Elements of it, perhaps, but things like the sandboxing are explicitly prohibited in other Android ROMs. Otherwise almost all custom ROMs would be using it, or some flavour of it.
other OSes
And this terminology kind of tells me you don’t really know the custom ROM scene.
What the hell are you talking about?? You’ve just made up this “ARM ecosystem” thing, when it never was a thing.
ARM design processors, then license those designs to other companies to build devices. There is no “ecosystem” because they don’t define the rest of the device.
The “ecosystem” you’re referring to is the overall phone itself, much of which is defined by Android and Google more than it is by ARM.
A retired MIT professor. That’s what “professor emeritus” means.
He gave an interview to a YouTuber in Russia because he’s retired and doesn’t have much else to do.
It’s open source, but the license agreement prohibits using it in other projects. You can do it for your own personal builds, but not any published builds.
Just because they have the same function in the OS doesn’t mean the hardware is the same. That’s where custom ROMs falter, with closed sourced hardware drivers.
The issue isn’t normalisation, it’s inaccessibility to understand the core functionality to drive the hardware.
I think you don’t really understand how hard it is to standardise everything. Just because IBM managed it in the 80s doesn’t mean it was easy.
You’re supporting diva devs selling out.
We don’t need GOS to do well. We need a fully open ecosystem for phone operating systems. GOS devs don’t let anyone incorporate their code.
They also refuse to provide basic functionality like inverted navbar buttons. Because they’re diva devs.
Lmfao 10 year service life is woefully short.
In terms of how they’re spending them, yes. Trump is wasting weapons so as to deplete US arsenals, but also to create demand for new weapons. More money for those dealing arms.
In terms of what you want to defend against, you should consider their potential success rate to be far more than 2%.
And that’s without needing to listen to the words of a lady from Texas who’s emigrated to Russia and interviewed a retired academic.
No it isn’t. GrapheneOS is directly based on AOSP, so it includes everything AOSP does. GOS devs have made it clear they want you to use gestures, and they only include the navbar at all because it’s still in AOSP.
Inverted navbar is in wide a range of other AOSP custom ROMs (including LineageOS, which could be confused with pure AOSP), because those developers chose to incorporate it. But it isn’t in AOSP by default.
It’s an accurate take on their general attitude to polite requests on their github. And the reason the requests are so excessively polite is because people are treading on eggshells due to their diva reputation - albeit, this reputation is somewhat drowned out by their fandom.
It’s also not mature to downvote people just because you disagree with them.
And furthermore, the reason I use the navbar is because I want a force close long-press gesture on the back button, so I can more easily close apps and stop their background processes. To me, that’s a fairly important feature for privacy and security. That’s also likely a big reason Google pushed away from that, and to see GOS devs align themselves with Google in such a manner raises my eyebrow against them, at the very least.