Why i think Fairphone OS should drop root and pre-install Google Apps

Nope, they are not root related, but related to no pre-installed Google Apps. Just look at the forum here how many people hat problems with that. And i certainly is annoying to reinstall and reauthenticate after each update. And each update is a chance for the Google Apps installation to fail… but not when the Apps are already integrated in the OS, as with most devices and therefore tested default.

Yes, i strongly assume that is the case.

True, they also started to write proprietary software only included in their proprietary “CyanogenOS” like a more modern email client and camera. The work they to for open source Android is still great, but it seems when it comes to business, they chose a more traditional, closed model similar to Google: If you download AOSP, you arguable to not get the “full” Android experience, since a lot of Apps you would expect are bundled in the closed source Google Apps. The same becomes true (in part) with CyanogenMod, where the open source CyanogenMod is not any longer the full package, but misses some apps only included in the closed CyanogenOS.

Who decides what is unrelated and what not?

The user in confronted with that decision when enabling her Google Account. Including Terms of Service. I do not think this is a valid argument, just because Google Apps are preinstalled, you do not need to use it. You can simply decline to setup a Google Account in the “First Use” wizard already. No big deal.

I think it is for every user to decide if Google Apps make her “un-free”, not for us.

Ok, fair enough. But then the FP2 is probably not for you (yet!). It is very well possible it will not have root out–of–box. And it might have Google Apps pre–installed. Most importantly, while Fairphone seeks to build great developer relations, root is not the main focus of the device. It’s about fairness to workers and miners and transparency and sustainablity. If all of that does not appeal to you, you are really better of with another, possibly cheaper device. Buy an Ubuntu Phone, or Firefox Phone or even a Microsoft Phone.

Many security researchers doubt that you need a virus scanner on an Android phone. And if you have the Google Apps, you already have Malware protection build in.

Thanks for being to open-minded and considering our argumentations and positions as valid as yours :irony:

And speaking of leaving, as i read, you neither have a Fairphone, nor have you been very active in the forum until now.

If the community of open source developers is really sick of “getting stones trown at” from Fairphone, and there is a considerable amount of people that do not care about fair but only what a Google-free Android device (which is what you said you are after), then i do not understand why there is not a single of all those chinese and european smartphone start-ups offering that alternative. And that would be the right way to do it: Prove there is considerable demand on the market!

Until the, the best way to get Smartphone with best possible Open-Source Android support is probably a Nexus or a Sony with Android AOSP. Check CyanogenMod and i am sure you will find that need already fulfilled.

This is paternalistic. No where do I or @danielsjohan say that Google is bad for us but we use it anyway. I think Google Services offer some great thinks for me. I would prefer them to be more open, yes, i would prefer the privacy policy to be better, yes, but that does not mean that i made a choice i am happy with while fully realizing the consequences! Please, i know this is important for you, but do not talk down on us like that. It is disrespectful and actually harming your cause – believe me or not.

Yes it is. It is expected to just work and currently it is not. It causes issues with every update and it has been driving some users here in the forum to frustration. Installing a app from Play store is a single tap (or click).

It is part of there motto to be more open then others. But it has always been Fairphone, not Freephone nor Openphone.

You are comparing strange things here. You are not an employee of Fairphone disagreeing with its management (at least that is what is assume ;-)). Instead you are a potentially customer and voting with your money. It if fair to raise your wishes and concerns, but what you do is constantly downplaying other requirements and even talking down on people not sharing your opinion. That is quite ignorant.

Exactly! Thank you! It is not related! It is perfectly possible to develop and sell a FairPhone and still have Google Apps.

[quote=“ben, post:163, topic:5582”]
This is paternalistic. No where do I or @danielsjohan say that Google is bad for us but we use it anyway. I think Google Services offer some great thinks for me. I would prefer them to be more open, yes, i would prefer the privacy policy to be better, yes, but that does not mean that i made a choice i am happy with while fully realizing the consequences!
[/quote]Sorry, but you’re reading something I didn’t say, again.
He knows little about “the issue” and he doesn’t care. “The issue” might be very bad. He doesn’t know. He makes an impression on me of an 10 years old boy who got a taste of some drugs. He doesn’t know what it is or what it does. But it makes him happy and he doesn’t want to know anything else. So I guess you’re right. I do behave paternalistic by telling him this might go badly wrong someday and we shouldn’t make this behavior default for everyone.
Or if you like: the analogy of the safety belt in your car. Is it better to sell cars without any and make the installation optional?

I never said that you think Google Apps to be bad. I just think some of you underestimate the danger or know nothing about it at all.

[quote=“ben, post:163, topic:5582”]
You are comparing strange things here.
[/quote]Yes. By using the word “managers” I’ve tried to draw attention to the fact that this ‘argument’ is made always by someone of power if someone doesn’t fit the wanted profile. “I’ve made my decision. Now f*ck off.” It’s the (dead) end of any constructive discussion.

[quote=“ben, post:163, topic:5582”]
It is perfectly possible to develop and sell a FairPhone and still have Google Apps.
[/quote]And it’s perfectly possible to develop and sell a FairPhone and still have no Google Apps installed.

-You need to eat your vegetables!
-But it’s raining, mom!
-How is rain related to vegetables?
-Exactly! Thank you! It is perfectly possible that it rains and I don’t have to eat vegetables!

(Also known as “Chewbacca defence”)

Why do you insist on talking about rain if the topic is vegetables?

1 Like

I’m sorry, but I hope you do realize how insulting you are?

I can perfectly well decide for myself how I want to live my life, thank you. I don’t need you to tell me Google is as bad as drugs.

I know little of this whole issue, because I looked into it and decided there are more important problems in this world (according to my personal opinion, I’m not saying you should share this priorities).
Issues like people being exploited, in order to make your smartphone, whether it contains Google or not. Issues like e-waste being “treated” in dangerous conditions. And many more.

So, I decided I won’t make the extra effort to really learn a lot about the “freedom”-issue, and take more time to dig into the other issues. That’s a personal decision. And it seems you don’t agree with this. No problem for me, but please don’t expect me to be even at the least attracted to look into your issue after being compared to a 10-year old taking drugs!

4 Likes

[quote=“danielsjohan, post:165, topic:5582”]
I’m sorry, but I hope you do realize how insulting you are?
[/quote]Sry, but I had to talk plain text and exaggerate to make clear why I’ve reacted that way. I have trouble understanding people who are deliberately ignorant. You made clear that you know little about it. But you also dismiss or ignore the opinions of people who are into the matter. I’m not saying you can’t make a decision. I say you don’t have the base to build your decision upon.

I wont debate whether the loss of privacy is as bad as drugs, but I’m positive, there are drugs that are less bad as the loss of privacy.
I realize the comparison with drugs might be over the top. Why don’t you see yourself as someone driving a car at 66mph or 100 kmh without a safety belt and airbags? Is that picture more appealing to you? Most of the times nothing will happen and you feel more comfortable.

1 Like

THANK YOU GIF

THANK YOU GIF

Not an argument for objecting people who know more about it.

I think it’s fair to say that we know for a fact that the average user cannot make a profound decision here.

I couldn’t make a profound statement here, maybe somebody else can. My feeling tells me that doesn’t suffice.

I don’t think that a decision always has to be profound. Decisiveness is a good characteristic of a person, why bother with thinking too much about something, which is not important to the average user?

Tip: Read this article: Find happiness in a hectic world

3 Likes

@ben your proposal is not for a “fair” phone, but for a “half-fair” phone.

Fairphone is currently being fair both towards producers and users.
Installing Play Store would expose Fairphone users to Google’s unnecessarily obscure and verbose terms of service, which are irrespectful of privacy and user rights.
Removing default root access (further than a configuration setting away) would take away freedom of choice in many respects.

I wish Google fanboys would read Google’s terms of service entirely before stepping out of technical subjects.

1 Like

You are mixing up fairness and freedom. Also I think, they (Fairphone) should focus on improving the fairness towards the producers of the phones, not to their users. The discussions here, if Google respects privacy or not, are 1st-world-problems! There are people out their, dying from toxic fumes and collapsing mines (not to mention the wars, which are financed by the average electronic device).

PS.: This is my own opinion.
PPS.: I’ve not installed Google’s Anti-Services on my phone.

4 Likes

[quote=“Stefan, post:170, topic:5582”]
You are mixing up fairness and freedom.
[/quote]Nothing is more fair than the slavery? :slight_smile:

2 Likes

Good point! :slight_smile: Well, still freedom, as opposed to slavery, is worse than freedom, as opposed to “Googlified phone”.

1 Like

@Stefan it is implied that fair trade food products are healthy and transparent. You seem to expect 1st world people to endorse others’ rights while not demanding their own rights.

1 Like

@fai8753 I’ll give it a go…

Proposing a Google account by default influences people’s decisions, especially if it is implied as a necessary, ordinary or unimportant step.

Once installed, Google Play Store gains full rights on the phone and data, and it may connect in the background. If it connects, it discloses phone usage patterns and allows Google to identify the user’s Internet activities, by cross-linking data from its other sources (search, analytics etc.). If it does not connect, it remains outdated and a security risk.

In any circumstance, unnecessary software running with high privileges makes a device less secure.

The installation of Google Play store requires the acceptance of a licence, similar to the activation of a Google account. Who has accepted the first licence on behalf of the user?

We are talking about Google: the same guys offering “free” analytics to sell website clients to their competitors; The same guys offering a 100 page russian-doll style series of licence agreements intentionally obscure and verbose; the same guys not allowing FP1 users to prevent the stock browser from sending Google all typed URLs because of mandatory auto-completion :confounded:

I don’t believe some kid is trying to take away our freedom just because he’s too lazy to double-tap an icon… I’d rather prefer this whole thread was a covert lobbying attempt from Google.

4 Likes

Ahh – i got lost in your response. But this caught my attention. No understand nothing anymore? Rain? Vegetables?

The two of us will never agree. I think let’s not talk about dangers or vegetables or sun (was it rain???): Let’s simply talk about preference. I think a large number of users would prefer to have Google Apps installed. I fully realize there are others that prefer NOT to have them. Simple: Provide two distributions of Fairphone OS, one with, one without. Fairphone indicated they will do that.

That leaves us with only one think left to discuss: Which setup should be default?

Since i made the assumption that people who care a lot about not having Google Apps are (a) more technical savy and (b) the minority of future (and arguably current) Fairphone buyers. I also made the assumption based on my personal experience that © the current way of installing Google Apps is error-prone, harder to understand than required and leads to a variety including strange crashes after each reboot, i propose to deliver the Fairphone with Google Apps installed, so that it’s ready to use by everyone and updates can be handled easier. I also propose to provide an alternative distribution without Google Apps that should be easy to install by either flashing an image or using the Fairphone Updater.

Thats how i would like to discuss this, not by speaking of drugs, 10yo boys (why no girls?), people that have to be protected from the “dangers of Google Apps”.

Please look up the meaning of “deliberately”. And than think about if that is really how you would like to discuss here. This is getting out of hand,

Also reading your latest post, that in my view, is a perfect example of ignorance, reading that sentence got me to laugh and made me sad at same time. I really urge you to keep a respectful tone here.

Thanks for that. Google “fanboy” is exactly what I am. Thanks for reading my posts and keeping a fair discussion and also, thanks for introducing the manners of reddit and engadget into this forum! Oh boy did I miss that!

What? Why is that? Healthy, were do you read that, here: http://www.fairtrade.net/the-fairtrade-marks.html? This is what i read:

When you buy products with any of the FAIRTRADE Marks, you support
farmers and workers as they improve their lives and their communities.
Products bearing these Marks meet the internationally-agreed social,
environmental and economic Fairtrade Standards
http://www.fairtrade.net/the-fairtrade-marks.html

And transparency btw. is related to the production of such products, not there health impacts.

You accept that license when you set up your account. No manufacturor accepts a users license for you.

It was me who opened that thread. I’m not lazy, im am full-grown and i am not working for Google or otherwise related to that company or Google.

I have no idea if you realize you are insulting. I don’t really care, i can very well live with that. What makes me sad is how aggresive some of you fight here, how you are repeatedly using ad-hominem attacks.

It is sad how that develops just because some people think would want to take something away from them. And it is intersting how many of you constantly ignored that from the first post on, i always argued there would be a requirement to offer some version of Fairphone OS without Google Apps.

4 Likes

Dear @enos, I hope you realise @ben is actually a supporter of free OS-stuff? You would know, if you took the effort to really read what’s been written here. So calling him a Google-fanboy, “arguing” he wants to work for Google etc. makes me really laugh out very, very loud :joy:

Personally, I am not such a supporter of the “freedom-issue”. Why? Because I decided I want to be “lazy” on this topic. Because I feel this is a first-world problem. Because I feel this issue is important, but has enough supporters already and I can be more of value for other issues I think are important. Simply said, there are other topics I care more about.
I get the feeling this is reason enough for you, @fai8753 and @HackAR to use ad-hominem attacks. Why? Because I have other priorities as you have. Apparently, that’s some kind of blasphemy to you…

Sorry, but you’re really convincing me to become a “Google-fanboy”, if you keep arguing like this. If your way of “arguing” is the way the “Freedom”-movement works, I really want nothing to do with it.


So, I would like to make a proposal: We start arguing about @ben’s proposal in the OP. Like civilized people.
Please, take your time to read his proposal. And take your time to read FP’s goals, take some time to sit down and try to realise FP is not a “FreePhone”, but a “FairPhone”. And finally, try to accept people have the right to have a different opinion as you have.
I will try to do the same. I will try to accept people can put the “freedom”-issue first, before the “FairTrade”-issue.

Can you accept this? If yes, I will be glad to talk further. If not, the next ad-homonem attack will be flagged to the moderators. Because I’m not here to be insulted, sorry.

6 Likes

I was just about to clear everyone up about this possibility. From the FAQ:

Be Agreeable, Even When You Disagree
You may wish to respond to something by disagreeing with it. That’s fine. But, remember to criticize ideas, not people. Please avoid:

  • Name-calling.
  • Ad hominem attacks.
  • Responding to a post’s tone instead of its actual content.
  • Knee-jerk contradiction.

Instead, provide reasoned counter-arguments that improve the conversation.

If you find, a post violates these rules, please flag them up to the moderators, by clicking this little flag symbol :checkered_flag: below each post.

4 Likes

Please try put that in other words. I do not really understand what you are saying.

You might be surprised, but i do. Regularly, and not only coffee, btw. Implient i do not gives your argument no more value. Fairtrade and Healthy food are different issues. Fair-trade does not imply healthy. But let’s not discuss food.

[quote=“enos, post:176, topic:5582”]
A licence including freedom from responsibility were most probably accepted before installation, otherwise I could sue Google (for example) for a breach of security caused by Google Play store. Who accepted that licence?[/quote]
Good luck! The license is accepted when you set up your account. It is as simple as that. My point is: It is not possible for someone else to accept a license for you.

This is ridiculous :scream_cat:.

I perceive it the other way around. And did i call you a kid? Did i call you “blindly preaching”, “deliberately ignorant”? And do see value in the possibility to use a phone without Google Apps. I did so for half a year. I feel you simply do not accept i see the value in running Google Apps larger then the potential privacy issues. This is an adult and reasonable decision i make. And others make to.

You are arguing as if i wanted to force you to use Google Services. I do not. I repeat my persistent argument a Google free, even self-compilable, as far as possible free version, should complement the version with Google Apps. Have you read that?

No, towards you other post…

I honestly do care! Attacks against people are attacks against people and i don’t like that. I do not care why you feel the need to attack people personally, including me, because of the different understanding or position in such an issue.

Is that the old “you asked for it” argument? I tell, that is never valid! No excuses.

This, in case you didn’t notice, is the next accusation. How do you think to know i am not honest? You do not really believe i am some kind of Google double agent, do you?

This seems to be targeted at me. So, let me hear in what way have i not been honest?

But before we try to continue and give this discussion another chance, let me say this again: I am not willing to be insulted, called stupid, ignorant or a dishonest anymore. If you wan’t to discuss, you have to believe in my honestly, because otherwise, this does not make any sense.

Anyway, i feel everything has be said already. Currently, the latest posts did not advance the topic in any way, instead, they make me really sad how unfriendly this nice place of a forum can be.

If you want a discussion on topic, be respectful

2 Likes

[quote=“ben, post:175, topic:5582”]I think let’s not talk about dangers or vegetables or sun (was it rain???): Let’s simply talk about preference. I think a large number of users would prefer to have Google Apps installed.
[/quote]Let’s not talk about dangers but preferences if the issue is that people prefer danger and seriously underestimate how big the danger is? How can we do that?

[quote=“ben, post:175, topic:5582”]
Which setup should be default?
[/quote]If you get to chose between a dangerous way and a less comfortable way, between no privacy and some privacy, I assume you’d chose danger without privacy. But I think we should not push new people that road. Let’s face it: new people do not understand the danger and will stick with default.

[quote=“ben, post:175, topic:5582”]
think about if that is really how you would like to discuss here.
[/quote]Yes. I do.

[quote=“ben, post:175, topic:5582”]
i got lost in your response.
[/quote]I suggest you read about the concept of “metaphor”, “simile” and “parable”.


[quote=“enos, post:174, topic:5582”]
Who has accepted the first licence on behalf of the user?
[/quote]Usually, there is a note in the manual telling you something like that: By turning this device on you agree to the terms of Google Inc. to be viewed on http:\… If you do not agree, please return the device…

So, you did.


[quote=“danielsjohan, post:177, topic:5582”]
[…] @HackAR to use ad-hominem attacks. Why?
[/quote]The term “ad-himinem attack” implies that I can’t or don’t want to respond to your arguments. The trouble is, there are no arguments made by you.

[quote=“danielsjohan, post:177, topic:5582”]
I feel this issue is important, but has enough supporters already
[/quote]That’s not the matter we “attack”, we oppose

[quote=“enos, post:176, topic:5582”]
you blindly preaching your point without listening to other’s opinions or trying to see any value in them.
[/quote] As enos stated correctly here.

[quote=“ben, post:180, topic:5582”]
Did i call you “blindly preaching”, “deliberately ignorant”?
[/quote]How can you? Neither of us said “I don’t know” nor “I don’t care”. It’s up to us to use your own words against you.

[quote=“ben, post:180, topic:5582”]
I feel you simply do not accept i see the value in running Google Apps larger then the potential privacy issues.
[/quote]Actually, no:

[quote=“HackAR, post:166, topic:5582”]
I say you don’t have the base to build your decision upon.
[/quote]We argue that you underestimate the danger involved in losing you privacy. And when someone ‘answers’ with “I don’t care”, I love to quote Gandalf: “Fools!”.

[quote=“ben, post:180, topic:5582”]
You are arguing as if i wanted to force you to use Google Services.
[/quote]We did not. But it would be a valid point, actually :slight_smile: By setting GoogleApps as default, you’re increasing the number of Google users and lowers the need for Google-free solutions. Thus making the usage of GoogleApps unavoidable in the future (read: force us to use Google Services).

1 Like

@enos, @HackAR, @ben I really enjoy reading your discussion, at least the paragraphs where you stay on topic, factual and polite.
But all of your he-said-she-said and attack-defense/counterattack make it really hard and boring to keep up with reading this discussion. I already skipped a lot of reading because of that and probably missed most of the mentioned ad-hominem atacks, so please: If you feel personally insulted by a post flag it, as @Stefan mentioned before.

I understand that this issue can cause a heated discussion but please keep the parts that are not worth reading for others to yourself.

6 Likes

Doesn’t matter anymore. I’ll just “untrack” this topic and ignore it. I don’t think it will ever go back on topic… :frowning:

1 Like

Yes, i understand that very well. I did not wan’t to flag that as “insulting” because i tried to solve the matter myself. I did not think about how boring that can be to others.
The issue to me has, for very long, not been a position on Google or not Google, but about the style of discussion. I know it makes not so much sense to discuss that in the forum, but i felt this forum to be a friendly and respectful place were people consider other positions and do not simply say, well you have another position on that matter than i, you must be wrong.

This is not how a community is encouring or inclusive. This is not a place were everybody can feel freely share thoughts we such attacks are to be feared. I will not flag these posts retrospectively, but i will try to do next time instead of heating taking part in such heated discussions.

I feel still very sad, that two participants in this discussion, simply refused to change their tone while being reminded several time that two others to not feel good about that and feel insulted. I a community like this, it should not be required to call for a moderator for such simple rules.

2 Likes