zlacker

>>kotaKa+(OP)
Meaning to use your device you need to have a contractual relationship with a foreign (unless you are in the US) third party that decides what you can or cannot do with it. Plus using GrapheneOS is less of an option every day, since banks and other "regulated" sectors use Google Play Protect and similar DRMs to prevent you from connecting from whatever device you want. Client-side "trust" means the provider owning the device, not the user.

Android shouldn't be considered Open Source anymore, since source code is published in batches and only part of the system is open, with more and more apps going behind the Google ecosystem itself.

Maybe it's time for a third large phone OS, whether it comes from China getting fed up with the US and Google's shenanigans (Huawei has HarmonyOS but it's not open) or some "GNU/Linux" touch version that has a serious ecosystem. Especially when more and more apps and services are "mobile-first" or "mobile-only" like banking.

>>arielc+542
> "GNU/Linux" touch version that has a serious ecosystem

That is a very hard problem, unless someone with serious name recognition like Linus Torvalds starts to lead that kind of effort, or a big company like Microsoft suddenly decides that putting 1 billion towards GNU/Linux would be in their interest. With small efforts, it will remain scattered.

Crowdfunding has a lot of power if there is name recognition behind the effort. Star Citizen has already gathered $800 million with mostly enthusiasm and a good start. Who is there to lead the effort for GNU/Linux phone development?

>>Cianti+F82
> [...] someone with serious name recognition like Linus Torvalds starts to lead that kind of effort [...]

Linus is a kernel hacker, and already busy tending to his own project.

"GNU/Linux" is effectively a committee of communities, with sometimes conflicting goals. It took Canonical and Valve to put things into shape on the desktop, and that's mostly because desktop was becoming less relevant.

I see two ways for things to change here:

- A massive, for-profit corporation, someone willing and able to challenge Google and Apple on an even ground, is hell-bent on making a Linux-based phone (Microsoft failed even after acquiring Nokia);

- Another platform shift happens, making smartphones irrelevant in comparison (think: when smartphones displaced desktops).

>>rollca+3h2
Microsoft was stupid, in EU they were slowly reaching 10% when they decided to kill WP, it was getting momentum as the alternative for those that didn't want Android and weren't going to spend Apple money for a phone device.

And actually the development experience was much better than Android to this day.

But that isn't coming back, especially after they killed all developer good will on Windows OS for everyone that invested into WinRT as platform.

>>pjmlp+Yj2
How much of that 10% was them basically paying OEM's and consumers to use Windows, which is what the Nokia deal amounted to? It wasn't sustainable.

Whatever benefit we'd have from a Windows Phone today, it's laughable to think that Microsoft wouldn't be doubling down on exactly the sort of locked-down devices Apple (and now Google) have or are moving towards.

Their only vaguely "open" platform (Windows) is like that because of legacy compatibility and customers, but for anything new Microsoft always wanted to sell you an Xbox that could make phonecalls. Try writing and deploying an app on that without a developer account.

>>avar+uC2
I really would like to have been payed to use Windows phones, especially as former Nokia employee.

I was in Espoo, the week following the burning platforms memo.

However it represented a third option, to a percentage no Linux phone distribution has ever achieved since Open Moko.

Maybe Maemo could have been it, had not been for Nokia's board decision to bring in Elop.