Comment by palata
7 days ago
> I fear "Android" will continue to be understood as a word for either variant
Well, "Android" generally means either variant. I run GrapheneOS and I call it Android. If someone asks, I say I run Android, not GrapheneOS. Actually in terms of experience, it is Android to me.
But in a context where we oppose GrapheneOS to Android, then I think it's important to be clear. GrapheneOS belongs to the family of OSes that are based on AOSP (like Android, LineageOS, IodeOS, /e/OS, CalyxOS), while Android is itself a "subfamily" of that, including the Google Android, the Samsung Android, the Xiaomi Android, etc.
In a way, I personally feel like GrapheneOS is closer to Google Android than the Samsung Android is from the Google Android, if that makes sense. Moving from GrapheneOS to Google Android, I really don't see significant differences. Now Moving to a Samsung Android, I need to adapt a little.
All that to say, I really only make a difference when we are talking about AOSP-based systems as a distinct group, by opposition to "Android certified" systems. Just like it sometimes make sense to talk about GNU/Linux in specific conversations, but generally, we refer to a Linux distribution as "Linux".
I take that point, that's a useful thing to do. Not sure that many people even in threads like these will get it unless explained (at which point you might as well word around it) but on a close forum or chat this is definitely a useful approach
I am honestly getting tired of people complaining about the fact that there is a less ambiguous way to name things. Those projects are more and more converging into saying "AOSP-based" (but that's evolving, interesting how language works!). GrapheneOS always says AOSP-based. The English wikipedia page of LineageOS says AOSP-based. In the past we used to call them custom ROMs, but the naming has evolved.
Of course, it is only relevant when it is relevant.
You can join a discussion about cars, where people talk about their Honda or Opel or Fiat, and when they ask you what you drive, you say "a car". And when they say "no but... which brand", you can go on and explain to them that they don't know how to use language, that "a car" is the common way to talk about those vehicles and that nobody in the world cares about a brand, even though you just witnessed a discussion where those people did care about the brand. Sure, you can do that.
But don't expect to have an enjoyable social interaction this way. And don't tell me "but you started it!": I answered to a comment that was making the article sound ridiculous by proudly conflating the two concepts.