zlacker

>>madars+(OP)
Last I heard, Google discontinued publishing device trees and driver binaries for Pixel devices with their recent changes to their stewardship of the AOSP [0]. Was it something definitive or are they merely delayed? If the practice is being discontinued, what would be the reason why? Doesn't publishing these artifacts create a business case for customer demand for the Pixel devices? Or is there some cost that outweighs the benefits? Is it maintainer overhead?

I didn't bring this up when it was a news story last month because there was a lot of cynicism in the thread, but I am genuinely curious. I am really grateful for both GrapheneOS and Google for creating a phone platform that Just Works for the essential stuff and that I can reasonably recommend to non-technical people!

[0]: >>44259921

>>minima+0A
I heard unsubstantiated rumors that it was somehow antitrust-related. If they are selling off their device business (again), then it makes sense that the device drivers would not be part of AOSP...

>>NewJaz+gC
> If they are selling off their device business

Android and Chrome are potentially going to be split from Google:

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/20/technology/google-search-... (https://archive.ph/egRL4)

Pixels are no longer the Android reference devices. An Android company ending up with the OS, Google Play and Google's OEM partners wouldn't need Pixels. That's a possible reason for the change. However, the simplest explanation is that they're continuing to take cost cutting to an extreme where it negatively impacts their long term revenue far more than the money it saves. A lot of Pixels were sold due to first class support for using other operating systems including it not voiding the warranty.