While we're on the topic of rooting, only Google, Sony, Xiaomi, Asus, Motorola, OnePlus, Samsung (Exynos only, breaks eFUSE) are bootloader unlockable.
Of the above, only Google has what I would consider "proper" software support.
At this point, I refuse to buy anything that I can't bootloader unlock and does not have proper software support because of planned obsolescence stemming from a lack of software updates.
Blacklisted for not being able to bootloader unlock: Huawei, Vivo, Samsung (Qualcomm), Nokia, Pixel (Verizon US variant).
"proper software support" comes when the you get blobs and sources. Until now, only Google does it, the other rather ignore or refuse to release something
Razer phone has LineageOS official support too, as does Essential and Fairphone. In general, there are lots of smaller OEM vendors that may or may not support bootloader unlock, so YMMV there.
They're fine if you don't mind an outdated chipset and paying multiple times the cost in hardware value. SD835 was released in 2016 and the 10nm samsung process is nowhere as efficient as equivalent TSMC arch nor current chips (say, SD870 or even the exynos latest gen chips)
I'll grant that it's expensive and on an old chip, but I don't think you can compare "multiple times the cost in hardware value" if nobody else has the hardware that is their headline feature (hardware keyboard).
Never heard of the brand, the phone looks pretty unique from a quick look at their website. But using parentheses in your brand name is a bit of a head-scratcher.
The hardware BOM should only cost ~200usd. The rest is software sorry/markup for being a small company with limited volume. Not great value and a horizontal keyboard isn't my thing personally but I'm glad they're competing!
Unlocking my OnePlus involved applying on their website for a key and waiting a week, which I found to be a serious inconvenience to using my new phone as I wanted to.
I'd consider that disqualifying from being "proper" unlocking, since what would I have done if they just said no to my application?
I'm no stranger to OnePlus devices. I've had a OP5 and 6T.
They have repeatedly released ROMs full of bugs, crashes, and required factory resets on major version upgrades. Their update lag has increased since being combined with Oppo/ColorOS, while their value has decreased/cost has increased.
They've peaked in terms of hackability and software support.
Even if we disregarded their (worse than google but better than say, Xiaomi/moto) software support, which is more important than the hardware itself, OnePlus hardware is frequently worse (mic, speakers). The only win you get here is a latest gen SoC for pricing that is barely (~10%) cheaper than the Samsung counterpart with a worse build quality.
OnePlus' proprietary warp charge isn't doing then any favors either. Non-standardized charging is frequently a pain point for me when most other devices have moved onto USB-PD.
I've had a 7T since they came out. I've never had it crash or do anything super odd. The one OS complaint I've had since day one is the auto-dimming being way too agressive and never "learning" what I want. Annoying for sure, not sure its a bug though.
As to charging, think they were one of the first (maybe the first) with the high speed charging. But I can charge it from any old charger, just not as fast.
Iirc sony only allows to unlock bootloader on devices listed as part of "open devices" program, but there is no relocking supported unfortunately. I would buy another device from them myself otherwise.
I'd kill for a Fairphone reseller in NA. I bought one from eBay with markup (running my FP4 in Canada and have roamed in the US with it). It's a great phone that needs more NA exposure.
As much as I'd like them to succeed their phones were always expensive with a mediocre chipset. They always took a long time to release updates (but at least they did!)
I have been using a Fairphone 3 in NA since it was released. As long as the device supports the same frequencies used by your American cell carrier, it will work well. Any package forwarding service may be used to receive a Fairphone in NA.
Using a mainline Linux kernel is also important, otherwise third-party Android forks you could install won't be easily updatable to newer Linux versions.
I still don't understand, and maybe this has changed since a few years ago, but how you can essentially brick a phone by re-locking the bootloader with a corrupt OS since unlocking the bootloader requires you to have access to it. I thought back when I did this that there would be a boot sequence I could put the phone into but that wasn't the case. Had to ship it in for service.
I have zero background/knowledge about this topic, so forgive me if it's a stupid question; but the article is very confusing to me.
In the terminology section, it says
initramfs: a section in Android’s boot image that the Linux kernel will use as rootfs
And
SAR: System-as-root. That is, the device uses system as rootdir instead of rootfs
In Boot Methods section, it says something like
The kernel uses initramfs as rootdir ..
So far, it has
* initramfs as rootfs
* system as rootdir (or "rootfs as rootdir" if no SAR)
* initramfs as rootdir
I get that the whole point of this article is about "A as B" for some booting shenanigans, but this mapping relationship doesn't make sense to me. rootfs somehow appears in both ends.
Also, for method A and C, it says "uses initramfs as rootdir" but the table lists "rootfs" instead of initramfs?
The terminology is confusing and the article isn't doing a good job of explaining it.
"Rootfs" is an im-memory virtual filesystem used to hold the root. The bootloader will read the initramfs into ram before executing the kernel, then the kernel will use that in memory data to construct the rootfs filesystem. For non root partitions you would use a loopback device or tmpfs.
Since system is a normal partition, the kernel can use the normal disk/filesystem drivers as a root device.
36 comments
[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 108 ms ] threadOf the above, only Google has what I would consider "proper" software support.
At this point, I refuse to buy anything that I can't bootloader unlock and does not have proper software support because of planned obsolescence stemming from a lack of software updates.
Blacklisted for not being able to bootloader unlock: Huawei, Vivo, Samsung (Qualcomm), Nokia, Pixel (Verizon US variant).
Also, it looks like a great phone.
Looking at specs: SD662 6/128 829USD
The hardware BOM should only cost ~200usd. The rest is software sorry/markup for being a small company with limited volume. Not great value and a horizontal keyboard isn't my thing personally but I'm glad they're competing!
Depends on what your values are, I guess.
They have repeatedly released ROMs full of bugs, crashes, and required factory resets on major version upgrades. Their update lag has increased since being combined with Oppo/ColorOS, while their value has decreased/cost has increased.
They've peaked in terms of hackability and software support.
Even if we disregarded their (worse than google but better than say, Xiaomi/moto) software support, which is more important than the hardware itself, OnePlus hardware is frequently worse (mic, speakers). The only win you get here is a latest gen SoC for pricing that is barely (~10%) cheaper than the Samsung counterpart with a worse build quality.
OnePlus' proprietary warp charge isn't doing then any favors either. Non-standardized charging is frequently a pain point for me when most other devices have moved onto USB-PD.
As to charging, think they were one of the first (maybe the first) with the high speed charging. But I can charge it from any old charger, just not as fast.
The modem lacks the firmware for VoLTE which is now becoming required in the US as the 3G towers are being retired.
It's being retired for a pine phone. So far postmarketos is delightful, VoLTE works, and we're about to see if waydroid is going to play ball.
In the terminology section, it says
And In Boot Methods section, it says something like So far, it has* initramfs as rootfs
* system as rootdir (or "rootfs as rootdir" if no SAR)
* initramfs as rootdir
I get that the whole point of this article is about "A as B" for some booting shenanigans, but this mapping relationship doesn't make sense to me. rootfs somehow appears in both ends.
Also, for method A and C, it says "uses initramfs as rootdir" but the table lists "rootfs" instead of initramfs?
"Rootfs" is an im-memory virtual filesystem used to hold the root. The bootloader will read the initramfs into ram before executing the kernel, then the kernel will use that in memory data to construct the rootfs filesystem. For non root partitions you would use a loopback device or tmpfs.
Since system is a normal partition, the kernel can use the normal disk/filesystem drivers as a root device.