For those unfamiliar, GrapheneOS is a privacy and security enhanced custom ROM endorsed by Snowden. Despite these big names, plenty of people give it backlash

Even @TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml gives it backlash despite being a moderator of Lemmy’s biggest privacy community. A quote here: “grapheneOS trolls are downvoting every single post and comment of mine, and committing vote manipulation on Lemmy. They are using 5-6 accounts.” That was in response to downvotes on a comment posted in the c/WorldNews community, which is entirely unrelated to technology.

One of the reasons is that GrapheneOS can only be installed on Google Pixels due to security compatibility, which makes complete sense considering Android should be most compatible with Google’s own devices. GrapheneOS even lists the exact reasons they chose Pixels, and encourage people to step up and manufacture a different supported device.

One year ago, Louis Rossmann posted this video outlining his reasons for deleting GrapheneOS. Mainly, he had multiple bad experiences with Daniel Micay (the founder and main developer of GrapheneOS) which put his distrust in the GrapheneOS project. Since then, he has stepped down and will no longer be actively contributing to the project.

So, I am here to learn why exactly people still do not like GrapheneOS.

  • xep@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    It’s likely because the developers are highly opinionated, and this is true even for topics they don’t know very much about. See the entire discussion about implementing battery charge limiting in GrapheneOS. This makes for a lot of friction for people who would like to see more focus on usability in GrapheneOS as opposed to it being purely focused on security.

    I stopped reading threads on their forums because the developers are so abrasive even though I still use the rom, because I don’t mind the loss of usability compared to other roms. I can completely understand why there is a lot of negative sentiment around it though.

    • clothes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Wow, Graphene really doesn’t have charging limits?

      I assume this is the discussion you referred to, and I think it broke my trust in the project.

      • xep@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        It really does not. I use an external device connected via Bluetooth to achieve this on GrapheneOS, and others use home automation.

        Edit: that thread isn’t what I’m referring to. There was a larger one, perhaps on their github, with a link to a blogpost about why charge limiting “isn’t necessary” being cited as the justification for why the rom doesn’t have the feature. Either way, it’s frustrating to read and best ignored.

        • clothes@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          What a weird situation. I suppose it’s nice those workarounds exist, even if they’re not ideal.