> Aside from root access, we were not forced to make any compromises in terms of features or functionality
from the link posted in the comments here. Can someone with more knowledge of the Android ecosystem explain this? I guess the phone cannot come with root access out of the box, but since Google's own devices come with unlocked bootloaders, why would it care about that?
I guess the rule is just no root without the user asking for it in some way? The Nexus 5 is unlocked, but it's not root by default. I definitely agree with that rule, I don't think it should be difficult but it definitely shouldn't be default. I'm a big fan of the sudo approach in some Linux distros.
It's better to have root access disabled by default on phones sold to the general public since they are more likely to just click the "Allow root access" button because they don't understand the security implications of allowing root access.
Can somebody identify just exactly what the "security implications of allowing root access" are? Are we referring to unrestricted escalation with sudo by an unprivileged user/app?
CyanogenMod has never allowed sudo without confirming it with a UI, or only allowed it for a few days back when it launched.
I think you are conflating issues, the Nexus 5 is only unlocked in the sense of being able to take it to any carrier. The bootloader is shipped locked but is easily unlockable by the user.
For phone security, you actually don't want root enabled by default, especially if it is being sold to noobs. Even for pro users, it is best to be able to do most of what you need to do on the phone without requiring root privileges. Although ofcourse if it is really your phone, you should have the ability to root it, which you will still be able to do provided you have an unlocked bootloader, or even just if can run an root program from over usb. It is much more important to have an unlocked bootloader than just having root access pre-installed.
Perhaps it should say "unlockable" bootloaders, not unlocked. A locked but unlockable bootloader is what every phone should ship with - unlocking the bootloader wipes the system back to factory state. This way, it can't be used to compromise user data.
An unlocked bootloader is better than a rooted device. If you have root but not an unlocked bootloader, you are unable to get full custom ROMs (meaning kernel and such, not just userspace), full control of your device, etc...
But with an unlocked bootloader, you just flash your way to root. Or to a full custom ROM. Or to whatever the hell you want.
From my understanding, it's really not. An unlocked bootloader means that with physical access you can install software on the phone without wiping it first. With root you have full (controlled) access to the file system. You can actually have a locked, rooted phone, but it means that if you want to change something low-level like your ROM, you may need to wipe the phone to install it.
Well, yes, an unlocked/unlockable bootloader is not the same as a rooted phone, that's correct. But the former often leads to the latter: for example, the process of rooting a Nexus phone involves flashing a new recovery system, which takes advantage of the unlocked bootloader.
If you don't have an unlocked bootloader, you have to resort to exploits and other flaws in the system. Releasing a phone with an unlockable bootloader is opening a door to rooting and many "unauthorized" modifications.
That's what I mean they're the same in practical terms.
Oppo has made some nifty, extremely useful, very high quality, just-on-the-edge of legit (read: you can disable region coding easily) DVD players for years. I really like their stuff, and thus would have very high expectations for this phone. It's really nice to see their name on it.
It fits in mine... but I also wear 36x38 jeans since I'm 6'9", so I'm not a typical use case. My current phone, a Note 3, fits with a lot of room to spare so I suppose it depends on the size of your jeans.
I can also use these phones one handed whereas I don't see most people doing that.
The CTS tests is the suite that ensures that all versions of Android at the same API level behave the same as far as a developer is concerned. It verifies that the public APIs do what they are documented to do.
Cyanogen Inc.'s business model is to license an improved version of Android to phone manufactures who want something better than what their competitors have; large manufactures do a bunch of customizations themselves (MotoBlur, TouchWiz, HTC Sense), but smaller manufactures are often left with "what you get from Android". However, to get the Play Store, as well as other first-part Google apps, a device has to pass Google's strict compliance tests. This is thereby Cyanogen's first customer, and a demonstration that their model is not fundamentally flawed (Google didn't deny the phone during certification testing did to some weird changes CyanogenMod has accumulated over the years, and a manufacturer wanted their product enough to get all the way through that process). If you were trying to value the company, I'd say a lot of the risks of their business model just got removed: they should be worth a ton more today than they were yesterday.
> However, to get the Play Store, as well as other first-part Google apps, a device has to pass Google's strict compliance tests.
If you're talking about officially, when the device is shipped, then this is true. However, one of the first steps after installing a custom rom is to flash a Google Apps package for your device (which includes Google Play). People still install Google's applications without the device passing any test.
I would quibble with even that, as those "Google Apps packages" are often themselves from sketchy sources... but even so, being some unofficial process done by a user is not really relevant from the perspective of a shipping device purchased through a carrier...
I have a CyanogenMod-enabled phone and haven't installed Google's apps on it. I got some open-source stuff and that's it. It's a two-year old Galaxy S (first gen) and battery now lasts for 8 days.
I don't know what's normal to you. It's a backup phone, using a PrePay plan on another network (prepays are pretty cheap in my country) and indeed I'm making less calls with it than with my primary. I'm also keeping it off the data-network, unless I need to connect.
So basically I use it as a dumb phone and it's a pretty good dumb phone.
Not having (or using) LTE helps quite a bit, since it's still fairly new technology with a lot of optimization still needed. Also the fact the Galaxy S has a 4" screen. Galaxy S lives on most of all from being nearly identical to the Nexus S, so it can borrow a lot from it.
Yes, but Google also turns a blind eye to that, and by and large CM and other custom ROMs stay compatible anyway. Google could, however, start cracking down if custom ROMs started causing problems.
> However, to get the Play Store, as well as other first-part Google apps, a device has to pass Google's strict compliance tests.
The thing I wondered about when I saw this is whether there will now be a legitimate path for getting Google Play on Cyanogen-modded devices now. I kind of get the feeling not, based on what you're saying.
No. Verizon only allows pre-approved devices to appear on their network, regardless of whether you are prepaid or postpaid. They do this by checking the IMEI identifier of the device. If it's not one of theirs, it won't work.
Their network is also incompatible with the radio in this device.
Unless something has changed, the article you linked to is basically the end of the story. Despite promises, Verizon has not moved to permit the Nexus 7 on their network, and there is no easy/useful enforcement mechanism to make them do so. The provisions are effectively toothless.
If you read forum reports, it seems people are activating it by using IMEI numbers from other tablets and whatnot, but Verizon is not making it easy, or (IMO) living up to their contractual obligations.
TMobile has some really good plans. They are trying a lot of new things. An unlimited plan from them with a Nexus 5 is what I use and I'm very happy with it.
Thanks for this - that sucks hard, I'm sorely tempted to switch off of Verizon. The only thing that keeps me on there is that I'm on a $40/month legacy family plan that still has unlimited data.
from the link posted in the comments here. Can someone with more knowledge of the Android ecosystem explain this? I guess the phone cannot come with root access out of the box, but since Google's own devices come with unlocked bootloaders, why would it care about that?