Comment by wolvoleo

14 hours ago

Seriously, I don't see a mediocre android provider like Motorola running and maintaining a hard fork.

Forking is all easy, keeping it up to date year after year as codebases diverge is a whole different story.

I could see Samsung doing it. But they won't, they're too good buddies with Google. But they have the resources. A Motorola no. The grapheneos team won't either, maintaining a disparate fork and introducing new features independently from aosp would just be beyond their scope. You're not just hardening at that point. You're basically doing everything.

Don't forget when Huawei didn't fork. Well they started with that but then replaced every component with their own design. It's easier because if you fork you're still bound by decisions made by the original party. Better to greenfield the whole thing then.

And look at how many people made a soft fork of chrome with some ui changes. There's tons of those. There's no hard fork that no longer follows Google. Even a large company like Microsoft didn't.

I think graphene could maintain a hard fork with manufacturer support (Motorola). At least for a while. Long term viability is an open question.

  • They could for a while but what's the point if it's not sustainable? Google is not going to turn around and make it more open again.

    With every Android release you will build up more feature base to replicate. Unless you cut all ties and drive a separate ecosystem but good luck getting enough developers to buy into that.

    • Well, someone is clearly giving Graphene money, and quite a lot of it, as per TFA:

      > We recently hired a bunch of new people and will be hiring more so our progress will be accelerating.

      1 reply →