The Graphene team has also been very outspoken about how much they dislike Fairphone for this very reason.
I use /e/OS on my Fairphone 5. It’s not a Graphene alternative as it’s not a hardened OS, it’s just Android without Google. Good enough for me, I’m not afraid of secret agents stealing my phone to extract data or whatever, I just don’t want American big tech anywhere near my phone.
Yeah absolutely I thought it would be fine but in my country we only have 2 banks and Revolut all of which only use google wallet. Other than that using the card has a limit.
There’s a blog post on contactless payments in /e/OS here, which talks about options without Google Pay. It’s written by the guy who started /e/OS, so it should be a decent source.
My guess would be that Google Wallet is so embedded in Google dependencies that you’d pretty much be back at stock Android by the time you get it working. But I have no personal experience, sorry.
Yeah, this is true. They just seem to have a specific beef against Fairphone and /e/OS because it’s presented as a privacy alternative (due to no big tech tracking), and the Graphene team believes they are the only ones with the security features to ensure true privacy (because of their… hardened malloc?).
Same. Like, I can tolerate hackers more than big tech. What is the deal with the security chips? I don’t want some shitty fuse or anything in my phone.
They (Graphene) have very strong ideas about security, and argue that Google Pixel devices are the only ones that can truly be unhackable enough because of some feature of hardware design. I have read it a bunch of times and I still don’t understand, but I’m sure there’s a valid point there somewhere. It has nothing to do with security as in safety, but relates to some sort of local hacking that requires access to the device I believe.
Really nothing to worry about unless you have very specific needs, in my opinion. But there are some people who feel very strongly about it, though without ever being able to clearly express their precise concerns in a coherent way.
The Graphene team has also been very outspoken about how much they dislike Fairphone for this very reason.
I use /e/OS on my Fairphone 5. It’s not a Graphene alternative as it’s not a hardened OS, it’s just Android without Google. Good enough for me, I’m not afraid of secret agents stealing my phone to extract data or whatever, I just don’t want American big tech anywhere near my phone.
Can tou use google wallet?
Short answer is no, but you can buy a card holder that integrates into the case: https://shop.fairphone.com/shop/fairphone-6-card-holder-1895?category=5&color=188
I thought I’d miss not having contactless phone payments but actually the card holder thing is fine.
Yeah absolutely I thought it would be fine but in my country we only have 2 banks and Revolut all of which only use google wallet. Other than that using the card has a limit.
Android auto is a major need for me too
There’s a blog post on contactless payments in /e/OS here, which talks about options without Google Pay. It’s written by the guy who started /e/OS, so it should be a decent source.
My guess would be that Google Wallet is so embedded in Google dependencies that you’d pretty much be back at stock Android by the time you get it working. But I have no personal experience, sorry.
to be fair I don’t think they like anything besides Google Pixel.
Last time I heard they were working with someone to produce a phone with the needed features, but hadn’t revealed who.
Yeah, this is true. They just seem to have a specific beef against Fairphone and /e/OS because it’s presented as a privacy alternative (due to no big tech tracking), and the Graphene team believes they are the only ones with the security features to ensure true privacy (because of their… hardened malloc?).
Same. Like, I can tolerate hackers more than big tech. What is the deal with the security chips? I don’t want some shitty fuse or anything in my phone.
They (Graphene) have very strong ideas about security, and argue that Google Pixel devices are the only ones that can truly be unhackable enough because of some feature of hardware design. I have read it a bunch of times and I still don’t understand, but I’m sure there’s a valid point there somewhere. It has nothing to do with security as in safety, but relates to some sort of local hacking that requires access to the device I believe.
Really nothing to worry about unless you have very specific needs, in my opinion. But there are some people who feel very strongly about it, though without ever being able to clearly express their precise concerns in a coherent way.