zlacker

>>madars+(OP)
My only problem with Graphene is the ridiculous low number of supported devices, i know I know, security reasons and so on. But I would accept an lower security hardened version but at least have Graphene instead of Google's junk

>>SchwKa+Tn
I actually like Graphene's focus in Pixel. It is available in a lot of countries unlike Fairphone - via Pixel of course.

So Graphene is actually not limited to the developed/western world. As for not supporting other devices, I believe the reason could be the team size and the fact that the fragmented Android world is known for unique shenanigans of every OEM. Besides Google's update/upgrade cycle is another reason it is an appropriate choice.

>>crossr+0G
por que no los dos?

>>beefle+kP
Because as mentioned, Fairphone has lackluster hardware security.

You can have the best alarm system in the word, if you leave the back door open and anyone can just walk in from the street.

>>gf000+u01
Okay, but the danger of vendor lockout is very great because gOS only supports one brand of phone. The justification for limiting support to pixels is that it has trusted computing features, but these are made unnecessary by having a long password.

You could just have some disclaimer on the grapheneOS site that says something like "Works best with pixel phones" or have some long password requirement on non-pixel phones

>>beefle+DK2
> but these are made unnecessary by having a long password.

Yeah, that's completely how security works...