You don't see how it doesn't make sense for Graphene to reject a company because it doesn't handle security according to their standards, but be OK with a company that is actively malicious?
They announced a partnership with Motorola. They are not just making an OS for their devices, they are partnering with them. There is a fundamental difference between taking a device and making an OS for it, and partnering with its manufacturer. The latter leads to the assumption that Graphene condones Motorola's security practices, and Motorola condones Graphene producing an OS for their devices. The former does not.
You don't see how it doesn't make sense for Graphene to reject a company because it doesn't handle security according to their standards, but be OK with a company that is actively malicious?
What matters is whether or not a particular device meets the GOS hardware requirements, anything else is secondary. It's not that complicated
They announced a partnership with Motorola. They are not just making an OS for their devices, they are partnering with them. There is a fundamental difference between taking a device and making an OS for it, and partnering with its manufacturer. The latter leads to the assumption that Graphene condones Motorola's security practices, and Motorola condones Graphene producing an OS for their devices. The former does not.
2 replies →