Huawei Will No Longer Allow Bootloader Unlocking On Its Android Handsets (androidauthority.com) 253
Chinese smartphone maker Huawei has long made it easier for users to unlock the bootloader on its phones. But that is changing now. Android Authority: Earlier this month a support page, which detailed ways to unlock a bootloader, disappeared without any explanation from the company's websites. In a statement, the company said, "In order to deliver the best user experience and prevent users from experiencing possible issues that could arise from ROM flashing, including system failure, stuttering, worsened battery performance, and risk of data being compromised, Huawei will cease providing bootloader unlock codes for devices launched after May 25, 2018." It added, "For devices launched prior to the aforementioned date, the termination of the bootloader code application service will come into effect 60 days after today's announcement. Moving forward, Huawei remains committed to providing quality services and experiences to its customers. Thank you for your continued support."
Right to unlock (Score:5, Interesting)
I am against the government getting involved in most aspects of our lives, but this is flat out a case where government intervention is needed,
If a phone can't be unlocked so I can install whatever OS I want, then it should not be allowed to be imported into the USA.
This includes the iPhone...
If I pay $3000 for a top of the line laptop, I can install whatever OS I want. It may not work perfectly, but that is on me. If I pay $300 for a bottom basement laptop, I can still install whatever OS I want.
This has GOT to change with phones as well.
They try to give some bullshit about how it is to protect the network, but that is a load of horseshit.
Re:Right to unlock (Score:4, Insightful)
Sorry, but this is in no way, shape or form a 'right'. Governments should not get involved in this. Vote with your wallet. If people want phones whose bootloader they can unlock, they should stop buying Huawei phones immediately.
Re:Right to unlock (Score:5, Insightful)
We've seen it with SIM-locking. Voting with your wallet doesn't work in an oligopoly case. There are very few carriers and they all lock their phones. Fortunately, in many countries, the government stepped in and banned SIM locking. Nothing of value was lost and it is better for the consumer and increased competition.
Re: (Score:2)
In the SIM case, consumers had a common and reasonable belief that they should be able to switch carriers pending the end of their contracts, and their phones were clearly capable of doing so.
In the case of operating systems, for example, or let's take iOS on Apple iPhones, there is not really the expectation of being able to put Android on it.
Phones don't generally switch operating systems, and consumers don't have a reasonable expectation to do so. And, for that
Re:Right to unlock (Score:5, Insightful)
on Apple iPhones, there is not really the expectation of being able to put Android on it.
Why not? If I want to try? Or develop my own OS?
How is it any different whether it's a pocket-sized computer (aka phone) or a full computer (laptop/desktop)?
By your logic, there no expectation to wipe Mac OS and install Linux or BSD on an Apple laptop either.
What about your thermostat? oven? microwave? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why not? If I want to try? Or develop my own OS?
Go for it, you own the device, do whatever you want with it.
How is it any different whether it's a pocket-sized computer (aka phone) or a full computer (laptop/desktop)?
There's not much difference, you can build a smartphone just like you can build a desktop. If you want real freedom over it then do that.
By your logic, there no expectation to wipe Mac OS and install Linux or BSD on an Apple laptop either.
There's no expectation to be able to wipe the OS on an XBox or Wii or PSP either, most people understand that.
Re: (Score:2)
Had your argument held sway in the late '70s and early '80s, there would be no Windows or Linux. We would all still be dinking around on DOS 32.5
Perhaps YOU have no such expectation, but people who know what they're doing do have such an expectation.
Re: (Score:2)
Had your argument held sway in the late '70s and early '80s, there would be no Windows or Linux. We would all still be dinking around on DOS 32.5
What argument? The modern PC was born out of the innovation of companies that provided value through separation of software and hardware rather than the incumbents of the day, now the majority of people prefer a tighter coupling of software and hardware rather than a customized setup but there's no reason you can't go back to building a smartphone or tablet from component pieces just like we do with PCs. Yes you do then need to deal with incompatibilities yourself but we've been doing that with PCs for deca
Re:Right to unlock (Score:5, Insightful)
This is not a tiny, miniscule issue. People have more smart phones than they have cars. This massive fleet of mobile computing devices is going to have security issues that get exploited sooner or later and the handset manufactures aren't going to do jack to close the holes. They want old phones to become trash and force everyone to buy new phones whenever they decide it's time to make some revenue. If this behavior is not monopolistic, anti-competitive, and counter to the public's best interests, then WTF is?
A bootloader locked phone is like a car with the hood welded shut. Most people don't know or care about what's under the hood until it breaks. And once it does, they have a reasonable expectation of being able to take it to the nearest repair guy to get it working again.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Very true. Smart phones certainly aren't necessary to most people.
Re: (Score:2)
A bootloader locked phone is like a car with the hood welded shut.
Right so why would you buy it? There are plenty of cars that don't have the hoods welded shut, go buy one of them.
Re: (Score:2)
Right so why would you buy it? There are plenty of cars that don't have the hoods welded shut, go buy one of them.
That's not for lack of trying. See the Motor Vehicle Owners' Right to Repair Act. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
If it weren't against the law, car hoods would absolutely be sealed so that only the dealerships could repair them. Hopefully we can get that kind of consumer protection for our phones as well.
Re: (Score:2)
That's not for lack of trying. See the Motor Vehicle Owners' Right to Repair Act. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] If it weren't against the law, car hoods would absolutely be sealed so that only the dealerships could repair them. Hopefully we can get that kind of consumer protection for our phones as well.
That wasn't law until only a couple of years ago, I don't remember car hoods being welded shut before that...and they certainly had welders.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Right to unlock (Score:2)
Sure, until there aren't any. See, that's the flaw in the free market that people like you try to get everyone to ignore with simpleminded answers.
It's a flaw with a built-in solution; in a free market you can manufacture and market your own phone which doesn't have these limitations. Granted, that can be difficult and costly, but today it is far easier than it has ever been historically. You don't even need venture capitalists to buy into your idea; you can develop a plan, put it up on kick starter, and start sending out links. If enough people are interested you will get plenty of cash; certainly enough to get through the design, development, and
Re: (Score:2)
Right so why would you buy it? There are plenty of cars that don't have the hoods welded shut, go buy one of them.
Sure, until there aren't any. See, that's the flaw in the free market that people like you try to get everyone to ignore with simpleminded answers.
You're proposing a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. Are there any cars that have their hoods welded shut?
In terms of this relating to phones there are plenty of phones that have unlocked bootloaders, you can even build your own phone with a raspberry pi if you're that paranoid about a dystopian future. There might even be a viable business in that for you.
Re: (Score:2)
But the phone manufacturer is equally free to design it as much as it likes to prevent tampering / loading of foreign or unsigned code.
If you don't like that, by all means choose a different computer / phone. No law exists to say that you have a right to compel the manufacturer to enable you to do what you want.
Re:Right to unlock (Score:5, Interesting)
Given that the heart of android is FOSS, if sufficient information about the hardware is known, then it seems perfectly reasonable for an android port to that hardware to exist, barring some really strange hardware related situations that would make that more trouble than it is worth. (say, the custom ARM CPU is missing some really important instructions or features.)
See also-- AOSP, and derivatives, like LineageOS.
The real reason is that the hardware makers dont want people poking about with unfettered OS level control over their chips and radios, because a lot of those are fully software controlled, and with a modified binary blob, features that they charge extra for can be turned on easily.
They cuddle up to the FCC, and complain that these experimenters and hackers (oh my!) are theoretically able to violate the transmit power restrictions, frequency band restrictions, and other restrictions put in place to comply with FCC regulations, and so the end user needs to be prevented from having access to that level of control over the hardware at all costs.
In reality, it is simply so the handset maker can market their new 5G! enabled handset. (when the changes that enable that communication mode are mostly just software, and the older handset can often communicate at that rate just fine with the right blob being pushed into it.)
Re: (Score:2)
+1 Insightful - it's at least an ideology, and perhaps even a religion.
In the case of operating systems, for example, or let's take iOS on Apple iPhones, there is not really the expectation of being able to put Android on it.
You need to stop being enslaved by Corporate ideology, and stop arguing against your best interest.
Re: (Score:2)
We've seen it with SIM-locking. Voting with your wallet doesn't work in an oligopoly case. There are very few carriers and they all lock their phones.
No it isn't like SIM locking for exactly the reason you point out: there are very few carriers, but in the case of smartphones there are a vast array of manufacturers, it isn't an oligopoly, in fact you can even build your own phone [wired.co.uk].
Re: Right to unlock (Score:5, Insightful)
There is nothing magical about their OS build either, other than that it is bundled with crap-ware and may never get a security update. Also, if having one company control your data service, hardware AND software isn't anti-competitive, I don't know what is. Monopolies can be vertical as well as horizontal.
Re: Right to unlock (Score:5, Insightful)
This. Huawei only guarantees two years of updates, so if you aren't planning to replace your phone at least every two years, you'll end up on an out-of-date, security-compromised OS with no way to upgrade. If you can unlock your bootloader, you have the option of installing LineageOS and getting several more years out of the device.
Bootloader locking serves an important purpose, but it should not be legal to deny consumers the ability to unlock their own devices. And that goes for Apple, too. If bootloader unlocking were required by law, no doubt the Android port to iPhones would get updated, not to mention that you'd have people doing things similar to XPostFacto/MacPostFactor, getting newer versions of iOS to run on older hardware.
Right now, locked bootloaders are turning technology into disposable junk, destroying the resale market, and creating an e-waste nightmare. That alone should be ample reason for the government to get involved.
regulation of carriers is the normal order (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd like to add that networks are built on the common property of wireless airspace. We have granted the government the authority to license the access to the airspace, which the carriers must pay to use. The carriers benefit from something that belongs to the people, and they can continue as long as they operate in a way mutually beneficial way. But careful oversight and regulation of a business using a common property is important to insure that their behavior remains in the public's interests.
Re: (Score:2)
Certainly the current system does not have to remain if enough of us wish to change it. That process should be well understood by everyone. But I don't really have the energy to explain to another slashdotter the ideas of representative democracy and the social contract. Maybe you can audit some classes at at JC?
Re: Right to unlock (Score:4, Insightful)
No. Most bricking comes from trying to get around the lockout in the first place. Remove the lockout and the bricking won't happen.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Right to unlock (Score:2)
This. The manufacturer of the phone I currently have provides bootloader unlocking for one of their US models, but not for any of the half dozen other models they manufacture. So the only way for me to unlock it was to use a shitty hack to install an unlocked US bootloader. The forums are full of people who screwed it up and got a brick, but there's not a peep from anyone bricking the phone which can be officially unlocked.
Re: Right to unlock (Score:5, Insightful)
Locking the os prevents morons from bricking their device and demanding a new one.
It also prevents smart people deleting the crapware, installing an adblocker and firewall.
Re: (Score:2)
Proper design and easy access to factory images prevents users from bricking their phones. Bricking happens because users are forced to use hacks to get around locked boot loaders.
A properly designed phone won't brick even if you deliberately flash random data over the OS. It just won't be usable until you re-flash a valid os image over the random data.
Re: (Score:2)
They lock if you buy the phone through them. Do what I did and pay more for an unlocked phone. You hear that? Stop being cheap and pay MORE for an unlocked phone which puts it closer to the MSRP.
Idiot much? We're talking about the bootloader not carrier lock. But hey, this is /., we don't RTFA.
Re: (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Right to unlock (Score:5, Insightful)
Sorry, but this is in no way, shape or form a 'right'.
It is "right to repair". I can repair or replace OS with a third-party offering and is not locked-in to OEM provided options.
What about the software on your microwave? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Really, no security at all on that pacemaker? (Score:2)
Re:Right to unlock (Score:5, Interesting)
The flying monkey fuck they shouldn't. Enforcing laws of ownership is a primary function of government. When you buy a product, it is yours to do as you please. This is a basic tenant of common law dating back hundreds of years. That companies think that they still control the products they sell you is the slipperiest of slopes that needs government intervention before it spreads and becomes out of hand as the 90% sit like frogs in a pot and watch.
Another primary function of government is to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. As it stands, then 10% have to accept what the 90% will tolerate. As you will hear often, "most customers don't care about unlocking the boot loader", therefore, your private property rights will go away because the 90% don't care, and the market clout of the 10% is simply not enough to make a meaningful difference to manufacturers.
If you are truly advocating that we only be allowed what the masses will accept, then you're advocating for a whole bag of hurt, not to mention a society which caters only to the whims of the masses, the average IQ of which is now 98.
It's why people coming back from Asia are startled by how far behind we are technologically. Americans will accept less. It doesn't bode well for our future.
Relying on the people to enforce your rights via market forces has proven to be a colossal failure as most people, altogether now, "don't care".
Holding the most technically literate people in a nation slaves to what the masses will accept is very much not a good thing, for reasons which I hope are obvious.
Re:Right to unlock (Score:4, Insightful)
Governments should not get involved in this.
You owe many of the comforts of your technology precisely because of government involvement. Everything from being able to repair your car, to not voiding your warranty when looking in the case, it is all thanks to the many laws on the books that protect you.
Vote with your wallet
This works only in a free market. Very few of those exist.
Re:Right to unlock (Score:5, Funny)
So, it's Huawei or the highway, eh?
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, but this is in no way, shape or form a 'right'. Governments should not get involved in this. Vote with your wallet. If people want phones whose bootloader they can unlock, they should stop buying Huawei phones immediately.
I'm sure their drop in sales by 0.01% will persuade them to capitulate.
Re: (Score:2)
The whole point of them providing unlocked bootloaders was to appeal to the USA modding scene, on the back of their Nexus device.
But with Huawei struggling to conquer the American market, or perhaps in collusion with US carriers, they remove the 'feature'.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, but this is in no way, shape or form a 'right'. Governments should not get involved in this.
Seems to me that it IS a right, similar to and related to 'right to repair'. In what fundamental way is after-market software different from the after-market hardware used to repair phones? And how is locking the software down to one vendor's offering different from locking the hardware against third-party replacement services and parts?
Sorry, but this is in no way, shape or form a 'right'... Vote with your wallet. If people want phones whose bootloader they can unlock, they should stop buying Huawei phones immediately.
And what happens when ALL vendors refuse to allow bootloader unlocking? In that scenario "vote with your wallet" means not owning a phone, period.
Governments should not get involved in this.
Too late - governments are
Re: (Score:2)
Would the "right to bear arms" be a right if anyone who saw you armed was allowed to shoot you? Would it matter if the NRA encouraged all shop owners to shoot gun buyers?
That you think the free market should drive people to shops that don't kill them doesn't mean it's OK in the first place.
Anything that infringes on my right of first sale should have a valid reason behind it. Hopefully, one I agree with.
Re:Right to unlock (Score:5, Interesting)
If I pay $3000 for a top of the line laptop, I can install whatever OS I want.
Only for the present, but that too shall change. The Political-Industrial Complex will push to have ALL devices locked into officially-sanctioned bootloaders and OS's soon. Lost profits and lost opportunities to snoop due to a non-homogeneous software/OS/encryption/security environment making spying and mass data-collection difficult will not be tolerated.
It's coming unless there is serious pushback.
Strat
Re: (Score:3)
We've been hearing that the sky is falling for decades now and yet even today major vendors offer various OS options (including Linux) on their computers and even Microsoft provide a mechanism for disabling SecureBoot on their own devices so you can install other operating systems on them, people have even installed macOS on the Surface Book! The transition from PowerPC to Intel meant you could install Windows on a Mac and even with the introduction of Chromebooks you can run other Linux distributions as a
Who said this isn't a government intervention? (Score:4, Insightful)
It certainly wouldn't be the first time a government used a "national security" blanket excuse to covertly force something down a company's gullet.
Re: (Score:3)
Aaah but can you? Many devices make you jump through all sorts of hoops to do just that. The top of the line Chromebooks made you jump through hoops, the bottom of the line Surface RT had secure boot locked down completely
You're going to see it change in the wrong way you expect before you see it change in the right way.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Can you offer a reason this must be the case, other than "because"?
Re: (Score:3)
Good riddance, Huawei. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Did you ever see the Steve Jobs talk where a guy in the audience starts to trash him about the Mac not supporting x,y,z (I don't recall exact technology in question)?
For that one person, this might be the bi
Re: (Score:2)
but this is flat out a case where government intervention is needed,
You have the right not to buy it. I'd prefer not creating imaginary rights.
There are phones that are positioned as being open source and mod friendly. They aren't the cheapest phones, but they aren't unreasonably expensive. Samsung Z2, Librem 5 (I think it hasn't shipped yet, but it is close), and a few older ones as well.
For most people the hardware and OS are not separate components that can be slotted in and out to suit the user's preferences, but instead is a monolithic user experience. That's really wh
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
r_naked demanded:
If a phone can't be unlocked so I can install whatever OS I want, then it should not be allowed to be imported into the USA.
They try to give some bullshit about how it is to protect the network, but that is a load of horseshit.
It is, indeed, a load of horseshit.
What's important to grasp here is that it is, in all likelihood, the Chinese government that has ordered Huawei to lock their bootloaders, in order to keep end users from deleting the same Chinese government spyware that led to ZTE being barred from exporting their phones to the USA (and which the idiot has defied his own intelligence agencies to announce that he's going to help ZTE get export licenses to resume).
If you buy a new Huawei phone from here on
Re: (Score:2)
Hahahahahahaha. I shot some water out of my nose after reading this. You want the government to get involved because you can't install the software you want on your toy? Are you being serious?
Re: (Score:2)
If a phone can't be unlocked so I can install whatever OS I want, then it should not be allowed to be imported into the USA.
So is that just for phones or for any type of computer? At least they are making it very clear so people can make an informed decision, the resolution to this problem is to simply vote with your wallet and support the companies that produce the products you want.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Use your brain.
Re: (Score:2)
The Librarian has already ordered long ago that phones must be unlockable.
Re: (Score:2)
PostmarketOS.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You have no idea indeed. That CPU is supported does not mean that you can run the OS on it because in embedded device world all the chipsets and all are variety of different incompatible ones. "provided proper driver support" is real hard to come by. So no, theoretically ARM OS won't run on any ARM devices. You might have different meaning to "theoretically" from others.
Re: (Score:2)
provided proper driver support
That's the problem.
It's not just driver support either, it's board support. The same components can be put together in different ways, requiring different configuration of the drivers for different devices.
There's no standard "plug and play" system to auto-detect all the connected hardware for these systems either, you end up needing a custom device tree for every variation of every device, which specified which drivers to load, what memory addresses are required to access them, which GPIO pins control them
Re: (Score:2)
Buy a phone that you can unlock instead?
How will that remain possible as other major phone manufacturers targeting major western markets follow the example of Huawei?
Re: (Score:3)
Buy a phone that you can unlock instead?
How will that remain possible as other major phone manufacturers targeting major western markets follow the example of Huawei?
How will that not remain possible as people vote with their wallets and support manufacturers that do allow unlocking of devices? If you're that worried about it then you should start a campaign to educate people about it and make sure they voice their opinions on why they are making the choices they are.
Re: (Score:2)
How will that not remain possible as people vote with their wallets and support manufacturers that do allow unlocking of devices?
For the same reason people can't buy netbooks that ship with X11/Linux in stores. Instead, you end up with Chromebooks that, once put in developer mode, destroy the file system if someone turns one on and looks at it funny [slashdot.org].
If you're that worried about it then you should start a campaign to educate people about it and make sure they voice their opinions on why they are making the choices they are.
Do you have any tips for teaching people to care?
Re: (Score:2)
For the same reason people can't buy netbooks that ship with X11/Linux in stores.
Because nobody wants them? (or at least not enough people to make it worthwhile to produce, ship and stock them).
Do you have any tips for teaching people to care?
Present an appealing case. If you can't do that then perhaps you need to re-think your position.
Re: (Score:2)
For the same reason people can't buy netbooks that ship with X11/Linux in stores.
Because nobody wants them?
I guess that makes me a nobody, as I used a 10" Dell Inspiron mini 1012 laptop for about 7 years in order to work on programming projects while riding the bus in a city whose buses do not provide free Wi-Fi to riders.
As for your other point: If there were "not enough people to make it worthwhile to produce, ship and stock" compact X11/Linux laptops, what makes you think there are "enough people to make it worthwhile to produce, ship and stock" pocket computers capable of running a user-provided operating sy
Re: (Score:2)
I guess that makes me a nobody, as I used a 10" Dell Inspiron mini 1012 laptop for about 7 years in order to work on programming projects while riding the bus in a city whose buses do not provide free Wi-Fi to riders.
Relatively speaking, yes. This experiment has been tried and proved it was not viable.
As for your other point: If there were "not enough people to make it worthwhile to produce, ship and stock" compact X11/Linux laptops, what makes you think there are "enough people to make it worthwhile to produce, ship and stock" pocket computers capable of running a user-provided operating system?
I don't if it meant a producing, shipping and stocking a different device, but if it means simply allowing a bootloader unlock on existing devices then I think that's viable.
Re: (Score:2)
I bought two Huaweis so far, basically to give away. Considered picking up one for me as a low end replacement for my aging Nexus, but that thought is well and truly gone, completely, forever. Probably Motorola next, since I am nothing but impressed with the last one and they seem to agree that unlocking is a thing. [custhelp.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I had one (the mate 9.) It really was my favorite phone.
It is difficult to root and mod but it was the first phone that I didn't feel the need to mod and root (install blocka instead.)
Plus android has made root so limiting nowadays as they detect for it and offer publishers the tools to detect if the phone is rooted or modified. I know there are workarounds like magisk but it is always a back and forth game.
I wish the Ubuntu or firefox phone had taken off and been successful.
DDT ? (Score:2)
If you're that worried about it then you should start a campaign to educate people about it
Was DDT banned due to lots of people voicing their opinions on it ? Or was it banned undemocratically, with a mandate from powers that be ?
About technical matters, where the populace is not expected to understand the implications of their choice, how are decisions taken in your world ?
Re: Right to unlock (Score:2)
Then we will just have to band together and design, manufacture, and market a phone geared towards geeks. The major brands already have all kinds of shortcomings which most of us can agree on; there's a market there just waiting to be filled.
This is excellent snark. (Score:2)
Just like if there was a market for a brick-sized phone with 2 weeks of battery life using replaceable batteries, 3 headphone jacks, no FaceID or fingerprint sensor, 4 different kinds of memory slots, and full ci
The most mediocre smartphone brand. (Score:3)
Huawei has been positioning itself as a higher quality smartphone brand than the rest of the Chinese competition, but fails at it entirely. It is, however, worse value than all other Chinese brands.
I don't care one way or the other as I have standardized our family on the same model Samsung Galaxy phones (so we can swap batteries and other accessories among us), but from time to time I look into the Chinese brands like OnePlus, Alcatel/TCL, Oppo, Lenovo (though this is partly a Taiwanese brand from a technological POV). Huawei makes just OK phones which have an incredibly uninspiring value.
I guess they have even more delusions of greatness now, as they think they should stop people from using their phones as they like (like Apple).
Re: (Score:2)
Nope (Score:5, Insightful)
"Thank you for your continued support."
There is no support. I don't have much influence in the phone world, but all that I have will now be directed at convincing people away from you.
Re: (Score:2)
all that I have will now be directed at convincing people away from you
Away from Huawei, and towards...? Who are the smart phone manufacturers that let you boot your own OS?
Re:Nope (Score:4, Informative)
all that I have will now be directed at convincing people away from you
Away from Huawei, and towards...? Who are the smart phone manufacturers that let you boot your own OS?
Google, Motorola, HTC, Samsung, LG (and they're just the brands I've personally owned and installed Cyanogenmod/LineageOS on.)
Sorry? What did they say? (Score:5, Insightful)
It kinda sounded like "You don't want to buy our stuff. You want to buy stuff from someone who isn't going to place limits on you doing what you want with your own device."
Re: (Score:2)
Kinda sounds like "You want to buy the shiniest newest device every year after throwing away your old one and you don't care about bootloaders. If you do, you're in the minority that won't affect sales."
So which is it? (Score:2)
This sort of self contradictory reporting bugs me a lot more than it probably should....
If it's *my* phone ... (Score:2)
"In order to deliver the best user experience and prevent users from experiencing possible issues that could arise from ROM flashing, including system failure, stuttering, worsened battery performance, and risk of data being compromised, ...
OK, now a good reason to avoid Huawei (Score:5, Insightful)
I wasn't impressed when the government told me to avoid them, but now Huawei itself is telling me to avoid them.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh no, they lost a customer they never had.
Comment removed (Score:3)
What places allow unlockable bootloaders now? (Score:2)
It seems like finding something with an unlockable bootloader is virtually impossible these days.
What companies actually allow it still? HTC is the only one I know.
Re: (Score:2)
Just check this site. Anything that allows lineageos installed should be unlockable and acceptable to buy.
https://download.lineageos.org... [lineageos.org]
The best manufacturers in this regards are LG, Motorola and Samsung.
That's the same claim AT&T made (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Translation: Stop Bypassing Chinese Spying! (Score:2)
We sorry, please use us!
Re:Professor Stefan Halper (Score:4, Insightful)
And 9-11 was a libtard job, duh! ae911truth org
I won't be sad when the current round of political stupidity ends.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And 9-11 was a libtard job, duh! ae911truth org
I won't be sad when the current round of political stupidity ends.
The heat death of the universe [wikipedia.org] is a long time to wait.
Re: (Score:2)
You know Librem 5 doesn't actually exist now eh?
You can pre-order a development kit....
By the time it gets produced (if it ever does) it's going to be a low to mid range phone performance wise, with an iMX8m cpu. They should have stuck with the iMX8.
It's a basic 1.5GHz quad core A53 CPU, like mid range phones from 3 years ago - the Moto G from 2015 has a quad core 1.4GHz A53. The iMX8 on the other hand has another 2 A72 cores.
It'll probably have shit battery life too, as the iMX series aren't designed for p
Re: (Score:2)
It's already obsolete in terms of hardware capability and it's still in development with no end-date in sight.
It's a nice concept though.
Re: Fandroids are fags (Score:2)
didn't know apple offered a 8 core 5ghz option. might give it a try, where can i buy?