Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

67% Positive

Analyzed from 4112 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#rcs#app#google#grapheneos#messaging#fairphone#support#sms#apps#call

Discussion (216 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

I_am_tiberiusabout 18 hours ago
Everytime I read GrapheneOS news I search for news related to Fairephone. It's such a shame that there's still no official plan for Fairephone to work on requirements for GrapheneOS. The combination of those 2 would be fantastic. It would also open a big new market (I assume) for Fairephone so not sure why there seems no clear sign in that direction at all (to my knowledge).
jasonvorheabout 18 hours ago
Everytime I see Fairphone mentioned whenever there's news about GrapheneOS I'm confused as to why people keep on conflating both when they obviously have very different goals.
Timshelabout 18 hours ago
? Not conflating, just we want a phone with both goals ...
pyaambabout 16 hours ago
+1
SkiFire13about 4 hours ago
Both are for for different niches, but their intersection is relatively big.
t0bia_sabout 16 hours ago
Every time Fairphone release new device I check width size. Still waiting for small device.
bl4kersabout 6 hours ago
I believe Fairphone relies on popular off-the-shelf parts. If that stays consistent, the Fairphone will never be small. Save for a change in business model (e.g. pay more for smaller phone)
topaz0about 15 hours ago
I wonder if Meta pays phone manufacturers under the table to keep their size large
blendergeekabout 4 hours ago
I agree they are separate. What annoys me is that every time FairPhone has news, there are obligatory FUD comments about how people should stay away from FairPhone because they don't support Graphene.
Brian_K_Whiteabout 8 hours ago
The only one conflating anything is yourself.

This is no great conundrum. There is simply a large set overlap. A lot of the people who care about one one, also care about the other.

It's the same as Framework owners and Linux users.

FW is not a linux laptop company. They didn't even barely say the word Linux initially. Their selling point was the repairability and configurability. Only after they had been shipping for a while it became unavoidable that a huge fraction of their users were linux and even freebsd users. Only after some time and only gradually they started providing a little bit of official acknowledgement and support for Linux.

But repair parts and linux os don't have anything to do with each other! zomg why is everyone conflating Framework with a linux laptop company???

andrepdabout 18 hours ago
I think it's obvious that the target audience has a huge overlap...
illiac786about 7 hours ago
I wouldn’t say obvious, no. It’s what I observe, yes. But I have some doubt about my observations scaling up to a valid statistics. Lots of folks out there are not techies yet do care about the environment. I can’t see them caring much about grapheneOS, but maybe I’m wrong.
gpvosabout 17 hours ago
HN readers aren't a huge demographic.
saligneabout 18 hours ago
You should search for the many times where GrapheneOS has stated they won't work with Fairphone
Telaneoabout 18 hours ago
It's because Fairphone doesn't fulfil GOS's hardware requirements. If Fairphone addresses that, there's no reason for GOS to not support a Fairphone device.
microtonalabout 9 hours ago
I don't think they can, even if they wanted to. From the GrapheneOS device requirements:

Device support code updated to new monthly, quarterly and yearly releases of AOSP within several months to provide new security improvements (Pixels receive these in the month they're released)

Fairphone's hardware and software is developed by a Chinese ODM (T2Mobile), who even have difficulty pushing out monthly patches very timely. They don't even do QPR2s, major Android updates are very late (usually almost a year), they rarely do driver firmware or kernel updates. There is no way they could fulfill this guarantee unless they started doing software development in-house and paid Qualcomm for monthly firmware updates.

fc417fc802about 16 hours ago
I don't understand the issue. If Fairphone wants GOS can't they just compile it themselves with whatever unsupported hardware based security features disabled? Ditto for any given end user. It's not as though we're talking about a device with hardware specs locked behind an NDA and drivers that only support outdated kernel versions.
mrd3v0about 18 hours ago
Given the state of Fairphone hardware, software and business, it is not surprising.
tcoff91about 18 hours ago
For those of us out of the loop, could someone summarize the situation?
drnick1about 16 hours ago
To be honest the specs of the Fairphone are middling and the device is rather expensive for what you get. The Pixels are a much better value, especially with a series. If you want something truly high end, wait for the Motorola with official GOS support.
IseardMiabout 7 hours ago
Isn't the whole idea behind Fairphone that they are more expensive because the parts are responsibly sourced? That they pay a fair price for labour and materials? And that the phones are highly repairable?

Why would that mean it could compete with a Pixel which generally has none of those goals?

grapheneosabout 7 hours ago
There's nearly no information available on the working conditions, pay or environmental impact of Fairphones. T2Mobile is the company designing and making Fairphones since the Fairphone 4 and little information is available on them. Fairphone provides a long list of companies involved in the supply chain without more details than their location and website.

Pixels have long term availability of official parts for repairs and also official repairs.

Unlike Fairphones, Pixels have very good updates over the long term. Fairphones do not provide anything close to decent updates and it greatly degrades over the lifetime of the device. Fairphone 5 and earlier have an end-of-life kernel without security support. The devices start out lagging months behind on partial security backports and a year or more behind on full security updates which gets worse over time.

varispeedabout 15 hours ago
Without support of alternative OS Fairphone is basically a landfill. Why would anyone buy this apart from novelty factor.
armadylabout 15 hours ago
Supporting an alternative OS wouldn’t change the fate of Fairphone, imo. Most people don’t care to move away from the stock version of Android that comes with their phone or iOS.
AstralSerenityabout 14 hours ago
I would throw serious money at them both if this collaboration happened.
sva_about 16 hours ago
Every fairphone I've seen to far the camera was kinda ass. Did it improve? Pixel phones usually have old Samsung sensors which are pretty damn decent.
emaroabout 16 hours ago
The sensor of the Fairphone camera is good enough, the software processing is what's lacking. Imo, owner of an FP4.
Evidloabout 13 hours ago
Some screenshots since the repo doesn't have any for whatever reason:

https://imgur.com/a/C8yV83v

dvhabout 8 hours ago
The reason is Waterluvian's Law:

> The more an article would benefit from photos, the less likely it’ll have them.

grapheneosabout 7 hours ago
It's not an article but rather release notes for people who already use it. The app is only available to users on GrapheneOS as the default SMS/MMS app (eventually RCS). Our users try out the new version directly instead of looking at static images of it.
cloudie78about 19 hours ago
How about some screenshots?
qweqwe14about 19 hours ago
I constantly see those projects that would benefit from a screenshot in a readme, but for some reason the thought about adding one doesn't even come to the authors' mind, even though it's pretty obvious. I'd really like to know what's going on.
sakisvabout 18 hours ago
I think the reason is that you can get quite much of a tunnel vision while developing. Everyone involved already knows what they're building and how it looks, so it's very easy to overlook it.

Case in point, I recently wrote a CLI to show which of your AWS infra is not captured in terraform, and you can either print the result as a json to consume by a machine or generate a dashboard with some charts. It took me an embarrassing while to realise that I should have included a damned screenshot in the README, in fact I think I only realised when I wanted to show it to my brother.

IshKebababout 18 hours ago
It's also just quite a lot of work to generate screenshots.
gbalduzziabout 19 hours ago
I think in many cases the authors value functionality much more then esthetics.

Which is a bummer because it is a complete different point of view from the more typical user experience

embedding-shapeabout 18 hours ago
> I think in many cases the authors value functionality much more then esthetics.

In many cases the repository isn't meant to be more than for source code too, not everyone use their git repository as also the marketing page, that'd go somewhere else.

With that said, grapheneos.org doesn't seem to have any screenshots either, which I also don't understand and think is a bummer. Even though the point of the differences with GrapheneOS might not be mainly visual, just showing what it looks like seem like a no-brainer.

xboxnolifesabout 18 hours ago
An image is functionality, as it provides significant information to the reader.
gremlinunderwayabout 18 hours ago
Yeah but see, we're talking about a functionality that is inherently visual. Ergonomics has nothing to do with esthetics, and it's such a dumb excuse to hand wave aside interface issues as of they are just about "making things look pretty"
Dig1tabout 18 hours ago
"A picture is worth a thousand words"

It's like we've had this ancient knowledge passed down for generations but people constantly just ignore it.

grapheneosabout 8 hours ago
A video would be needed rather than screenshots since those wouldn't show the new animations and UI flow.

GrapheneOS users can update to it via the Alpha channel and try it out rather than looking at screenshots. There's still more to improve before it will go to the Beta and Stable channels.

It's the default SMS/MMS app for GrapheneOS and isn't available for use outside GrapheneOS so we aren't trying to promote it as an option.

gib444about 8 hours ago
A screenshot would show something though. I'm sure the OP knows what a screenshot vs a video would show
nicolas_about 17 hours ago
I was looking for the same thing. Fine! Maybe it’s in the Readme.md. Nothing! Well, ok then
why_atabout 15 hours ago
I just updated mine to try it out, it definitely looks nicer.

https://imgur.com/a/ZGpbqB7

karimabuseerabout 17 hours ago
Worth raising a PR/discussion on the repo as reasonable chance the devs haven’t even considered it
mrd3v0about 18 hours ago
I wish they prioritised the call app. It is beyond appalling. You can't even determine when a call happened, beyond the generic low fidelity "[time] ago". It also almost feels like tapping anything makes me accidentally call people. Abhorrent UI/UX to be completely honest.
okanatabout 18 hours ago
I'm using LineageOS so I have the AOSP Phone app. If Graphene uses the same, then you can actually determine the exact time of call, but you need to jump through a couple of hoops: Go to "Call History" from the three dots then click on the call of interest. You'll see a button called "Call Details". Then you can see the exact time.
azdleabout 18 hours ago
Can confirm the same works on Graphene. Also works directly from the "Recents" list.
loufeabout 17 hours ago
This is completely false. Tap the call, tap "call details" and its there. Took be 2 second to disprove. This is lazy to the point of being seemingly malicious commentary.
slumberlustabout 12 hours ago
I agree with parent. When I tap the icon/picture on the history it should pull up the contact not call. I also find the need to click into a submenu for context bad UI.

Your comment is unnecessarily inflammatory.

j1eloabout 17 hours ago
I'm just reading from the barrier here, and not knowing what it even looks like, but reading your description I can immediately agree that it is a bad design.

There's only a handful of critical details in a call history, and absolutely no reason for any UI to implement them as secondary or tertiary details: Whether it was in- or outbound. To/from what contact. The date and time.

2 taps for some other extra info such as call length, or further contact details, would be OK I guess, but for first-level info as these, it's 100% bad design.

I mean come on, design-wise this was already a "Done" thing in the golden Nokia days! https://the-gadgeteer.com/2009/03/02/a-week-with-the-nokia-n...

[*] Ctrl+F to find the image below "miss a call".

Walfabout 16 hours ago
>not knowing what it even looks like

Clearly.

>There's only a handful of critical details in a call history

And they're all there: profile pic, contact name, indicators that show incoming/outgoing + missed/connected, which SIM, a redial button, how long ago (which after about a week shows the date), Tapping the middle expands the row (no obstructive pop-up) to show Block, Message, & Details buttons.

The reason it has 'human times' is because multiple calls with the same contact are grouped, so a precise time doesn't always make sense. Tapping the Details will show all calls in that group, whether it's one or seven, with their full dates, times, durations, and further options. It's never been a difficult UX.

fc417fc802about 16 hours ago
> design-wise this was already a "Done" thing in the golden Nokia days!

I might be mistaken but I seem to recall it being a done thing for android prior to several years ago when it was "improved" with an update. Although it's possible I'm confusing the call apps from AOSP and various vendors. Either way several of my past android devices had a significantly better address book, dialer, and call history.

HybridStatAnim8about 13 hours ago
Good news! GrapheneOS has ported Messaging to kotlin, jetpack compose, and material you. The same is planned for the Contacts app, Dialer app, and more. Dont quote me but it seems Contacts and Dialer are up next after Messaging.

Also, GrapheneOS has very recently released automatic call recording for the Dialer.

subscribedabout 18 hours ago
What? :)

You mean the perfectly functional (if barebones) AOSP call app? :)

HybridStatAnim8about 13 hours ago
It will get ported to kotlin, material 3, and jetpack compose, just like Messaging.
gpvosabout 17 hours ago
The one with the terrible UI, yes.
Maskawanianabout 19 hours ago
Does anyone know if this is something that we can install now, or if it will show up in the next OS release?
flexagoonabout 19 hours ago
You can go to the GOS App Store, choose the Messaging app, click 3 dots at the top and choose the Alpha release channel to get it now
novafuncabout 19 hours ago
They mentioned you can use the Alpha from their app installer.
Maskawanianabout 19 hours ago
Good to know! For others: You open their app store, go into messaging, hamburger menu, select release channel, and choose alpha.
gib444about 19 hours ago
It's in the alpha channel. Go in to the 'App Store' app, go to Messaging, 3 dot menu and change release channel.
unlocked7565about 1 hour ago
juste tried it... still no search fonction ? back to QUIK app...
jculabout 16 hours ago
Where I live, an sms app is not very important. It's almost exclusively used for two factor authentication messages. Everyone uses WhatsApp, signal, telegram etc, even businesses and services.

So having a bare bones aosp messaging app was never an issue for me. Having said that, I find fossify messages pretty good.

Will try out the new GOS app too.

nosioptarabout 13 hours ago
All of fossify's apps I've tried have been better than the stock apps.
Cider9986about 10 hours ago
Their phone app doesn't have visual voicemail.
mewse-hnabout 19 hours ago
Does it do RCS?
OneDeuxTriSeiGoabout 19 hours ago
No. RCS is still quite hard to actually implement. There's an open issue for it but the effort is mildly herculean.

AFAIUI though GOS does intend on providing an RCS impl eventually even if it takes years to do.

sicktripleabout 18 hours ago
I'm really hoping they're doing this to pave the way for an RCS implementation. If it can be done, GOS is in the best position to make it happen, and without RCS, chatting with normies is both extremely inconvenient (large group chats straight up do not work) and categorically insecure. If I could convince all my friends and family to use Signal I would, but they just think I'm on about some weird Edward Snowden shit, and they just write me off as crazy. "Why would I checks notes download software to solve a problem when I could use the one that came with my phone?"
sebastiennightabout 6 hours ago
I'll give you the strategy that works for me.

Do NOT talk about privacy, E2EE, or any of that. To regular people, "privacy" has negative value, so even if they wanted something, your talk of private communication and not being scanned by data brokers and governments will make them want it less.

So what to do then?

I present Signal as a novelty and focus on one single feature: "hey, video calls work much better than WhatsApp! Try it out!"

Bam, instant download.

loufeabout 17 hours ago
Don't give up the good fight! Took some time but I got the whole family to adopt it as we had no common shared platform before, and it's been great.
greatgibabout 17 hours ago
I'm thinking quite the opposite. I hope RCS can die fast. We already have chat apps WhatsApp, signal, telegram, you can even create your own. I'm quite happy that SMS for one are not something centralized by the giant US big corp. Would be the dream of Google to get all your messages as a gateway.
grapheneosabout 7 hours ago
It may take a long time to make a fully standalone implementation and that may not be compatible with most carriers. However, we plan to provide it in the short term through support for using the Google RCS infrastructure. We can have it start out supporting using sandboxed Google Play for RCS activation in the same way Google Messages uses it to replace Google Messages.
Groxxabout 18 hours ago
particularly if you want to support all of the message-body features, of which there are MANY. it's very business-comms oriented.

I broadly expect third-party RCS apps to drop that though, like how essentially none support all of MMS. did you know MMS supports slideshows (I built support for this once)? 3d objects (mimetype model/gltf+json)? "timed text" (mimetype text/mp4)?

sterlindabout 18 hours ago
What's so difficult about implementing RCS from a technical perspective?
tcfhgjabout 18 hours ago
also I think RCS is way to insecure for Graphene OS - they have no way of making sure the communication is actually 100% secure.

In my experience, Graphene OS doesn't make compromises.

grapheneosabout 7 hours ago
We've announced our plan to add RCS with Messaging Layer Security (MLS) for E2EE compatible with Google Messages and iOS. SMS/MMS will only be a fallback once that's implemented.
fphabout 17 hours ago
Why would they support SMS then?
OneDeuxTriSeiGoabout 10 hours ago
RCS is way more secure than SMS what are you talking about? RCS+MLS (i.e. GSM standard RCS E2EE) is basically as secure as you can get unless you lock all users involved into a specific app (ex: signal, etc)
seanyabout 12 hours ago
RCS is really the only thing I truly am annoyed by with rooted devices. If GrapheneOS can build something open that works we should be able to rip it apart and get it to work without passing play integrity.
grapheneosabout 7 hours ago
RCS already works on GrapheneOS via Google Messages using sandboxed Google Play. We have an ICC authentication toggle for granting the required access to Google Play services. We want to provide our own implementation within our Messaging app to replace Google Messages and then we want to provide an alternate backend not depending on sandboxed Google Play, at least for carriers with their own implementation.
grapheneosabout 7 hours ago
We've announced our plan to add RCS with Messaging Layer Security (MLS) for E2EE compatible with Google Messages and iOS. SMS/MMS will only be a fallback once that's implemented.
ImJamalabout 1 hour ago
I don't know enough about how RCS works, but if I have an existing conversation in Google Messages would I be able to migrate it over to when this gets implemented?
phhabout 5 hours ago
For the context, the vast majority of carriers do RCS with Google's RCS servers (https://github.com/phhusson/rcs-scanner). I'm a bit rusty, but to my knowledge the only exceptions are Jio in India, all Chinese telcos, and some Japenese telcos.

Of course it is relevant privacy-wise (Google still gather a lot of metadata about who speaks to who and when), but that's not even the reason I'm mentioning it.

In the RCS specification, there are three lines on a killer-feature: device attestation. A server can whitelist which devices are allowed to connect to it. And of course Google uses this, allowing only Google-certified devices and Apple devices.

And then, there is actually one RCS client for Google's RCS servers. Because Google Messages doesn't use RCS, it uses a custom protocol based on protobuf. My personal guess is that this protobuf is a 1-to-1 matching with actual RCS, and it's both-way compatible. But still, that means that potentially the Google device-attestation won't work with an RCS client.

Sibling comments say that GrapheneOS plan on implementing it. I think it can reasonably work. TBH I'm expecting that giving a LLM the publicly available information about RCS on microG should give a working "send message" within a day (even when using Google apps rather than microG, it's just that the microG work explains the API). And once RCS work in GrapheneOS' message app, it should be pretty straightforward to port to microG, so yay. However I have to admit I'm not optimist about how long it will keep working. I'd say we are two years away from Google enforcing RKP device integrity for RCS, and uh, good luck passing that.

Of course, I'm hoping that, in the EU, the DMA will break this Google/Apple-only device-attestation, but I'm not aware of anyone pushing that ATM.

Markoffabout 8 hours ago
RCS requires Google account and Google Play services, completely useless, I'm better off with Whatsapp not requiring any of these to function, heck I xan even download APK directly from whatsapp website without play store or aurora
HybridStatAnim8about 13 hours ago
Not yet, but they do plan to add support for it.
DeepDynoabout 13 hours ago
One feature I just found out about after trying it is that you can text email addresses.

Unfortunately I think that feature is shutting down.

https://www.verizon.com/support/vtext-vzwpix-shutdown/

I'm still waiting until RCS is supported before I actually use it.

Denatoniumabout 13 hours ago
It's probably for the best. As recently as 2016 (and probably more recently; that's just the last time I tested this), they weren't even validating SPF records on their email-to-SMS gateway. You could spoof the "From" address to any email address you fancied and your messages would go through, appearing to be from that sender. Back in high school, my childish self had a field day showing off my phone's SMS inbox filled up with spam Viagra ads that were "sent by" Hillary Clinton's "hacked" email server.

It's not as funny in hindsight, given the unexpected results of that election, but at the time, it felt like top-tier humor.

module1973about 18 hours ago
Would have been cool to have encrypted SMS messages like the SMSecure app while we wait for RCS
lollobombabout 19 hours ago
Now, can we please get the long-awaited full system backup feature? We pay you for a reason!

(sarcasm obvious, but indeed full system backup is sorely missing. Seedvault is crap, not an option)

Advertisement
LoganDarkabout 19 hours ago
That was really fast, they only announced it like a day or two ago IIRC? Also: no screenshots of the redesigned interface?!
getpokedagainabout 19 hours ago
If you look at the history they have been working on this for a few months. The announcement probably was tied to this public release being cut for testing.
Markoffabout 8 hours ago
I just wished there was some IM app supporting ordinary SMS, so I can have extra communicator where I could also receive all notifications from courier, 2FA codes, etc. Such a shame Signal removed it, it was one of the reasons why we ditched it completely with family (other would be unreliable delivery, fixing errors when US dev wakes up, half screen nag prompts about PIN, etc.).

So now I must have extra dedicated app just for SMS, which could be replaced easily with another alternative messenger if ANYONE bothered to implement simple SMS support, but seems nobody is interesting in this, so I am not interesting in your messengers if you cant be bothered to support at least SMS and use Whatsapp (and have Telegram as backup if WA would block me again, appeal took ~5 hours to resolve).

grapheneosabout 8 hours ago
We've announced our plan to add RCS with Messaging Layer Security (MLS) for E2EE compatible with Google Messages and iOS. SMS/MMS will only be a fallback once that's implemented.
mmoossabout 19 hours ago
With a seemingly insurmountable workload - maintain an actually secure OS fork - for a small team, I wonder how GrapheneOS prioritizes things like messaging apps? I'm not saying it's wrong at all; I am just interested in the thinking inside a project like that.

I can imagine many reasons to devote resources to it:

* A platform is only as good as its apps. If they want to grow GOS in the general public, it requires a good SMS/MMS messaging app.

* LLM tools greatly reduce development costs, especially for well-known functions like text messaging.

* Without secure messaging (as far as SMS/MMS can be secure), the platform security is greatly reduced.

* GOS got a big donation, or has a volunteer that wants to do messaging ...

But idk what I'm talking about. What is their approach?

ravenstineabout 19 hours ago
Well they're going to be shipping GOS on Motorola and I think some other devices, so basic things like the messaging app need to actually have some polish to them. I really like GrapheneOS overall as-is, but the messaging app felt like baby's first texting app. Not necessarily their fault since it's pretty much straight out of AOSP if I understand correctly. But any time I've installed GrapheneOS, the messaging app is one of two things I must replace every time (the other being the downright bad AOSP keyboard).

If they fix(ed) their messaging app and their keyboard, then they've really eliminated a lot of potential complaints if a less tech-savvy crowd ends up buying future Motorolas.

grapheneosabout 8 hours ago
> as far as SMS/MMS can be secure

We've announced our plan to add RCS with Messaging Layer Security (MLS) for E2EE compatible with Google Messages and iOS.

> GOS got a big donation

We receive large donations on an ongoing basis.

> or has a volunteer that wants to do messaging

Everyone doing substantial work on the project is paid to do it full time. We hired all the people doing large amounts of high quality volunteer work. We've moved on to a process of filtering candidates based on their CV, an interview process and small test projects.

HybridStatAnim8about 13 hours ago
GrapheneOS has made a big push to hire a bunch of experienced, talented app devs, and they have been slowly chipping away at Messaging for a few months. They now have the resources to take on the AOSP apps and resume with the GrapheneOS apps. The rest of the AOSP apps are also planned to be overhauled.

They also plan to eventually support RCS in the Messaging app.

mmoossabout 12 hours ago
> GrapheneOS has made a big push to hire a bunch of experienced, talented app devs

That's great. How can a FOSS project afford that? Where does GOS money come from? Did Daniel win the lottery?

Cider9986about 11 hours ago
They get most of their donations from cryptocurrency. Mostly small Monero donations but also Bitcoin and Ethereum.

They have 14 devs 13 are payed in ETH and 1 in CAD.

Iirc they said something like 2 million in donations in 2025. Vitalik Buterin may have donated at least some time ago.

Proton donates double digits.

Cape has donated around 100k https://www.cape.co/blog/cape-supports-grapheneos and plans to donate 100k this year.

There's estimated 500k users so if 25% donated 10 dollars a year that's 1.25 million.

grapheneosabout 9 hours ago
GrapheneOS is entirely funded by donations. We're not yet spending nearly enough yet relative to the amount of donations we're receiving.
HybridStatAnim8about 10 hours ago
GrapheneOS makes 100% of their money off of donations, and have made quite a lot of it. The bottleneck is not funding, but finding talented developers to pay with that money.
microtonalabout 18 hours ago
A bunch of the AOSP apps feel like you have to rewrite them for modern standards now and then you can basically have them in maintenance mode for years. The AOSP messaging app has also lasted for 15+ (?) years and has basically had no maintenance from Google for many years.

Modernizing these apps seems very high-impact. These are the very first things a new user sees and after the initial modernization, they should be relatively cheap to maintain.

subscribedabout 18 hours ago
> Messaging, high impact.

Messaging can be replaced with one of the hundreds decent messaging apps.

Unlike the backup app which is utterly unusable, untrustworthy and frankly crap. And CANNOT be replaced by anything else.

As it stands it's impossible to have reliable backups in GOS.

drnick1about 11 hours ago
I know this isn't the solution you are looking for, but there is a fairly simple workaround and IMO it is superior: set up a Samba server or a Nextcloud instance, either at home or in the cloud, place it with behind a Wireguard tunnel, and don't store anything on the phone itself other than apps and things like maps for OsmAnd that can be redownloaded if lost. The Nextcloud app can automatically sync photos or other files too.

If my phone were lost, stolen or destroyed, I would simply revoke its Wireguard key, buy a new Pixel, flash Graphene, and provision a new Wireguard key. Essentially no data of value would be lost, and restoring my apps and settings manually would take an hour tops. Admittedly, I don't use many apps, so YMMV.

microtonalabout 9 hours ago
Very few of them will support RCS (I think currently only Google Messages?), which GrapheneOS also wants to support.

I agree that a new backup system is also high impact, but there can be more than one high-impact thing, and the Message app is really low-hanging fruit.

flexagoonabout 19 hours ago
I you look at the commits of the new Messages app it's mostly made by 2 people whose Github profiles show them as employees of GrapheneOS and who are mostly committing to different system apps. So I assume they have a separate team of devs whose job it is to make the system apps.

IIRC when they started first announced their replacement for the AOSP camera they said they hired a developer specifically for it.

beepbooptheoryabout 16 hours ago
The biggest issue I have with the degoogled Androids is no RCS chats out of the box. At least for me, it stinks these days to not have it, and you're forced to do sneaky things to get it.
grapheneosabout 9 hours ago
Providing it via the built-in Messaging app is planned but not straightforward to implement since it's not an open platform. GrapheneOS has official support for using RCS via Google Messages rather than it requiring anything sketchy. It's currently essentially the only remaining Android RCS client.
HybridStatAnim8about 13 hours ago
GrapheneOS wants to eventually support RCS in the default chat app. It may take a lot of time for it to work without google components/google services but it is the eventual plan.
preisschildabout 18 hours ago
I had a scary bug on an older version where for months the contact names didnt match the actual senders/recipients. I have received SMS from my WISP under the same contact as Github MFA codes but also send mssages to relatives that never where received...
andrepdabout 18 hours ago
Seeing "Material 3/Material You" is a negative point for me, not a positive. It's almost comical just how atrocious the UI is. Yes let's make all phones 20% huge-er and all whitespace 40% wider, said no sane person ever.
qingcharlesabout 15 hours ago
Design is so personal. I love Material 3 Expressive personally. Each to their own :)
HybridStatAnim8about 13 hours ago
At least it is now consistent with the rest of the OSs UI.
tsunamifuryabout 18 hours ago
It’s amazing that you don’t think any of this is based on real HCI.

People prefer larger tap targets on touch screens.

Dylan16807about 7 hours ago
Larger than what? That only goes so far.

And tons of whitespace doesn't make the tap targets bigger. It exacerbates the problem of bigger targets causing less to fit on the screen.

andrepdabout 16 hours ago
> People prefer larger tap targets on touch screens.

Only in a completely stupid, nonsensically A/B tested notion of "prefer". I'll refer you to this ~~excellent piece of satirical writing~~ actual post from Google design team: https://design.google/library/expressive-material-design-goo...

tsunamifuryabout 15 hours ago
Uh. This HCI fact has been known for 30 plus years.

Are you this … poorly informed