Thanks for your answer!
Sounds resonable to me. The installation of root is pretty easy with an unlocked bootloader, as all root-packages for Android (like SuperSU) supply and easy zip file for installation via recovery. Fairphone could provide a Guide on it’s support pages together with an explanation what the benefits and risks are.
Please also note that an unlocked bootloader is the only requirement for installation of custom OSs, root is not required to install.
Paul, we at this stage don’t know exactly what the images will look like but indeed but you should not complain about software or updates not working because you installed xposed or similar, Our helpdesk will simply not be able to help out and you will need to seek help on the forum or elsewhere. That said current testing happens as much a possible on stock Android components.
I agree that you aren’t responsible for things users do with root. And I agree that your Helpdesk cannot support every change tools like Xposed do to the OS.
But without support for rooted phones on issues not related to the changes by Xposed, etc. I certainly won’t buy the phone myself nor suggest it to anyone. It is really disturbing to me that you’ve decided or even consider dropping support for an open OS…
I am not sure if I understand you correctly. Dropping root doesn’t mean that they drop support for an open OS, does it? Or, put another way: An unrooted Android is not more closed than a rooted one, in my opinion.
PS.: Thanks @keesj for the little outlook on the FP2! 
I am very happy that Fairphone came and hopefully will continue to come without Google apps / playsotre etc. preinstalled.
If something / software etc. is already preinstalled it is nearly always next to impossible to get rid of it completely. So getting people to deinstall google is not the same as not having it in the first place.
I would not have bought a Fairphone (FP1!) if it had been with google preinstalled and I would not recommend it to other people if it had google preinstalled.
Of course there are some apps that are unfortunately only provided via googleplaystore, but if you search a little there are nearly always alternatives to be found.
so since my local trains-buses-app is only on the gogleplaystore I use Liberario, there so far I fould every town I needed.
If I can’t get an app in other situations I simply visit the mobile website version. Or I just do without it (i.e. I don’t use whatsapp, but for other reasons / data privacy)
My digital life does not depend on a certain apps, sofar I’ve had no reason to complain.
And I agree with everyone who already said this: to me Fairphone and Google don’t mix. I think we can possibly all agree that google’s main aim is to collect personal data and that their websites and apps are not uncontroversial (i.e. their influenced search results etc.).
That would be enough reason to not force it on Fairphone Buyers.
Leave it as a free choice.
Since apparently it is only a very small and easy step to activate all the google stuff on the fairphone there is NO reason to go the other way around and ask the (possible) minority to remove google stuff later.
Here in Germany I get lots of positive reactions of people to the Fairphone, and very often they also praise the not-preinstalled-google (USP 
).
Sometimes good things just come out of chance (think of Newton and the apple) - so maybe the first fairphone was googlefree because they were not allowed to preinstall it. But that was really good, so let’s continue with that.
Hello HackAR,
I might not have expressed myself correctly: We will actively support the open source community and allow you to install alternative operating systems as well as allow you to “root” your phone by means of recovery for example. What we will not provide is a help desk or telephone support. Can you please explain what you mean by “But without support for rooted phones on issues not related to the changes by Xposed” can you perhaps give an example? What do you mean by rooted phone, given the phone will come unlocked why do you need to “root” it?
That is very relative. And i am not only talking about this “small step” but also issues related to this, like Fairphone having to support users for which that is irritating, providing a custom solution to install Google Apps, supporting reinstalling after each update…
I get a lot of positive reactions for my FP as well but they have never been related to Google. So that’s subjective as well.
Yes, that is fine and everything. But sometimes there is no alternative, for example to use mobile tickes with Deutsche Bahn you have to use the mobile app.
But I understand, if you do not wan’t Google Apps, removing it/replacing the OS with an alternative version, is a burden, so thanks for contributing.
But given that kessj already confirmed there will be a version of FP OS without Google Apps (see above), i do not see a big issue here. Today with the FP1 we, the users who want Gapps, have to install Google Apps if we want them manually, and repeat that including the installation wizard, entering user credentials, setting language, etc. after each update. In the FP2 it might be the other way around: If you do not want GApps, thanks to the unlocked Bootloader, install the Google-free alternative before first use. Seems like good deal to me and since i expect the majority will want Google Apps, especially first time / general users, i think it is actually better this way.
I think want @HackAR meant here is “rooted” in the sense of having a “su” binary eg. superuser access installed.
[quote=“keesj, post:46, topic:5582”]
I might not have expressed myself correctly
[/quote]I guess you need to be precise on what extend you’re dropping the support.
A version of OS with root access is made available by you, but not supported:
[quote=“keesj, post:38, topic:5582”]
we will not “add” root in the shipped and supported installations
[/quote]That means that the installations with root access are not supported? This would be point 1. or 2. on my list. And this is not acceptable for me.
[quote=“Stefan, post:44, topic:5582”]
An unrooted Android is not more closed than a rooted one, in my opinion.
[/quote]So you’re saying that an OS that allows you to change the OS settings and files is not more open that the one that does not? 
Please define “support” here. what do you expect from “support”?
HackAR, this is not about being open or not, it is about being secure. We will not disallow people from fiddling with their devices and even do as much as we can to make this possible but if you call customer support that your devices is not working we will ask you to test this on the official unmodified build(s).
The FP2 device will be open source friendly because we the phone is unlocked and we will release as much as possible as open source software. We have an good track record for publishing our own code and have done what was possible to release as much as possible of the FP1 code. For FP2 we aim much higher. The intent is to allow for community contributed code and translations in the build. If you feel that not providing customer support for modified builds (e.g own modifications on the /system partition) FP2 is probably not for you.
So you’re saying that an OS that allows you to change the OS settings and files is not more open that the one that does not?[/quote]
I was referring to openness as in “Open Source”.
Of course the more you can fiddle the more open, as in “If you can’t open it, you don’t own it”, a phone is.
Edit: I removed a part because @Stefan was faster.
This is actually common sense and done this way by other manufactures as well. With Sony for example, while they provide first class developer support for their top-smartphones, you actually have to agree that you lose your warranty when you unlock your device (required for AOSP/custom os installation). And this is similar with ASUS and other manufacturers.
With a custom os or system level access, with apps like Xposed etc, it might very well be that your problems is caused by your own or that apps modifications. How is support actually expected to detect that, or even further fix it?
Requiring to reinstall an offical image first seems very reasonable.
This actually a very important question.
[quote=“ben, post:47, topic:5582”]
That is very relative. And i am not only talking about this “small step” but also issues related to this, like Fairphone having to support users for which that is irritating, providing a custom solution to install Google Apps, supporting reinstalling after each update…[/quote]
Actually the support you mention that Fairphone is supplying is also not such a big thing. You can easily find the instructions on how to do both (installing, re-installing after update) in the support section, even in a number of languages. So the support is mainly to point people to using the search function in the support section.
Don’t really understand what you are trying to say here. Of course our experiences are subjective and of course positive feedback to the FP can have a number of reasons. One can be that it is originally google-free. Since you installed google you obviously don’t get that one.
[quote=“ben, post:47, topic:5582”]
Yes, that is fine and everything. But sometimes there is no alternative, for example to use mobile tickes with Deutsche Bahn you have to use the mobile app.[/quote]
I think there is always an alternative, glad to be able to help you there. Just buy an online ticket and show the QR-code of it on your FP. That always works fine.
Actually I did not say it was “a burden”, my argument was quite different.
It is probably a minority that uses their FP without any google, but since the FP is really a minority phone it would suit it very well not to overrun this minority by changing to preinstalled google.
You are right, that was unclear. It did not tell you that i did not run Google Apps for about half a year. But anyway, i was just trying to tell exactly that: You got positive reactions for not running google, but the positive reactions were not related the Google at all. People did either not care, or not notice if was running Google Apps at all. But you are right, that does not matter much. I think i was somehow annoyed (not by you) but that generally i have the impression the real important stuff about there Fairphone is so much undermined and reduced to such a minor thing as Google Apps or not (in my point of view). I do not see the °Fair" in Fairphone to be related to customer rights/privacy/anti-monopolist whatever, but to miners, workers and people directly affected by environmental and social issues related to the production and disposal of Fairphones. I am very sorry, but while I see myself as very Open Source friendly and supportive, i feel like these issues are not “on the same level of importance”. We live in a rich country, we have a customer protection and privacy regulation … The Fair in Fairphone is not mainly about us nor about open source. To me, it feels as some people are hijacking the “fair” for their own agenda that frankly, has zero benefits for miners and workers and the environment. I must admit that makes me angry, so apologies for my angry posts.
Nope it does not. It can, but it actually says this ticket is only valid if printed on white DIN A4 paper and not modified or scaled. Ii had a long discussion with DB employees about this and overheard several other occasions where travelers had to buy another ticket (with the option for a refund) because they were told the validity of the ticket could not be checked that way. Anyway, this is getting very off topic.
Fair point, but for one, it is only a change of defaults: Now the FP1 comes without Google per default, the FP2 might come with. This is not “overrunning” a Google-skeptical minority. Secondly, this will certainly not happen on existing FP1 devices, even with future upgrades. It might happen, at least i hope so, with the FP2, by which time a Google free alternative will be offered by Fairphone.
That, by it’s own right, is very much unique: Fairphone enables you to buy a middle-to-top-class device with the option for a Google free Android, supplied by Fairphone itself, good luck trying to find another vendor who does that! There won’t be many.
Ok in different words:
If the hardware is truly open and I can get a decent Android version free of google stuff, then this phone could be shipped with whatever you want, even iOS.
I don’t understand why all this fuss about gapps and root. The problem is that current Fairphone was based on a chipset from a supplier which cannot release updates because they do things quick&dirty and thus maintenance is pain. This is Fairphone problem 0. If this is fixed in next version, it’s success.
I just would like Fairphone to not to promote Google Apps, as they have licensing issues and are worth something only if you have Google account and you like to give all your data to Google.
If Fairphone wants to support Google, it’s fine BUT it is a (quite unfair IMHO) choice done for the user. I expect Fairphone to provide also a version of the OS free from Google apps at least.
On one thing I agree, don’t customize the OS.
I agree regarding the chipset issue.
As expected i disagree regarding the Google Apps. I think pre-installing Google Apps is not mainly promoting, but reacting to users requirements. You might say that this is “unfair”, that is you personal opinion, but i would say let’s try to keep from rebranding “fair” to everything we like to see or not to see on the Fairphone.
I see that practical: A (suspected) minority does not want Google Apps on their phone. Kees announced at this thread that there will be a Google free alternative. If that works out, i think everything is fine.
And regarding “Giving all your data to Google” i disagree. You need a Google Account to download apps, yes, and if you wan’t do buy apps you need to supply either a credit card or a paypal account (or buy credit in stores, btw.). But that is all. Compared to Apple, the Play Store is open for almost everything that es legal and not malicious: Alternative Browsers, Cloud Services, Email clients even from direct competitors like Microsoft. And you are free to install plain APKs or another Store/Repository like F-Droid or Amazon alongside. Let’s be realistic: The Google Apps is hardly as bad as some claim.
[quote=“keesj, post:50, topic:5582”]
HackAR, this is not about being open or not, it is about being secure.
[/quote]“secure” as in …? internet security? Like a good firewall? Or more like safety of the personal data? like what XPrivacy does? I wonder if those do work without root access… /sarcasmoff
[quote=“keesj, post:49, topic:5582”]
Please define “support” here. what do you expect from “support”?
[/quote]If something unrelated to my changes via root access doesn’t work, I’d like the issue solved and not being told to use unrooted OS.
[quote=“keesj, post:50, topic:5582”]
if you call customer support that your devices is not working we will ask you to test this on the official unmodified build(s).
[/quote]The question is: Are the builds with root access made by FP “official” and “unmodified” ?
[quote=“keesj, post:50, topic:5582”]
If you feel that not providing customer support for modified builds (e.g own modifications on the /system partition) FP2 is probably not for you.
[/quote]That’s ridiculous. How can someone expect support from FP for software piece he wrote himself?
[quote=“ben, post:52, topic:5582”]
With a custom os or system level access, with apps like Xposed etc, it might very well be that your problems is caused by your own or that apps modifications. How is support actually expected to detect that, or even further fix it?
Requiring to reinstall an offical image first seems very reasonable.
[/quote]I agree for the most part. But there are quite a few issues FP team can detect by trying to reproduce the issue on an unmodified and rooted phone on their own. If this test shows no issues, then it’s reasonable to assume the source is in the modifications. But not before that.
And regarding Google Apps:
It seems that an Installer proved not to be a good way to offer the usage of Google Apps. (I never used it, so I can only judge based on the forum.) I’d say, either the Installer is faulty or it’s an error with ID 10t. I really can’t say how many users got problems during installation. If you really must offer an unrooted googlized OS, it should not have a better support than the “regular” one.
And yes, I realize, that an unrooted, controlled OS is much easier to support and maintain. That how Apple does it.
[quote=“kiwi, post:55, topic:5582”]
I don’t understand why all this fuss about gapps and root. The problem is that current Fairphone was based on a chipset from a supplier which cannot release updates because they do things quick&dirty and thus maintenance is pain. This is Fairphone problem 0. If this is fixed in next version, it’s success.
[/quote]Most of those "IF"s are not related to FP. All they can do is choosing the hardware. “IF” CM/FFOS/whatever will offer its OS to run on FP is not really up to FP.
[quote=“ben, post:56, topic:5582”]
The Google Apps is hardly as bad as some claim.
[/quote]It’s not as bad as Apple, it’s a silver medal on “badness”.
Thanks for appreciating that! I am afraid it is neither a user error (ID 10t) nor a general problem with the installer, although it has been buggy at start. It is simple that the level integration of GApps into the System makes a installation harder. And that some parts of the system the GApps add to Android get overwritten by the Google-free software update, thous requiring reinstallation. I do not see a way to change that, but would be happy to learn otherwise.
Who says the software update have to be unaware of Google? There are 3 ways to do it, as far I can see atm.:
I’d choose the Nr.1.
Hi,
I tried to read all the posts (even the first one ! 
but I have to say, I am not sure to be representative of the average Fairphone owner, but I totally disagree with the majority of what I read. For example, this quote 
I totally disagree with that : when I show my Fairphone and explain what it is, people find it nice that is it “Fair” and cares for the environment and workers. But they would definitely NOT buy it only because of this. But, when I specify that I received it rooted, that I can install or remove whatever I want (even this damn “Google search” bar so hard to remove on some smartphones), they find it definitely interesting.
For me, the “If you can’t open it, you don’t own it” slogan was the one that makes me choose a Fairphone. It would be a total nonsense to choose to go back to what all others manufacturers do, that is, give non rooted phone because they seem to think the users are to stupid to use correctly their phone, and also, because they seem to think they know better than us what app we want to have in our phones. I hated to have all those useless apps like Facebook installed on my previous phone, that I could not remove. And frankly, I can’t see how a non rooted Fairphone would compete versus the giants like Samsung or the Nexus. I don’t know if a huge change is planned for the FP2, but my FP1 was lower than most of the other phones available in terms of hardware (and software, but I guess it will change). Do you really think people will buy a “classic non rooted” Android phone, but not as powerful as the one available on the market, and at the same or higher price, just because of the environmental/social aspect ? I’m afraid people are not so altruistic.
I have the first generation Fairphone, and I love it, even if there is sometimes some issues (“Fairphone as stop working” is not a very reassuring message ;). But if the next Fairphone choose to stay on Android (and not give a try to an open source system, then) AND go back to “non rooted or you loose support/updates” then I’m afraid my journey with the Fairphone would be over.