zlacker

Viability of second-hand still drives market demand, as people have an incentive to buy devices that have resale value. The counter-argument is that otherwise this device will become e-waste. This is still a conundrum, but "don't give your money to Google" remains the active topic here, so...

>>rollca+(OP)
True, but grapheneos only supports Pixels because of the unlocked bootloader and hardware security. If more and more people adopt Pixels solely to install Grapheneos, it may drive other hardware manufacturers to offer a device that meets Grapheneos' requirements, and then they can bank on grabbing almost all of the PixelGrapheneos market share, or at least the fraction which actively wants to avoid google (which I suspect is at least 75%).

>>helloj+hp1
We're actively working with a major Android OEM since June 2025 towards a subset of their future devices meeting our requirements. They've been interested in improving their security for a while and have demands for it from large customers including specific requests for GrapheneOS. They saw our posts about us wanting to work with OEMs and reached out to us recently.

We previously tried to work with a much smaller company which was a startup and ended up going bankrupt. The current partnership with an OEM is a new thing entirely separate from that and it's not a small company or startup.

Our requirements are listed at https://grapheneos.org/faq#future-devices. The devices we're working on with this OEM will meet these requirements and provide an alternative to Pixels for GrapheneOS. They may not initially be quite on the same security level as Pixels, but they will provide what's listed there and can get better from there.