no significant say in what GrapheneOS does with their OS. GrapheneOS can assist Motorola in hardening efforts at the OS and firmware layer etc.

[unethical_ban]

Motorola supplies hardware. GrapheneOS supplies software.

The entire premise of GrapheneOS is total control of the device. There is no way they would release a Motorola phone with GrapheneOS installed, but with unremovable bloatware.