If our goal is the empowerment and greater freedom of people, mobile Linux appears to be a more feasible route to achieve those goals in the long term than AOSP.
palata wrote on Hacker News:
…
– We’ll probably want the security model, with the nice sandboxing and I would argue the verified boot.
Many of these commentators aren’t grasping the advantages to developing mobile Linux as an independent operating system that can’t be controlled by any single company. They aren’t seeing the advantages that mobile Linux offers over AOSP, nor are they accounting for the difficulties of modifying AOSP to respect its users, compared to developing mobile Linux.
Off the jump, not responding to the concerns of security implementations is a bit disingenuous and I stopped reading there. For Linux to seriously compete in the phone ecosystem, security needs to be there.
We’re just now getting there on desktop with things like Wayland, Flatpak, and some distros having tbe ability to enable measured boot via TPM (usually its a process that requires a lot of research even when its supported.)
Theres no doubt in my mind that Linux phones could be great, and a lot of the work done for desktop can be copied over to mobile. Until the day where Linux mobile security is at the very least good enough for the everyday person though (Proper sandboxing, permissions, encryption and verified boot) I dont see it being viable, as much as I would like it to be.
Theres no doubt in my mind that Linux phones couldn’t be great
You meant that you have no doubt that they could be great, right? Your next few sentences make it sound like you’re saying that there’s still hope, but this first sentence essentially states, “even if all of my doubts were removed, Linux phones still couldn’t be great.”
If I’m misunderstanding, then I’d really like to know why you doubt Linux mobile as a platform in general.
Therr is no doubt in your mind that Linux couldn’t be great? I guess you meant it could?
The way you’re talking sounds like younthink Linux is just starting with some basic security. Linux has pretty much been on the forefront security wise, I wouldn’t trust any other OS over it (BSD type, maybe)
Off the jump, not responding to the concerns of security implementations is a bit disingenuous and I stopped reading there. For Linux to seriously compete in the phone ecosystem, security needs to be there.
We’re just now getting there on desktop with things like Wayland, Flatpak, and some distros having tbe ability to enable measured boot via TPM (usually its a process that requires a lot of research even when its supported.)
Theres no doubt in my mind that Linux phones could be great, and a lot of the work done for desktop can be copied over to mobile. Until the day where Linux mobile security is at the very least good enough for the everyday person though (Proper sandboxing, permissions, encryption and verified boot) I dont see it being viable, as much as I would like it to be.
Sorry to be pedantic, but seeking clarification:
You meant that you have no doubt that they could be great, right? Your next few sentences make it sound like you’re saying that there’s still hope, but this first sentence essentially states, “even if all of my doubts were removed, Linux phones still couldn’t be great.”
If I’m misunderstanding, then I’d really like to know why you doubt Linux mobile as a platform in general.
Youre correct and it is a typo
Therr is no doubt in your mind that Linux couldn’t be great? I guess you meant it could?
The way you’re talking sounds like younthink Linux is just starting with some basic security. Linux has pretty much been on the forefront security wise, I wouldn’t trust any other OS over it (BSD type, maybe)