zlacker

> What do you mean, "doesn't support Pixels with locked bootloader"?

You cannot install GrapheneOS on a Pixel that was locked by the carrier, it's literally the first prerequisite they mention [0]. From here came my initial comment saying that the biggest thing that excludes most phones from supporting GrapheneOS is the lack of unlockable bootloader.

This is what should give you pause when you declare one phone to be "best HW for security" because it supports GrapheneOS. Some Pixels are unsupported even with the same HW/FW/SW.

[0] https://grapheneos.org/faq#supported-devices

>>close0+(OP)
You acting purposefully obtuse. unlocked bootloader is the prerequisite for any android rom, that does not mean other hardware feature are less important than there other security requirements set by the project. Why other phones aren't comparable with details is literally explain two bullets point below your own link.

https://grapheneos.org/faq#future-devices

>>akimbo+nb
> purposefully

Mighty all-knowing of you.

Just read my first comment, see what I objected to, see what arguments I used, and then think 2-3 times if you really added to the conversation. There must be better way to pad your comment count.

>>close0+ce
I did, and it makes this comment unintelligible unless there are no other Android phones with unlocked bootloaders. You've moved the goalposts, then got snotty about it.

edit: exactly who on this planet is motivated by "comment count" other than spammers?

edit2: the only way I can make your comments comprehensible is if I assume that you thought somebody was angry that they couldn't install Graphene on a phone with a locked bootloader. Before you assume the person you're talking to is insane, you should consider the alternatives.