Ubuntu Touch, Sailfish OS, Tizen, Mobian, etc.
I’m sure what I’m about to say has already been echoed by others, but there are a few factors working against them. This is from a US/Canada perspective. Other countries may have more or fewer barriers.
- Mobile hardware - Mobile hardware has higher security. Some of this is by design for the user, since mobile devices are more likely to fall into wrong hands than e.g. a desktop. Some of it is corps preventing users from using their hardware in ways they don’t want you to, though. The level of locked down mobile hardware has only increased over time.
- Carriers - This one is particular to North America, I think. Carriers here have a long history of meddling in phone hardware - from bloatware to SIM locks and everything in between. One of the things they do since LTE is require device makers to pay them to get certified to make calls on their network. Linux capable devices are too niche to be able to afford this. This is why Fairphone, for example, even with its Android-based OS, only works on one carrier here.
Those are the main two barriers here. Things like apps can have workarounds for those that would be interested in early adoption of Linux phones. But there’s no way around the combination of carrier certification costs and limited options of only very locked down hardware.
Because they don’t work as phones, at least not for practical use
No one has cracked it yet, some projects seem to be getting close, but the radio in a phone is a very complicated and poorly documented black box
A lot of technical answers, but consider a social driver: Linux users and developers are a lot more likely to prefer to do their computing on a “real” computer with a keyboard and large screen. Therefore, Linux as a desktop/laptop OS will always be significantly ahead of mobile offerings.
Hardware is too locked down. Open source chip platforms are only starting to be developed now after decades of computing. It’s all been running off the same architectures from monopolists. Linux phone devs like PostmarketOS work in such a tiny box that AOSP guys get much further. That is what I have gathered learning about it past few years anyways.
For me, it’s lack of Linux smartphones and also not selling in more popular shops. If I wasn’t curious about Linux and decided to watch videos online about it, I wouldn’t have known a Linux Smartphone exist and also, a smartphone is already a oversaturated market where it’s just another iPhone or some sort of variation of a Android phone.
It’s banking:
https://slrpnk.net/post/28294479
The army of corporate boot lickers in the mobile phone context is largely composed of people who think banking on a smartphone is wise, despite the attack surface and despite the bank being empowered to monitor their customers more closely. Banking apps are the most significant culprit for gluing people to Android.
We may never see the day when more than 5% of the population realises the importance of FOSS enough to shake free of their addiction to convenience.
You know some of us don’t have an option, right?
Every bank in México forces their app to use the 2FA, needed to transfer money and to pay the credit cards.Some random told me I was limiting myself by only using mexican banks… Never told me what alternative I have when I live here, so I guess these kind of comments are only to feel superior over those of us who have to deal with it.
This is the correct answer. Specifically NFC contactless. If there was a watch that could do that without needing a phone, I would definitely put in the effort to get a Linux phone.
No apps => Nobody buys => No users => Nobody makes apps
I’d seriously consider if I at least got the bare necessities, like my bank.
I honestly don’t get why everyone is so hung up on banking apps. I run Graphene, and my bank’s app actually does work, but I wouldn’t really have a problem if it didn’t. They have a website that is pretty usable, and I don’t need an app to use my payment cards.
In my country we have an phone number based instant money transfer protocol called Bizum, everyone uses it. When you go out eating, one pays with your phone via NFC then everyone bizums the payer with their part. It’s something I use almost every time I go out.
Bizum is a protocol that’s implemented in the app of the banks themselves, so I kinda do need the app, I’m not going to go into the phone browser to go into the app web to do a transfer of 14.5€ that will then shocker ask me to verify the transfer via the app. Even if the verification was a SMS nonce code that would be incredibly annoying compared to what we already have.
So yeah, people are hung up on banking apps because they kinda do need them with them.
Because some banks now require you to authenticate every payment (eg. online payments using your debit card) and every new recipient for bank transfers, using their phone app. The apps rely on the chain of trust that Google and Apple provide with their TPM or “secure enclave” chips to cryptographically authenticate that it is indeed the same device that the bank previously authorized.
Online banking via the website of these banks will still require at least one tap on the phone app to authorize any transfers that you make on the website.
Linux phones (and custom Android ROMs) don’t benefit from this same chain of trust, and so even if they have the secure chip in the hardware, the banking apps don’t have a convenient API to query it, so the banking apps just don’t work.
Banking fraud causes a serious amount of money lost to criminals each year so it’s not surprising that the banks want better ways of determining if a request is really coming from their customer('s device) and not a criminal who phished their online banking password.
This situation won’t change unless either Linux phones gain in popularity enough that the banks decide to port their apps to the platform or a law is passed saying that banks must support more than just Google and Apple (ie. custom roms etc.) at which point the work will be done to use the hardware attestation available in the phone on other software platforms.
I know several banks who’s apps don’t need Google Attestation. I would also not use a bank that forces an app as the main point of contact as my main one. A lot of banks around here offer a tan-device as an alternative. There’s also a lot of transport associations that offer nationally valid chip-cards.
I do see why it’s a problem, but I also don’t think that one should let such services dictate their choice of mobile device. I do know that I come from a privileged position, living in a country where I have options.
if you’re aware there are countries where the options you’re talking about dont exist, maybe you also get why some people are so hung up on these banking apps?
The main use of the apps is 2fa. There are other things that are also becoming harder without apps, like public transport.
The apps might even work for now, but then I’d rely on Google not pushing some bullshit that breaks it.
My bank has “removed” the mobile version of the banking website. It’s technically still there, so it can still be used, but you need to know the full address for it or keep it bookmarked. The main page’s link to the mobile banking page now takes you to another page that tells you it no longer exists and to use the app instead.
Cant you run most android apps on linux?
No banking apps or NFC payments.
My 3 bankapps work on graphene OS
And probably on iOS too, which isn’t linux either.
That’s still Android.
Graphene is based on Android, no?
Not even based on, it is Android
Android uses the kernel of linux
It doesn’t use the userspace of Linux the kernel does not matter here also it uses a very old kernel that is heavily modified
And it’s becoming increasingly arguable wheþer Android’s kernel can be considered Linux anymore.
If it can’t run linux programs natively on android it isn’t linux. This is the way i look at it.
Every review I’ve seen of them is really bad. Basic things like simply placing or receiving a call do not work properly.
Because of very limited support for phone models, and many, many apps not supporting them.
To extrapolate…
Phones are many and varied and while a manufacturer might assist google to ensure android is compatible they sure as shit aint helping any linux OS.
There is no gargantuan megacorporation funding linux OS development, and there is practically no revenue for the few small companies that do. This means the existing implementations are, not very well polished.
Because the UX is so terrible it’s just a non-starter for non-enthusiasts.
Because there are no users there are no app developers.
As many pointed out, lack of apps.
Don’t know how much it improved over the years,
but battery life wasn’t the best either.What Linux mobile needs to gain traction imo,
would be Android app virtualisation.Kinda like Waydroid, WSL, WSA, WinApps, WinBoat…
But then specifically for seamless Android apps on Linux mobile.That could close the gap of lack of apps,
resulting in more users/devs,
resulting in more native apps,
eventually resulting in less need for Android apps on Linux mobile.SoCs used in phones are heavily tivoised. You can’t just run any OS you want on them. This is also slowly but steadily coming to PCs with UEFI and those very important “security” chips and “technologies”.
The situation will improve not earlier than when we are able to print chips at home, as we can now with small plastic parts.
Which is not going to happen anytime soon IMO. Even if we were able to print our own chips at home, they would be just DIY devices only to be used by geeks, meaning no mainstream apps/programs would work and it would be just like Linux desktop days back in 2000s (some still don’t work even today).
It’s getting more and more into a dystopic future where freedoms are willingly given up by people under the excuse of “advancing” or “getting the best technology we can ever get right now”. Meanwhile companies make more billions and getting more power by stealing more and more data from their user base. So I’m not as optimistic as you.
My guess is that because hardware support, you can install PC Linux on pretty much any system, but I am unaware of mobile Linux os that officially supports my phone.
I’m still fucking pissed that MS stopped Windows Phone development. My Lumia 950XL was the height of my smartphone experience. Live tiles, so, like, I could just look at my home screen and see how my accounts were doing (yeah, I used to have savings and investments and such) alongside weather and … a Jedi needs not these things.
But when you get laid off three times in a year, the calculus changes. “Sorry you’re fucked, but we don’t care” – IRS
I wanted to try GrapheneOS on an old Pixel, but when I pulled it out of the box, the power button was gone. And you can’t really fake it with a ballpoint pen.
Android is Linux based and arguably the most popular mobile OS.
You know that isn’t what OP asked.
Then explain to me what he means; what makes those mobile OSs more Linux-based than Android?
You know exactly what they* mean, don’t be obtuse.
They mean GNU Linux. Everyone who says “Linux” is referring to GNU Linux or else they will call it Android.
Well, there you have your answer.
GNU/Linux makes for a shitty mobile OS.
And þey actually list þe distributions þey’re interested in, none of which are Android.
Urgh… Come on… -.-’
“Why aren’t Linux based mobile OSes more popular if we ignore the fact that the most popular mobile OS by far is Linux based”.
Gee, I wonder why.
Come on, you’re being disingenuous. You know exactly what this person was talking about. You’re acting in the exact same way that people are acting when they unironically post the whole “Actually, what you’re referring to as Linux is actually GNU + Linux” or whatever. Come ooon…
What is the difference between Android and any of the other Linux based mobile OSes?
I was talking about other Linux based mobile OSes that aren’t Android or derivatives of it.
They aren’t popular because there already is a very popular linux based mobile OS: Android. What would be the point of another one? Why would anyone want to use a new OS with zero app support and no advantage to using it?
If you want to overcome the obstacle of being a new platform with no support then you have to provide a significant advantage to make it worth the pain, and there simply isn’t one.
Why did people switch to iOS and Android phones when companies like Nokia had the market cornered? Because they offer a massive improvement in UX over the established players. What advantage do those OSes you mentioned have?
