←back to thread

2071 points K0nserv | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.531s | source
Show context
idle_zealot ◴[] No.45088298[source]
This makes the point that the real battle we should be fighting is not for control of Android/iOS, but the ability to run other operating systems on phones. That would be great, but as the author acknowledges, building those alternatives is basically impossible. Even assuming that building a solid alternative is feasible, though, I don't think their point stands. Generally I'm not keen on legislatively forcing a developer to alter their software, but let's be real: Google and Apple have more power than most nations. I'm all for mandating that they change their code to be less user-hostile, for the same reason I prefer democracy to autocracy. Any party with power enough to impact millions of lives needs to be accountable to those it affects. I don't see the point of distinguishing between government and private corporation when that corporation is on the same scale of power and influence.
replies(14): >>45088317 #>>45088413 #>>45088437 #>>45088617 #>>45088634 #>>45088767 #>>45088805 #>>45088812 #>>45089073 #>>45089349 #>>45089473 #>>45089554 #>>45089569 #>>45091038 #
vbezhenar ◴[] No.45089569[source]
> ability to run other operating systems on phones

> building those alternatives is basically impossible

For smart people it is not impossible. Just few years ago, few folks wrote complicated drivers for completely closed hardware, and I'm talking about M1 Macbook.

Google Pixel, on the other hand, was pretty open until very recently. I might be wrong about specifics, but I'm pretty sure that most of software was open, so you could just look at the kernel sources in the readable C to look for anything. You can literally build this kernel and run linux userspace and go from there to any lengths of development. Or you can build alternative systems, looking at driver sources.

I don't understand why mobile systems do not attract OS builders.

replies(5): >>45089629 #>>45089726 #>>45089800 #>>45089809 #>>45090866 #
1. yardstick ◴[] No.45089629[source]
I’m fairly sure the modem firmware on the Pixels was never open. There’s some hardware that will never have open firmware to it. Especially when that firmware deals with regulated airwaves like cell signals.
replies(1): >>45089674 #
2. vbezhenar ◴[] No.45089674[source]
My laptop has plenty of chips with closed firmware. They matter not. Open hardware is a noble goal, but open software is enough. Firmware is part of hardware block, so having open operating system, which sends blobs into some devices for initialisation is perfectly acceptable compromise.