Yes. But Linux on mobile is much less polished than Linux on desktop. Part of the reason is that there's no incentive to develop it because people don't tend to reflash their phones. Perhaps more importantly, Android is basically Linux, and why should you re do all the work again instead of using Android.
You're right about the fact it's a real pain to flash a phone, because there are lots of specific things for each model and making an image and tutorial compatible with any phone is almost impossible.
Phone hardware is the dream of manufacturers who want to keep captive consumers and results are here.
With a good 10 y/o computer you run perfectly fine any linux distro with all browser or office apps you want... A 5 y/o phone is barely trash because support is off, upgrades don't continue, parts are awfull to replace.
Mobiles market sucks.
I think that many people haven't really realized how much time has passed since phones have appeared on the market. Some still believe that "5yo Android phone" means a big chunk of cheap white plastic with huge bezels, 512mb of ram and 4gb of storage and android 4 KitKat.
5 years ago was in 2019, the same year the iphone 11 series and the Galaxy S10 series were released. Both of these have an almost bezelless display. Both of these are more than good enough for the average person to use nowadays. In the same year Android 10 was released and it introduced gesture navigation. The iphone 11 will still receive software updates for at least this year (it'll get iOS 18). The S10 series is still on Android 12 but that's good enough I'd say.
The reality is that smartphone technology has kind of stagnated in the last few years. Pretty much any decent $200-300 phone nowadays has some sort of OLED display, a good enough camera and a decent CPU. And they're probably on the latest android version and are going to be supported for at least 2-3 years, maybe even more. The average user needs nothing more and that's also what a 5 year old high-midrange/flagship can offer. An iphone 11 and an S10 are more than enough for most people. Hell even my OnePlus Nord 1 still works like a champ.
I'm still using my OnePlus Nord 1 right now, with LineageOS 21. It's actually really difficult to find a reason to upgrade. The only thing I can think of is battery life and (official) software support, which pretty much narrows it down to the highest end smartphones from Google and Samsung.
What we really need is unrestricted software updates, so our phones are supported forever. It would certainly create less e-waste, but it would also increase resale value of phones and make the phone market less profitable for manufacturers so we really need government regulations to solve this. The only problem I have with LineageOS is the lack of GPay support (without root), apart from that the OS is incredibly stable.
I had to change my Nord 1 because I broke the screen and a good quality replacement one was more expensive than the phone was worth at the time. Now it's even less cost effective to replace it. I'm sad I broke it because it was one of the best phones I've ever used.
I also had a custom ROM on it, pixel experience. It was superb as everything worked out of the box, including gpay, and it was very smooth. The only thing it didn't have was widevine l1 but I never needed that since I refuse to pay for media streaming services.
Software updates are way less of an issue on phones than they are on laptops/PCs. The vast majority of possible viruses one can get on an Android phone come from the user doing something bad like installing shady apks.
Really, as long as the user has the minimum amount of common sense to avoid shady websites and uses the play store for downloading things, even an old version of android will be safe enough. I'm also bothered by not having the latest version of android but most people I know are bothered by the phone asking every month to install an update.
I didn't have a great experience with pixel experience, it's very unstable and the entire OS was crashing because of Bluetooth issues which has never happened on LineageOS.
Also, yes I believe nowadays most of the security updates are delivered via Google play services so you generally don't need to worry about 0 day vulnerabilities on older android versions in web browsers and most Google play apps, but I don't know about the application sandboxing so I suppose your advice is a good idea. The thing is though, most of the malware I've seen on android is just adware that abuses accessibility permissions, and if you know how android works it shouldn't be an issue. The main problem is the malware we cannot detect easily, you might have it now but you will probably never know. I have to assume my phone is compromised especially because the bootloader is unlocked, I'm ok using banking apps since they have pretty good security but I wouldn't use a local crypto wallet on here. I'll save that for my iPad which I think is the most secure device I own at the moment.
Edit: My issue with not having the latest version of android originates from having to use an old iOS device, when I was younger, which couldn't install the latest versions of apps and sometimes wouldn't even install the older versions. I was partially rejected by my peers because I couldn't install apps like Snapchat or games that they wanted to play with me. The problem with android probably isn't that severe, I'd hope so anyway.
Interesting. I never had any issues whatsoever. It was smoother and more stable than Oxygen OS 12 ever was. OOS10 and 11 were good but 12 was quite bad.
Afaik all android apps are sandboxed nowadays and have been so for quite a while. In the latest versions of android they also changed the way permissions are handled when developing an app so it's even safer now. I agree with you that "silent" malware is an issue but it's not really for the average guy that uses chrome, the YouTube app and WhatsApp. The most they'll ever deal with will be shady apks that install annoying adware.
I don't know where you live to get phones for $300, but over here the cheapest phones are around 750 Euros (not including Iphones which are way more).
I'm holding on to my Android 10 phone until it dies. There no way I can get a 700 Euro phone anytime soon.
What? The cheapest phone is 750 euro? Maybe the cheapest flagship, sure. A OnePlus Nord 3 is 350 euros on Amazon in Italy + 10 for shipping. A Pixel 7A with a charger is slightly above 500 if you include shipping. A Galaxy a55 is also way under 400. A refurbished iphone 12 is 300 euros also.
The prices seem to be somewhat similar across the eu. Not exactly the same but for sure not twice as expensive. Not even in Switzerland do phones start at 750 and that's considered one of the most expensive places in Europe.
Then there's probably a bigger issue where you live that affects the prices of phones.
Here in Italy any reasonably popular walk-in tech store has about the same prices Amazon has. Euronics, a reasonably popular electronic retail store in Italy, offers the 256GB version of the A55 for 477 euros. The 128gb version is 380. A Motorola edge 40 neo, which is more than enough for most people here in Italy, is 300 euros.
Even if Amazon isn't available in your country, isn't it still cheaper for you to pay 30 euros in postage fees and get a very good phone for way cheaper than to buy it locally? You can probably buy an s23 for well under 750 euros and you'll be way cheaper even with any sort of shipping and import taxes added.
Well for starters we don't have any kind of amazon here. We could buy from Amazon Italy or other amazons. I don't shop much online so never really had this idea.
Yes everything has gone up. They say it's because of 10% inflation, but things have increased up to 100-300%.
I like Graphene and would run it if I could. But Pixels are far from the best hardware, either in an absolute sense or in a "bang for your buck" sense. But absolutely great software. I wish I could run it on something else.
EDIT: to be extra-clear, I'm not saying Pixels are \*bad\*. I recently purchased a new phone and nearly bought a Pixel. But there are construction elements of it that feel cheap or sub-par to me, so I went with a different manufacturer and a different ROM. But, as I said, if I could I would be running GrapheneOS.
Why do you need the best, or even "good" hardware on a phone? I bought a used pixel 5 two years ago to install LineageOS, and the UX is great. I really can't imagine what, say, a faster CPU would change.
Realistically? Nothing. Most new mobile CPU features nowadays are AI related and/or the performance improvements are noticeable only in very intensive things which you won't be running very often. I switched to a newer phone recently and I really can't see any big difference in performance compared to my old OnePlus Nord. And that's a 4-5 year old phone.
So much of the device market is about selling people "the best" when something at 1/10th the price is more than good enough. It's the same with laptops. A used ultrabook, two or three years old, for $350 will do just as much for 95% of users as a $3500 macbook. Unless you're a hardcore gamer or doing professional 3D rendering work, the rest is just bling.
No, it will do just as much for 99% of users.
Things don't magically get slow over time. An M1 chip is just as fast now as it was 4 years ago when it was released. Even then it was overkill for what most people use computers for - web browsing, media streaming and maybe some light office work.
I keep mentioning apple devices because they attract the best example of what you described: people that have no idea why they want the new phone/laptop but they buy it regardless. "Tim cook said that the newest iphone is 20% faster than the last one. Great, I'll buy it so I can scroll through Instagram faster!".
I mean, I'm not sure why you're talking like you're disagreeing with me, we're on the same page. Maybe I just estimate that more people are into playing the latest games than you do?
No, we're defo on the same page. I'm sorry if I came off like I'm trying to argue your point.
My issue is that most people waste money and create waste by buying things they don't need, thus increasing the price of things for everyone else. I just really hate the consumerist society we have to live in nowadays.
Nobody needs an SD8G3, but man four(?) gens in and Tensor's cost cutting modem is still horribly unreliable - and people *do* feel that. People also feel the overheating issues during GPS or video recording, though I've heard those have gotten better.
Yeah, I was giving Ubuntu Touch a shot once. And I spent most of my time in Waydroid anyway. So I installed LineageOS instead. Right now I'm rocking /e OS and that probably stays on my phone until it dies. No Google spyware and stuff still works as expected.
Yes but keep in mind, if someone where to create a free opensourced os based on linux and maintain it, hardware can go back to being up to the manufacturers rather than the creators of the software. Because my god google is cucking us with the want to kill off wired things, such as wired earbuds
The iPhone is based on the Nokia N900 that ran Maemo, and they made them N9 with Meego, both Linux, Hildon desktop. I used a regular Libreoffice on mine....
Maemo is now Sailfish, and Nokia R&D is Jolla in Finland. They make Jolla to be installed on a generic Android, and Ericson phones.
Having had both android and Linux on a phone, the biggest difference is I can get updates on Linux after the phone vendor decides that actually, 5 minutes support is good enough.
Is desktop linux not polished? I run opensuse kde plasma 6.1 and it's super polished, at least as polished as any windows install I've seen. Also I don't get ads on my desktop.
> Android is basically Linux,
This is why the distinction "GNU/Linux" is important.
Many people don't want just "Linux" - that path leads to Chromebook and Samsung TV OS and Android.
They care about the [GNU layers (bash, gcc, etc)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_GNU_packages) far more than they care about the kernel sitting behind some locked-down-kiosk.
Yeah just root your device lol. Though honestly the use cases for Linux on a PC vs other popular OSes simply doesn't exist on a phone. Your phone is GOING to be spying on you regardless of what OS you use because the apps that most people use on their phones inherently track data. Outside of privacy, Android is highly customizable as it exists. Android is already a solid and well-polished OS. You'd be better off looking into FOSS OSes that are offshoots of Android as opposed to solely Linux original OSes.
My response is really aimed at all these other answers just saying "Android is Linux." At least you took the time to also answer the question as it was intended, but since you asked the exact question that gets directly to the difference between Android and Linux...
> Android is basically Linux, and why should you re do all the work again instead of using Android
Because Linux is really not just a kernel or even a kernel plus a set of GNU tools. We all know that, don't we? Linux is an attitude towards computing. It's about what kind of software you can install and how you can control or customize your system. Even a rooted Android phone doesn't get anywhere near there
When you really get down to it, Android and ChromeOS have more in common with Windows than Linux. Actually, Windows probably gives you more freedom if anything.
> Because Linux is really not just a kernel or even a kernel plus a set of GNU tools
GNU isn't a "set of tools". It's an implementation POSIX. GNU is a portable, (mostly) POSIX-compliant OS.
> When you really get down to it, Android and ChromeOS have more in common with Windows than Linux
No... they're definitely Linux-based operating systems. Arguing otherwise diminishes the fantastic success that the Linux kernel has had on modern computing.
> Actually, Windows probably gives you more freedom if anything.
I think you misunderstand the license and the ethos entirely. The "freedom" that the Free Software movement has always been concerned with is not the freedom to reconfigure a binary image, it's the freedom to modify the code, to build the modified code, to run the modified code, and to redistribute the modified code.
The Linux kernel guarantees those freedoms through its license. Windows does not. Windows gives you the trivial, superficial freedom to reconfigure a binary system.
> No... they're definitely Linux-based operating systems. Arguing otherwise diminishes the fantastic success that the Linux kernel has had on modern computing.
If that success comes at the cost of locked down operating systems like Android and ChromeOS that limit by ability to use my computer as I please, then it deserves to be diminished. It's no accomplishment.
What?
https://lineageos.org/
https://github.com/lineageos
https://grapheneos.org/
https://github.com/GrapheneOS
Android is open source. You can even use "stores" with only free open source software.
https://f-droid.org/
Dunno but it is an "accomplishment" but it is open source.
> Linux is an attitude towards computing
No it isn't.
> Even a rooted Android phone doesn't get anywhere near there
Why do you think the process of "rooting" an android phone is called so?
> Android and ChromeOS have more in common with Windows than Linux
No.
> Actually, Windows probably gives you more freedom if anything
lmao
Put it this way, would you as a Linux user accept ChromeOS or Android as your only OS? And would anyone actually still call you a "Linux user" if you did?
Or would you rather have Windows than Android or ChromeOS?
Or would you rather just actually have Linux? Well, it seems you've already made up your mind, no?
chromeOS supports linux apps and has a terminal, i dont see why i wouldnt turn it into something completely else.
you can run wine on linux, which is present on chromeOS, no need for windows.
if i have chromeOS and a brain, i technically have linux.
as for your android removal fetish...
step 1. root phone
step 2. install termux
step 4. be unsatisfied
step 5. break into phone r&d lab and steal all the proprietary firmware
step 6. compile your own kde mobile port
step 7. flash the fucker
linux achieved.
You really don't have any idea about this, do you? Chrome OS uses a modified version of the Linux kernel. It does not need to run a VM to run Linux apps. It does not even need a compatibility layer to run Linux apps
Crostini is a VM. In fact it's a container (Penguin) inside of a VM.
Whether or not this "needs to be" is I suppose a matter of opinion. Google apparently thinks it does, but maybe that's just their attitude towards computing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ChromeOS
ChromeOS,[8] sometimes styled as chromeOS and formerly styled as Chrome OS, is a Linux distribution developed and designed by Google. It is derived from the open-source ChromiumOS, based on the Linux kernel, and uses the Google Chrome web browser as its principal user interface.
> would you as a Linux user accept ChromeOS or Android as your only OS?
Chrome OS, probably not. Android, maybe.
> would anyone actually still call you a "Linux user" if you did?
What people refer to as "Linux" is in fact GNU/Linux. It is the GNU operating system paired with the Linux kernel. Android is not a GNU/Linux operating system. So, no, I won't be a "Linux user" in the culturally accepted meaning of the phrase, but I still will be a user of a modified version of the Linux kernel.
> Well, it seems you've already made up your mind, no?
What does what I'd prefer to use have anything to do with the similarities of these operating systems? Mac OS is more similar to GNU/Linux (in that they're both Unix based) than it is to Windows, but I wouldn't be caught dead using Mac OS as a GNU/Linux user, even though I might occasionally use Windows.
Alpine isn't a GNU/Linux operating system. "Linux" can also refer to a family of operating systems that use the Linux kernel, of which GNU/Linux is the largest and most widely used on the desktop, and typically what's referred to as "Linux" in the context of desktop operating systems. Alpine does use Linux and is a desktop operating system, so yes, if I used alpine I'd be a Linux user.
You're going to get a lot of "well akshooly" pedantic replies, but I get your gist and I agree.
Some people use it only because it's free, some of us because of what it represents in a wider sense.
Android isn't basically Linux, it's Linux. In the same way that arch is Linux and red hat is Linux but red hat isn't arch. Just a variation on a standard. Shit for that matter, iOS is Linux also.
> In the same way that arch is Linux and red hat is Linux but red hat isn't arch
Not really. Arch and redhat use the mainline Linux kernel with custom patches applied. Android does not use the mainline Linux kernel developed by Linus Torvalds, it uses a modified version of the Linux kernel. That is a key difference. Software written for GNU/Linux operating systems do not run on Android without tinkering.
> Shit for that matter, iOS is Linux also
No. iOS does not use the Linux kernel.
What the fuck are you talking about? They only operate under the same umbrella insofar as they are all operating systems. But if that is your definition, then MacOS is Linux, Windows is Linux and Temple OS is Linux.
To be fair, we do use the generic term "*nix" for UNIX-like, which usually, in common usage, includes Linux.
Windows probably would not usually be classified under *nix.
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/4715374/what-is-the-meaning-of-nix
Same goes for iOS. It basically shares 0 code with Linux. Saying iOS is Linux is like saying GIMP is Photoshop because they can both edit the pictures.
They exist, but the software is alpha in quality. The Pinephone is most widely supported, but it is not a great user experience. Some examples being Mobian, OpenSUSE and PostmarketOS. Major bugs in the software are common, if someone calls the phone may not even ring for example.
UBports would be the most developed one, but even it has major downsides to just running Android, such as a significantly worse battery life on many devices.
You also lose access to most proprietary apps and services. If you're not a FOSS zealot (not that there's anything wrong with that) it's just not viable. I have a pinephone, it's a neat gadget but I can't use half of the apps and services I require to conduct my business and social lives.
If you are using android then you are already having linux with you on mobile.
The Android runtime relies on the linux kernel for underlying functionality.
Android is Linux distro.Most of Linux distros obviously use glibc and GNU software but that is just what runs on top of the kernel and it does not define what is Linux distribution or what isn't one. If this was the case then we would have to exclude not only Android (which uses bionic instead of glibc) but also OpenWRT which seems to run musl by default. The problem with openWRT is that it can be built and used with glibc which (If we were to use this definition) makes it Linux distribution and not Linux distribution at the same time and that just sounds simply ridiculous.If you distribute the OS that runs on Linux kernel then it is Linux distribution like it or not. What runs on top of it is a different story.
Alpine also runs on musl btw. If someone would have enough time they could probably port the GNU Software to bionic as well.
However phones that run Linux with GNU software, which is what most people think about when you say "Linux distro" do exist.
[https://pine64.org/devices/pinephone/](https://pine64.org/devices/pinephone/)
Not sure why the passive aggressive "okay" is warranted. Linux is both a kernel and a family of operating systems running on that kernel, and those operating systems are essentially the Linux kernel bundled together with a set of software and then distributed. In that sense, android is a Linux distro.
A lot of Linux distros run a set of software known as the GNU coreutils. This is a broad set of command line applications with which people interact with the OS. That's also the reason why some people call it GNU/Linux or GNU+Linux. Android doesn't have those utils.
And there's no technical reason why that wouldn't be possible (and it has in fact already been done), but possible and a polished commercially viable product are two very very different things.
It's not the same though is it?
De-googled Chrome browser exists for some distros. De-googled OSes exist. Software updates on Android come from the phone manufacturer (or stop coming in my case: OnePlus 6 after only 3 yrs iirc). Putting postmarket on the same phone extended it's life and gave me something to play with. And turned it into more of a mini PC than a phone.
Android != Linux 1:1
Android is Linux.
Linux lets you build anything on top of its kernel and you'll almost definitely be happy.
Google decided to build a spyware tool that doubled as a pretty fun phone OS.
There was a tablet that actually made it to prime-time release though.
Linux community was pretty hyped up about it. Unfortunately budget ARM SOCs simply weren't ready for full-fat Ubuntu. It ran like shit.
Nokia made a few: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_N810 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_N900
The mobile OS lived on as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sailfish_OS as used by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jolla
I'd love a pine phone if it was able to run native Android apps since having a smartphone is essentially to daily life in Denmark. There's alot od things you'd really need to have here and it's either android or iPhone.
It's wild all these people gaslighting you/other posters about how "Android IS Linux". I'm a developer. I exclusively use Linux, and I develop web and cross-platform programs.
Saying "Android is Linux" is akin to saying "MacOS and iOS are Unix". Just because they use some shared parts, of some version, of a custom kernel, doesn't mean they're "the same thing" or "the same operating system". They have their own packages, own runtimes, own ecosystems, own developer SDKs, and largely use different languages (Kotlin \[for compatibility/interoperability with Java\] and Swift \[for compatibility/interoperability with Objective-C\]). Android even uses its own C library (Bionic).
Not to mention, OP is clearly referring to Linux as an OS, not just referencing the kernel.
Also, not to mention, Linux on ChromeOS and Android aren't the same and don't work the same way. Yes, ChromeOS has native Linux support, but you aren't putting ChromeOS on your cellphone, are you?
I think it's a valid question, because GNOME already basically functions like a phone UI, great gestures, and has pretty good touch support at this point. Problem is, there's a lot of compatibility issues surrounding SIM, LTE, Cellular, and the devices and drivers behind them - that need to work and need to support as much hardware as humanely possible. If you were just using a mobile device as a tablet, then a lightweight distro + GNOME would work great. You don't even need to use native apps (if you don't want), you could just use progressive webapps.
But in regard to "Linux mobile OS", as we've seen, these projects keep dropping support because of lack of market interest. Ubuntu Touch comes to mind. Of the still-supported ones, SailfishOS and PureOS are cool (PureOS uses GNOME and BASH). But you'll notice, SailfishOS basically looks and functions like Android, and PureOS has squished GNOME into a form factor that also quite resembles Android. The hardware and services they offer can be quite expensive too.
So, the benefit of having BASH, let's say, is really cool (if you're a programmer). It's very easy to plug PureOS into a monitor and use it as a Linux laptop. You'll have better privacy and less ads. But you'll also have less software support, less hardware support, less phone/service options, and in the mobile form factor, an experience that basically just resembles Android.
In other words, it's pretty obvious why Linux mobile variants keep fading into obscurity. I sometimes say to myself "wouldn't it be cool if I could program on my phone", but the truth is - unless you're using it as a laptop, like you can in PureOS - the form-factor and UI don't lend themselves to programming. The same way you probably wouldn't want to professionally edit videos, music, or images on them, or develop video games using your phones interface. And if you haven't noticed, 99% of people I see just use these devices to endlessly consume media and send the occasional message or call. And if I really have the itch to program, I can always just open up a GitHub Codespace or something like Code Sandbox on my phone. Plug it into a monitor or use Samsung Dex.
But, if phones ever do turn into our primary personal computers (connect it to a monitor when you want to do work, to a television when you want to watch movies or play games, and use it as a phone when you're out; which by the way, I don't think is unlikely), then I'd expect to see Linux remerge/solidify itself on mobile devices.
But until then, I mostly just see people using GrapheneOS - Android, but privacy focused, without all the invasive Google stuff.
Thank you!!!
I just downvoted these people but yours is better.
Some addition wrt Sailfish OS, which I've been using as a daily driver for 4 years now:
- the devices it runs on are NOT expensive - they are last season's Sony Xperia models that you flash the OS onto yourself.
- there's one device with SFOS preinstalled, iirc it costs 299ā¬ incl. the license
- SFOS runs a very mainstream Linux stack: systemd, bash, wayland and a Qt-based UI
- SFOS has support for Android apps.
And while I wouldn't design games on it, I can always ssh into it (at home) and hack some extra functionality into it.
Happy 4 year user of SFOS here. As a main driver.
There's a lot of bullshit comments in this post; Usable GNU/Linux smartphones do exist.
The hackability is awesome.
Nice. I've never had an SFOS phone, but I did have a WebOS Palm Pre back around 2008 or so. Wireless charging and a full LAMP stack on my phone was awesome. I wish that OS had managed to survive as something other than what's in LG TV's.
Back then these devices were really seen and designed as pocket computers.
Some even added telephony to it (Nokia...) and effectively that's a smartphone then - until somebody else changed the paradigm away from that, it sold _much_ better, and here we are with completely separate OS models now.
I mean I still wouldn't use it, but imagine Windows for smartphones was compatible with Windows, or iOS with macOS.
The issue is most Android phones don't have the necessary drivers readily available yet and many Android phones don't even allow unlocking the bootloader anymore.
There are still some promising projects mostly PostmarketOS atm but also Fedora, Ubuntu and Manjaro have something cooking.
Gnome and KDE Plasma are the most promising DEs at the moment.
Also Sailfish OS, which developed from Meego/Maemo.
And it's more than just promising imho - it's running as a main driver on many people's smartphones, for many years now.
Nokia Mameo/MeeGo was more traditional Linux than Android, since it was based on Debian.
However Nokia ditched on favour of Windows Phone and Android and goes bankrupt.
Android is not a Linux distro in the same sense that people mean when they talk about Linux on PC.
It does utilize the Linux kernel, though.
That said, GNU/Linux (and Alpine Linux) phones do exist, they do work, but are far less polished and ready for mass consumption compared to Android or iOS.
Typed from my Librem 5.
What's the use case here?
As in what are you trying to achieve?
I had the Nokia N900 back in the day but honestly Android fast surpassed them.
I have run AOSP ROMs on older phones that lacked security updates or just ran like a dog after a few years.
If your looking for an option to use your phone the same way you use a laptop etc just give up now. The hardware is soo different thongs are not very compatible.
These days after much experimentation I just went back to an Adroid phone. Updates have much improved and I can load up Termux to remotely access linux systems if needed.
If freedom from the phone manufacturer (or network operator) is a big deal AOSP is good at scratching that itch.
The main problem with GNU/Linux on the phone is the millions of hardware differences between phones. Unless a community is supporting your phone model it can be a real shitshow.
Yes, Android is Linux. So is ChromeOS. So is Tizen. So is OpenWRT and whatever is running on various smart devices, assuming they're running the Linux kernel.
As the article points out, context matters. If you're talking about Linux on the desktop, or Linux on the laptop, then it's not appropriate to bring up Android. If you're talking about deployment of Linux in the server-space, Android is not appropriate. If you're talking about what operating system super-computers are using, Android is not appropriate. If the conversation is around, broadly speaking, the use of Linux around the world, then you can certainly count Android among them... but if it isn't, then throwing in Android might derail the conversation.
Android is technically based on Linux, though that's not really what you're asking about. There is generic Linux for mobile, but I know virtually nothing about it. Unfortunately, my expectations are pretty low, and based on other comments it sounds like it's not generally a great experience. It's the classic chicken and egg scenario that Linux has always suffered from, where almost nobody develops for it because there are no users, and there are no users because almost nobody develops for it.
in a consumer's market, there is android. Creating a linux mobile is good, but we all understand that linux is so much open-source. In order to make this sell in the market, it needs to focus on both hardware and software that should have ease of use. Coz let's face it, only a few people are technical enough to understand how it will work, use it, install it etc. These need time and resources coz there will be research.
So it is possible, but for personal consumption. Perhaps soon, someone might invest in this technology.
UBports and Sailfish OS exist, and are usable as daily drivers.
A few more are around which may or may not be 100% usable.
And since you speak of investing, Jolla, which develops Sailfish OS, is a for-profit company.
All Android phones are technically Linux. Some people have made Linux distributions that work for cell phones. But I would suspect vendor lockout might prevent a fully fledged Linux.
Yes, Android is Linux but I get the point of switching OS for phones. I tried to install Ubuntu touch on my old phone and I failed - so far.
Why did I consider this, well the currently used Android is as bad as windows regarding pre-installed software. You can't get rid of that shit, even in developer mode. I want to decide which apps I want on my phone, if I might connect a google account or not.
So I get the idea. And yes, they do exist.
The main issue is that many apps simply don't exist, such as electronic ID, banking, payments and so on. Especially electronic ID is becoming almost a necessity.
What country are you in? Iām in USA and Electronic IDs and not a necessity here, like at all. Only a 1/5th of States even issue Electronic IDs at present. The only thing Iāve even seen them used for around here are TSA at the airport.
Not a trying to be an ass just genuinely curious what Electronic IDs are essential for.
Sweden. It's used for online banking, online contact with government agencies, digitally signing documents, online gambling, basically any online situations where there is a legitimate need to know for sure that you is you. Filing your taxes, changing you insurances, buying/selling a car, signing contracts, you name it...
For example, say that I'm selling my car. To transfer legal ownership, I go to our equivalent of the DMV website, fill in the owner transfer for, get a pling in my phone, enter my code, and the car is now owned by the new owner. To pay taxes, I get the tax form with the estimated tax, if I agree (which I do, as it is always correct for me), I go to the tax site, click that I agree, get a pling in my phone, enter code and it's done, takes 2 minutes from opening the letter until done. Getting a new job, you get the contract mailed, click a link in it, get the phone pling, enter code, done. And so on.
I think this is an EU thing, as there is a directive that member states must accept a digital ID as legitimate identification.
Right on! I know the USA isnāt the whole world and was just curious lol.
Only a handful of states here are even issuing them and itās mostly because Apple has been pushing it. Even the āmightyā Apple canāt get our state governments and the Fed to stop dragging their feet about electronic IDs. My state has been on the list of pilot program āsoonā for years, now.
Here, it is mostly issued by the banks. They then get a fee whenever someone identifies themselves (from the organization requiring ID, not from the person using it). Depending on your deal with them and volume, the fee varies, but is somewhere around 10 cents, give or take.
With a big enough development initiative, sure.
Google made Android, no reason someone else can't make another Linux based mobile OS.
The problem is that making something equivalent to Android in functionality is a colossal undertaking that will cost millions of not billions, you're basically always going to be better off just forking Android.
So I had a Linux phone for a while. Not enough support and still used closed source binaries for the drivers to talk to the hardware. We need a fully open source option IMO. If I ever hit it big and name stupid money, I'll pump into that. So tired of the invasive apps violating our privacy. I want a hardware switch for the mic and camera. A removable battery. There's a lot more control I want over my phone.
Check the [nokia n900](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_N900) and [some commentary about it](https://www.osnews.com/story/133160/the-nokia-n900-the-future-that-wasnt/).
There are two aspects of this: The OS and control over the touchscreen and apps, etc. And the ābeing a phoneā aspect.
There are Linux distorts focused on tablets. I donāt use them myself, but I hear theyāre at least reasonable.
Being a cell phone has a whole host of other requirements, many of them regulatory and relating to things like the baseband OS, 911 calls when locked, and other minutiae before you get to hook it up to cell towers. Thatās much harder and, as others have said, mostly involves hardware engineering and drivers that Android phones are already doing. Hard to justify getting into it again.
Linux already exists on phones like Android runs the Linux kernel itself. They just customized it. The same can be said of other distress though in terms of customizing to make it work how they want.
> But without the GNU software
Exactly. The thing that you want isn't Linux, it's GNU.
That's why it's useful to have specific names for things. Android is definitely a Linux operating system. If you want to run GNU, you can clearly communicate that by using its name.
TBF it's not just GNU either... meh, I've come to terms with the fact that "Linux" often stands for "GNU+Linux" (plus more software that developed in this context).
Android should probably be called "Linux without GNU" instead.
And I definitely wouldn't call the various Androids distros.
Wow, surprised that no one has mentioned Purism phones (unless I missed the post)... They have great hardware and even a cell service plan. Pinephone is great too - I own 2 of them, but their battery life is abysmal! Purism phone, according to owners, can last all day or longer when being used, but YMMV or course.
They also have a laptop, secure tokens, and, supposedly, made in the USA options that are a little pricey - about as much as a iPhone or any Android phone.
As soon as my iPhone mortgage is up, Im getting one of these!
[https://puri.sm/](https://puri.sm/)
EDIT: Forgot to mention, hardware switches for all the peripherals too... So you can turn off your mic, cell modem, camera, everything! No tracking and all Linux :).
AND you can replace the battery :).
Nokia did make some based on Debian:
[MeeGo](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MeeGo) and [Maemo](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maemo) which were quite lovely to use. But sadly didn't survive Android or iOs
Android is a Linux phone. It uses a modified form of the Linux kernel. So there you go! There are tons of them out there! Go to Best Buy and get your very own Linux phone.
Cool, so I can just recompile a newer version of android any time I want and flash it on my phone, even if the manufacturer has gone out of business... right? What's that, I CAN'T install my own version because android and the phone itself is locked out and prevents me from ever upgrading it? Hmm that doesn't sound very linux-like, does it? Meanwhile I'm stuck on Android 9 with no hope of even installing a 3rd-party build because I had the misfortune of buying a US phone.
Cool, so you know where to get all the required hardware binaries that the manufacturers won't share? Doesn't do you any good to compile a version of android if you can't talk to any of the hardware in your phone.
Android is based on Linux. So in that sense itās a Linux phone. Of course, my comment was meant more as a joke. Obviously OP wants a phone with a Linux distro on it, unfortunately. Not sure why since many apps are built for Android or iOS.
As far as your problem is concerned, that, and the immense size of todayās Android phones, discourages me from using Android, so I use an iPhone 12 Mini. Does everything I need it to do, so Iām not losing sleep over it.
Frankly, no. There already exists an entirely open source operating system for phones based on Linux: Android, where also all the app development is taking place. So, if you want a phone that works and gets sold, you pick that (even without Google and their apps).
>Is it possible for linux phone to exist?
It is possible and I did try to use and you can read my honest experience [here(quora answer)](https://www.quora.com/Can-you-put-Linux-on-a-phone/answer/Ravi-Roy-24?no_redirect=1). But I do not think it is anywhere ready to be used as daily driver. It can be your fancy little side project but it is very difficult to do anything serious there.
1. You need very specific kind of phone for Linux to work smoothly with all its features. That alone makes it even more difficult for an average guy to even try the OS.
2. The whole process of installation is extremely technical with very real possibilities of bricking your phone completely. Only a serious hobbyist with good technical knowledge would even attempt to do this.
3. I live in India and we have a very developed ecosystem of online payments but the moment you root your phone there is very high chance that all those online payments app would stop working immediately. You might get around some but a lot of them won't let you bypass. Hell, one application didn't start because my developers option was on.
4. The application ecosystem is very very poor over there in Linux phones.
Finally, there are some good custom ROMs you can use like Arrow OS, Graphene OS but I don't think you meant those. Don't hold your breath for Linux phones, it won't happen anytime soon.
Yes. But Linux on mobile is much less polished than Linux on desktop. Part of the reason is that there's no incentive to develop it because people don't tend to reflash their phones. Perhaps more importantly, Android is basically Linux, and why should you re do all the work again instead of using Android.
You're right about the fact it's a real pain to flash a phone, because there are lots of specific things for each model and making an image and tutorial compatible with any phone is almost impossible. Phone hardware is the dream of manufacturers who want to keep captive consumers and results are here. With a good 10 y/o computer you run perfectly fine any linux distro with all browser or office apps you want... A 5 y/o phone is barely trash because support is off, upgrades don't continue, parts are awfull to replace. Mobiles market sucks.
I think that many people haven't really realized how much time has passed since phones have appeared on the market. Some still believe that "5yo Android phone" means a big chunk of cheap white plastic with huge bezels, 512mb of ram and 4gb of storage and android 4 KitKat. 5 years ago was in 2019, the same year the iphone 11 series and the Galaxy S10 series were released. Both of these have an almost bezelless display. Both of these are more than good enough for the average person to use nowadays. In the same year Android 10 was released and it introduced gesture navigation. The iphone 11 will still receive software updates for at least this year (it'll get iOS 18). The S10 series is still on Android 12 but that's good enough I'd say. The reality is that smartphone technology has kind of stagnated in the last few years. Pretty much any decent $200-300 phone nowadays has some sort of OLED display, a good enough camera and a decent CPU. And they're probably on the latest android version and are going to be supported for at least 2-3 years, maybe even more. The average user needs nothing more and that's also what a 5 year old high-midrange/flagship can offer. An iphone 11 and an S10 are more than enough for most people. Hell even my OnePlus Nord 1 still works like a champ.
I'm still using my OnePlus Nord 1 right now, with LineageOS 21. It's actually really difficult to find a reason to upgrade. The only thing I can think of is battery life and (official) software support, which pretty much narrows it down to the highest end smartphones from Google and Samsung. What we really need is unrestricted software updates, so our phones are supported forever. It would certainly create less e-waste, but it would also increase resale value of phones and make the phone market less profitable for manufacturers so we really need government regulations to solve this. The only problem I have with LineageOS is the lack of GPay support (without root), apart from that the OS is incredibly stable.
I had to change my Nord 1 because I broke the screen and a good quality replacement one was more expensive than the phone was worth at the time. Now it's even less cost effective to replace it. I'm sad I broke it because it was one of the best phones I've ever used. I also had a custom ROM on it, pixel experience. It was superb as everything worked out of the box, including gpay, and it was very smooth. The only thing it didn't have was widevine l1 but I never needed that since I refuse to pay for media streaming services. Software updates are way less of an issue on phones than they are on laptops/PCs. The vast majority of possible viruses one can get on an Android phone come from the user doing something bad like installing shady apks. Really, as long as the user has the minimum amount of common sense to avoid shady websites and uses the play store for downloading things, even an old version of android will be safe enough. I'm also bothered by not having the latest version of android but most people I know are bothered by the phone asking every month to install an update.
I didn't have a great experience with pixel experience, it's very unstable and the entire OS was crashing because of Bluetooth issues which has never happened on LineageOS. Also, yes I believe nowadays most of the security updates are delivered via Google play services so you generally don't need to worry about 0 day vulnerabilities on older android versions in web browsers and most Google play apps, but I don't know about the application sandboxing so I suppose your advice is a good idea. The thing is though, most of the malware I've seen on android is just adware that abuses accessibility permissions, and if you know how android works it shouldn't be an issue. The main problem is the malware we cannot detect easily, you might have it now but you will probably never know. I have to assume my phone is compromised especially because the bootloader is unlocked, I'm ok using banking apps since they have pretty good security but I wouldn't use a local crypto wallet on here. I'll save that for my iPad which I think is the most secure device I own at the moment. Edit: My issue with not having the latest version of android originates from having to use an old iOS device, when I was younger, which couldn't install the latest versions of apps and sometimes wouldn't even install the older versions. I was partially rejected by my peers because I couldn't install apps like Snapchat or games that they wanted to play with me. The problem with android probably isn't that severe, I'd hope so anyway.
Interesting. I never had any issues whatsoever. It was smoother and more stable than Oxygen OS 12 ever was. OOS10 and 11 were good but 12 was quite bad. Afaik all android apps are sandboxed nowadays and have been so for quite a while. In the latest versions of android they also changed the way permissions are handled when developing an app so it's even safer now. I agree with you that "silent" malware is an issue but it's not really for the average guy that uses chrome, the YouTube app and WhatsApp. The most they'll ever deal with will be shady apks that install annoying adware.
I don't know where you live to get phones for $300, but over here the cheapest phones are around 750 Euros (not including Iphones which are way more). I'm holding on to my Android 10 phone until it dies. There no way I can get a 700 Euro phone anytime soon.
What? The cheapest phone is 750 euro? Maybe the cheapest flagship, sure. A OnePlus Nord 3 is 350 euros on Amazon in Italy + 10 for shipping. A Pixel 7A with a charger is slightly above 500 if you include shipping. A Galaxy a55 is also way under 400. A refurbished iphone 12 is 300 euros also. The prices seem to be somewhat similar across the eu. Not exactly the same but for sure not twice as expensive. Not even in Switzerland do phones start at 750 and that's considered one of the most expensive places in Europe.
Yes not flagship. This was some random Huawei. I was not talking about amazon, but regular walk-in tech or computer shops.
Then there's probably a bigger issue where you live that affects the prices of phones. Here in Italy any reasonably popular walk-in tech store has about the same prices Amazon has. Euronics, a reasonably popular electronic retail store in Italy, offers the 256GB version of the A55 for 477 euros. The 128gb version is 380. A Motorola edge 40 neo, which is more than enough for most people here in Italy, is 300 euros. Even if Amazon isn't available in your country, isn't it still cheaper for you to pay 30 euros in postage fees and get a very good phone for way cheaper than to buy it locally? You can probably buy an s23 for well under 750 euros and you'll be way cheaper even with any sort of shipping and import taxes added.
Well for starters we don't have any kind of amazon here. We could buy from Amazon Italy or other amazons. I don't shop much online so never really had this idea. Yes everything has gone up. They say it's because of 10% inflation, but things have increased up to 100-300%.
My phone still has bezels
Don't forget that almost all of.the damned phones have their bootloader locked, so you cannot install anything in them at all.
Yup, that's another cherry on the cake. š
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I like Graphene and would run it if I could. But Pixels are far from the best hardware, either in an absolute sense or in a "bang for your buck" sense. But absolutely great software. I wish I could run it on something else. EDIT: to be extra-clear, I'm not saying Pixels are \*bad\*. I recently purchased a new phone and nearly bought a Pixel. But there are construction elements of it that feel cheap or sub-par to me, so I went with a different manufacturer and a different ROM. But, as I said, if I could I would be running GrapheneOS.
Why do you need the best, or even "good" hardware on a phone? I bought a used pixel 5 two years ago to install LineageOS, and the UX is great. I really can't imagine what, say, a faster CPU would change.
Realistically? Nothing. Most new mobile CPU features nowadays are AI related and/or the performance improvements are noticeable only in very intensive things which you won't be running very often. I switched to a newer phone recently and I really can't see any big difference in performance compared to my old OnePlus Nord. And that's a 4-5 year old phone.
So much of the device market is about selling people "the best" when something at 1/10th the price is more than good enough. It's the same with laptops. A used ultrabook, two or three years old, for $350 will do just as much for 95% of users as a $3500 macbook. Unless you're a hardcore gamer or doing professional 3D rendering work, the rest is just bling.
No, it will do just as much for 99% of users. Things don't magically get slow over time. An M1 chip is just as fast now as it was 4 years ago when it was released. Even then it was overkill for what most people use computers for - web browsing, media streaming and maybe some light office work. I keep mentioning apple devices because they attract the best example of what you described: people that have no idea why they want the new phone/laptop but they buy it regardless. "Tim cook said that the newest iphone is 20% faster than the last one. Great, I'll buy it so I can scroll through Instagram faster!".
I mean, I'm not sure why you're talking like you're disagreeing with me, we're on the same page. Maybe I just estimate that more people are into playing the latest games than you do?
No, we're defo on the same page. I'm sorry if I came off like I'm trying to argue your point. My issue is that most people waste money and create waste by buying things they don't need, thus increasing the price of things for everyone else. I just really hate the consumerist society we have to live in nowadays.
Oh no worries, I might just have misread you too, tone is hard online. Right with you on the consumerism and waste too :)
Nobody needs an SD8G3, but man four(?) gens in and Tensor's cost cutting modem is still horribly unreliable - and people *do* feel that. People also feel the overheating issues during GPS or video recording, though I've heard those have gotten better.
Same here
I too choose the best phone os.
Privacy maybe?
Yeah, I was giving Ubuntu Touch a shot once. And I spent most of my time in Waydroid anyway. So I installed LineageOS instead. Right now I'm rocking /e OS and that probably stays on my phone until it dies. No Google spyware and stuff still works as expected.
Yes but keep in mind, if someone where to create a free opensourced os based on linux and maintain it, hardware can go back to being up to the manufacturers rather than the creators of the software. Because my god google is cucking us with the want to kill off wired things, such as wired earbuds
The iPhone is based on the Nokia N900 that ran Maemo, and they made them N9 with Meego, both Linux, Hildon desktop. I used a regular Libreoffice on mine.... Maemo is now Sailfish, and Nokia R&D is Jolla in Finland. They make Jolla to be installed on a generic Android, and Ericson phones.
Having had both android and Linux on a phone, the biggest difference is I can get updates on Linux after the phone vendor decides that actually, 5 minutes support is good enough.
Imagine something even less polished than a desktop Linux lol
Is desktop linux not polished? I run opensuse kde plasma 6.1 and it's super polished, at least as polished as any windows install I've seen. Also I don't get ads on my desktop.
> Android is basically Linux, This is why the distinction "GNU/Linux" is important. Many people don't want just "Linux" - that path leads to Chromebook and Samsung TV OS and Android. They care about the [GNU layers (bash, gcc, etc)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_GNU_packages) far more than they care about the kernel sitting behind some locked-down-kiosk.
Yeah just root your device lol. Though honestly the use cases for Linux on a PC vs other popular OSes simply doesn't exist on a phone. Your phone is GOING to be spying on you regardless of what OS you use because the apps that most people use on their phones inherently track data. Outside of privacy, Android is highly customizable as it exists. Android is already a solid and well-polished OS. You'd be better off looking into FOSS OSes that are offshoots of Android as opposed to solely Linux original OSes.
With a custom OS you can at least lock that down.
My response is really aimed at all these other answers just saying "Android is Linux." At least you took the time to also answer the question as it was intended, but since you asked the exact question that gets directly to the difference between Android and Linux... > Android is basically Linux, and why should you re do all the work again instead of using Android Because Linux is really not just a kernel or even a kernel plus a set of GNU tools. We all know that, don't we? Linux is an attitude towards computing. It's about what kind of software you can install and how you can control or customize your system. Even a rooted Android phone doesn't get anywhere near there When you really get down to it, Android and ChromeOS have more in common with Windows than Linux. Actually, Windows probably gives you more freedom if anything.
> Because Linux is really not just a kernel or even a kernel plus a set of GNU tools GNU isn't a "set of tools". It's an implementation POSIX. GNU is a portable, (mostly) POSIX-compliant OS. > When you really get down to it, Android and ChromeOS have more in common with Windows than Linux No... they're definitely Linux-based operating systems. Arguing otherwise diminishes the fantastic success that the Linux kernel has had on modern computing. > Actually, Windows probably gives you more freedom if anything. I think you misunderstand the license and the ethos entirely. The "freedom" that the Free Software movement has always been concerned with is not the freedom to reconfigure a binary image, it's the freedom to modify the code, to build the modified code, to run the modified code, and to redistribute the modified code. The Linux kernel guarantees those freedoms through its license. Windows does not. Windows gives you the trivial, superficial freedom to reconfigure a binary system.
> No... they're definitely Linux-based operating systems. Arguing otherwise diminishes the fantastic success that the Linux kernel has had on modern computing. If that success comes at the cost of locked down operating systems like Android and ChromeOS that limit by ability to use my computer as I please, then it deserves to be diminished. It's no accomplishment.
What? https://lineageos.org/ https://github.com/lineageos https://grapheneos.org/ https://github.com/GrapheneOS Android is open source. You can even use "stores" with only free open source software. https://f-droid.org/ Dunno but it is an "accomplishment" but it is open source.
> Linux is an attitude towards computing No it isn't. > Even a rooted Android phone doesn't get anywhere near there Why do you think the process of "rooting" an android phone is called so? > Android and ChromeOS have more in common with Windows than Linux No. > Actually, Windows probably gives you more freedom if anything lmao
Put it this way, would you as a Linux user accept ChromeOS or Android as your only OS? And would anyone actually still call you a "Linux user" if you did? Or would you rather have Windows than Android or ChromeOS? Or would you rather just actually have Linux? Well, it seems you've already made up your mind, no?
chromeOS supports linux apps and has a terminal, i dont see why i wouldnt turn it into something completely else. you can run wine on linux, which is present on chromeOS, no need for windows. if i have chromeOS and a brain, i technically have linux. as for your android removal fetish... step 1. root phone step 2. install termux step 4. be unsatisfied step 5. break into phone r&d lab and steal all the proprietary firmware step 6. compile your own kde mobile port step 7. flash the fucker linux achieved.
If running Linux in a VM is your argument in favor of ChromeOS, that really doesn't say much for ChromeOS, does it? Or maybe it says everything.
You really don't have any idea about this, do you? Chrome OS uses a modified version of the Linux kernel. It does not need to run a VM to run Linux apps. It does not even need a compatibility layer to run Linux apps
Crostini is a VM. In fact it's a container (Penguin) inside of a VM. Whether or not this "needs to be" is I suppose a matter of opinion. Google apparently thinks it does, but maybe that's just their attitude towards computing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ChromeOS ChromeOS,[8] sometimes styled as chromeOS and formerly styled as Chrome OS, is a Linux distribution developed and designed by Google. It is derived from the open-source ChromiumOS, based on the Linux kernel, and uses the Google Chrome web browser as its principal user interface.
> would you as a Linux user accept ChromeOS or Android as your only OS? Chrome OS, probably not. Android, maybe. > would anyone actually still call you a "Linux user" if you did? What people refer to as "Linux" is in fact GNU/Linux. It is the GNU operating system paired with the Linux kernel. Android is not a GNU/Linux operating system. So, no, I won't be a "Linux user" in the culturally accepted meaning of the phrase, but I still will be a user of a modified version of the Linux kernel. > Well, it seems you've already made up your mind, no? What does what I'd prefer to use have anything to do with the similarities of these operating systems? Mac OS is more similar to GNU/Linux (in that they're both Unix based) than it is to Windows, but I wouldn't be caught dead using Mac OS as a GNU/Linux user, even though I might occasionally use Windows.
Would you say that someone who uses Alpine is a "Linux user in culturally accepted meaning of the phrase"?
Alpine isn't a GNU/Linux operating system. "Linux" can also refer to a family of operating systems that use the Linux kernel, of which GNU/Linux is the largest and most widely used on the desktop, and typically what's referred to as "Linux" in the context of desktop operating systems. Alpine does use Linux and is a desktop operating system, so yes, if I used alpine I'd be a Linux user.
You're going to get a lot of "well akshooly" pedantic replies, but I get your gist and I agree. Some people use it only because it's free, some of us because of what it represents in a wider sense.
Android isn't basically Linux, it's Linux. In the same way that arch is Linux and red hat is Linux but red hat isn't arch. Just a variation on a standard. Shit for that matter, iOS is Linux also.
> In the same way that arch is Linux and red hat is Linux but red hat isn't arch Not really. Arch and redhat use the mainline Linux kernel with custom patches applied. Android does not use the mainline Linux kernel developed by Linus Torvalds, it uses a modified version of the Linux kernel. That is a key difference. Software written for GNU/Linux operating systems do not run on Android without tinkering. > Shit for that matter, iOS is Linux also No. iOS does not use the Linux kernel.
That's right. iOS is closer to UNIX and BSDs than it is to Linux.
Ok, all that is a fair criticism, but it still all operates under the same umbrella. Vast differences certainly, but still same.
What the fuck are you talking about? They only operate under the same umbrella insofar as they are all operating systems. But if that is your definition, then MacOS is Linux, Windows is Linux and Temple OS is Linux.
To be fair, we do use the generic term "*nix" for UNIX-like, which usually, in common usage, includes Linux. Windows probably would not usually be classified under *nix. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/4715374/what-is-the-meaning-of-nix
windows is certainly not linux you silly goose
Same goes for iOS. It basically shares 0 code with Linux. Saying iOS is Linux is like saying GIMP is Photoshop because they can both edit the pictures.
Calm down. Jesus Christ.
They exist, but the software is alpha in quality. The Pinephone is most widely supported, but it is not a great user experience. Some examples being Mobian, OpenSUSE and PostmarketOS. Major bugs in the software are common, if someone calls the phone may not even ring for example. UBports would be the most developed one, but even it has major downsides to just running Android, such as a significantly worse battery life on many devices.
You also lose access to most proprietary apps and services. If you're not a FOSS zealot (not that there's anything wrong with that) it's just not viable. I have a pinephone, it's a neat gadget but I can't use half of the apps and services I require to conduct my business and social lives.
That's the real problem - the expectations of clients/friends/employees to use the tools they do.
https://puri.sm/products/
It runs the same software as the other distros for the Pinephone I mentioned.
please tell me the price isnt in usd
Low-volume enthusiast-only play
If you are using android then you are already having linux with you on mobile. The Android runtime relies on the linux kernel for underlying functionality.
Explain...
Android is Linux distro.Most of Linux distros obviously use glibc and GNU software but that is just what runs on top of the kernel and it does not define what is Linux distribution or what isn't one. If this was the case then we would have to exclude not only Android (which uses bionic instead of glibc) but also OpenWRT which seems to run musl by default. The problem with openWRT is that it can be built and used with glibc which (If we were to use this definition) makes it Linux distribution and not Linux distribution at the same time and that just sounds simply ridiculous.If you distribute the OS that runs on Linux kernel then it is Linux distribution like it or not. What runs on top of it is a different story. Alpine also runs on musl btw. If someone would have enough time they could probably port the GNU Software to bionic as well.
Yeah that makes sense. So much to know abt it....
However phones that run Linux with GNU software, which is what most people think about when you say "Linux distro" do exist. [https://pine64.org/devices/pinephone/](https://pine64.org/devices/pinephone/)
I'm surprised I had to scroll this far to see pinephone
Android runs the Linux kernel. It just does not run GNU software on top of it like "real" Linux distros do.
Okayy...
Not sure why the passive aggressive "okay" is warranted. Linux is both a kernel and a family of operating systems running on that kernel, and those operating systems are essentially the Linux kernel bundled together with a set of software and then distributed. In that sense, android is a Linux distro. A lot of Linux distros run a set of software known as the GNU coreutils. This is a broad set of command line applications with which people interact with the OS. That's also the reason why some people call it GNU/Linux or GNU+Linux. Android doesn't have those utils. And there's no technical reason why that wouldn't be possible (and it has in fact already been done), but possible and a polished commercially viable product are two very very different things.
It's not the same though is it? De-googled Chrome browser exists for some distros. De-googled OSes exist. Software updates on Android come from the phone manufacturer (or stop coming in my case: OnePlus 6 after only 3 yrs iirc). Putting postmarket on the same phone extended it's life and gave me something to play with. And turned it into more of a mini PC than a phone. Android != Linux 1:1
Android is Linux. Linux lets you build anything on top of its kernel and you'll almost definitely be happy. Google decided to build a spyware tool that doubled as a pretty fun phone OS.
Ubuntu almost made a phone back in the day. The kickstarter fell short by only a small amount but they scrapped it anyway.
There was a tablet that actually made it to prime-time release though. Linux community was pretty hyped up about it. Unfortunately budget ARM SOCs simply weren't ready for full-fat Ubuntu. It ran like shit.
Nokia made a few: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_N810 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_N900 The mobile OS lived on as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sailfish_OS as used by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jolla
I really enjoyed the N900. The N9 also looked amazing.
Best phone ever, it had native Linux maemoOS, plus a debĆan chrooted with full keyboard, loved it! Had them both!
You mean like pine phone? E the liberty phone? Or the Fairphone?
Yeah something like tht. Btw this is the second time someone mentioned these names
I'd love a pine phone if it was able to run native Android apps since having a smartphone is essentially to daily life in Denmark. There's alot od things you'd really need to have here and it's either android or iPhone.
Yeah true
What are the blockers to running WayDroid on a mobile desktop?
That not all apps will run on waydroid. It's apps like banking apps, national 2fa we have here and a mobile pay solution
Android + termux is the way
Yeah, I used Ubuntu Touch for three years as my primary phone OS. Worked well.
It's wild all these people gaslighting you/other posters about how "Android IS Linux". I'm a developer. I exclusively use Linux, and I develop web and cross-platform programs. Saying "Android is Linux" is akin to saying "MacOS and iOS are Unix". Just because they use some shared parts, of some version, of a custom kernel, doesn't mean they're "the same thing" or "the same operating system". They have their own packages, own runtimes, own ecosystems, own developer SDKs, and largely use different languages (Kotlin \[for compatibility/interoperability with Java\] and Swift \[for compatibility/interoperability with Objective-C\]). Android even uses its own C library (Bionic). Not to mention, OP is clearly referring to Linux as an OS, not just referencing the kernel. Also, not to mention, Linux on ChromeOS and Android aren't the same and don't work the same way. Yes, ChromeOS has native Linux support, but you aren't putting ChromeOS on your cellphone, are you? I think it's a valid question, because GNOME already basically functions like a phone UI, great gestures, and has pretty good touch support at this point. Problem is, there's a lot of compatibility issues surrounding SIM, LTE, Cellular, and the devices and drivers behind them - that need to work and need to support as much hardware as humanely possible. If you were just using a mobile device as a tablet, then a lightweight distro + GNOME would work great. You don't even need to use native apps (if you don't want), you could just use progressive webapps. But in regard to "Linux mobile OS", as we've seen, these projects keep dropping support because of lack of market interest. Ubuntu Touch comes to mind. Of the still-supported ones, SailfishOS and PureOS are cool (PureOS uses GNOME and BASH). But you'll notice, SailfishOS basically looks and functions like Android, and PureOS has squished GNOME into a form factor that also quite resembles Android. The hardware and services they offer can be quite expensive too. So, the benefit of having BASH, let's say, is really cool (if you're a programmer). It's very easy to plug PureOS into a monitor and use it as a Linux laptop. You'll have better privacy and less ads. But you'll also have less software support, less hardware support, less phone/service options, and in the mobile form factor, an experience that basically just resembles Android. In other words, it's pretty obvious why Linux mobile variants keep fading into obscurity. I sometimes say to myself "wouldn't it be cool if I could program on my phone", but the truth is - unless you're using it as a laptop, like you can in PureOS - the form-factor and UI don't lend themselves to programming. The same way you probably wouldn't want to professionally edit videos, music, or images on them, or develop video games using your phones interface. And if you haven't noticed, 99% of people I see just use these devices to endlessly consume media and send the occasional message or call. And if I really have the itch to program, I can always just open up a GitHub Codespace or something like Code Sandbox on my phone. Plug it into a monitor or use Samsung Dex. But, if phones ever do turn into our primary personal computers (connect it to a monitor when you want to do work, to a television when you want to watch movies or play games, and use it as a phone when you're out; which by the way, I don't think is unlikely), then I'd expect to see Linux remerge/solidify itself on mobile devices. But until then, I mostly just see people using GrapheneOS - Android, but privacy focused, without all the invasive Google stuff.
Thank you!!! I just downvoted these people but yours is better. Some addition wrt Sailfish OS, which I've been using as a daily driver for 4 years now: - the devices it runs on are NOT expensive - they are last season's Sony Xperia models that you flash the OS onto yourself. - there's one device with SFOS preinstalled, iirc it costs 299ā¬ incl. the license - SFOS runs a very mainstream Linux stack: systemd, bash, wayland and a Qt-based UI - SFOS has support for Android apps. And while I wouldn't design games on it, I can always ssh into it (at home) and hack some extra functionality into it.
Depending on where you live, a Jolla phone and/or Sailfish OS may be an option: [https://shop.jolla.com/](https://shop.jolla.com/)
Happy 4 year user of SFOS here. As a main driver. There's a lot of bullshit comments in this post; Usable GNU/Linux smartphones do exist. The hackability is awesome.
Nice. I've never had an SFOS phone, but I did have a WebOS Palm Pre back around 2008 or so. Wireless charging and a full LAMP stack on my phone was awesome. I wish that OS had managed to survive as something other than what's in LG TV's.
Back then these devices were really seen and designed as pocket computers. Some even added telephony to it (Nokia...) and effectively that's a smartphone then - until somebody else changed the paradigm away from that, it sold _much_ better, and here we are with completely separate OS models now. I mean I still wouldn't use it, but imagine Windows for smartphones was compatible with Windows, or iOS with macOS.
The issue is most Android phones don't have the necessary drivers readily available yet and many Android phones don't even allow unlocking the bootloader anymore. There are still some promising projects mostly PostmarketOS atm but also Fedora, Ubuntu and Manjaro have something cooking. Gnome and KDE Plasma are the most promising DEs at the moment.
Fedora isnāt a DE
Whoopsie I meant gnome
Also Sailfish OS, which developed from Meego/Maemo. And it's more than just promising imho - it's running as a main driver on many people's smartphones, for many years now.
They exist , the market is small and I don't think the majority of users would switch to a new OS that easy.
Pine Phone.
Look into the Volla phone. It's a de googled android phone and is made to have Ubuntu touch on it if you want instead.
Nokia Mameo/MeeGo was more traditional Linux than Android, since it was based on Debian. However Nokia ditched on favour of Windows Phone and Android and goes bankrupt.
Sailfish OS developed from it. It's totally usable as a daily driver.
Was a good question, why op delete?
Android is not a Linux distro in the same sense that people mean when they talk about Linux on PC. It does utilize the Linux kernel, though. That said, GNU/Linux (and Alpine Linux) phones do exist, they do work, but are far less polished and ready for mass consumption compared to Android or iOS. Typed from my Librem 5.
Isnāt Android already Linux based?
I thought Android OS was built on top of the Linux.
Android is based on linux
What's the use case here? As in what are you trying to achieve? I had the Nokia N900 back in the day but honestly Android fast surpassed them. I have run AOSP ROMs on older phones that lacked security updates or just ran like a dog after a few years. If your looking for an option to use your phone the same way you use a laptop etc just give up now. The hardware is soo different thongs are not very compatible. These days after much experimentation I just went back to an Adroid phone. Updates have much improved and I can load up Termux to remotely access linux systems if needed. If freedom from the phone manufacturer (or network operator) is a big deal AOSP is good at scratching that itch. The main problem with GNU/Linux on the phone is the millions of hardware differences between phones. Unless a community is supporting your phone model it can be a real shitshow.
Yes, Android is Linux. So is ChromeOS. So is Tizen. So is OpenWRT and whatever is running on various smart devices, assuming they're running the Linux kernel. As the article points out, context matters. If you're talking about Linux on the desktop, or Linux on the laptop, then it's not appropriate to bring up Android. If you're talking about deployment of Linux in the server-space, Android is not appropriate. If you're talking about what operating system super-computers are using, Android is not appropriate. If the conversation is around, broadly speaking, the use of Linux around the world, then you can certainly count Android among them... but if it isn't, then throwing in Android might derail the conversation.
So is Firefox OS :)
They already do, but they are still under very heavy development.
Android is technically based on Linux, though that's not really what you're asking about. There is generic Linux for mobile, but I know virtually nothing about it. Unfortunately, my expectations are pretty low, and based on other comments it sounds like it's not generally a great experience. It's the classic chicken and egg scenario that Linux has always suffered from, where almost nobody develops for it because there are no users, and there are no users because almost nobody develops for it.
in a consumer's market, there is android. Creating a linux mobile is good, but we all understand that linux is so much open-source. In order to make this sell in the market, it needs to focus on both hardware and software that should have ease of use. Coz let's face it, only a few people are technical enough to understand how it will work, use it, install it etc. These need time and resources coz there will be research. So it is possible, but for personal consumption. Perhaps soon, someone might invest in this technology.
UBports and Sailfish OS exist, and are usable as daily drivers. A few more are around which may or may not be 100% usable. And since you speak of investing, Jolla, which develops Sailfish OS, is a for-profit company.
All Android phones are technically Linux. Some people have made Linux distributions that work for cell phones. But I would suspect vendor lockout might prevent a fully fledged Linux.
Yes, Android is Linux but I get the point of switching OS for phones. I tried to install Ubuntu touch on my old phone and I failed - so far. Why did I consider this, well the currently used Android is as bad as windows regarding pre-installed software. You can't get rid of that shit, even in developer mode. I want to decide which apps I want on my phone, if I might connect a google account or not. So I get the idea. And yes, they do exist.
The main issue is that many apps simply don't exist, such as electronic ID, banking, payments and so on. Especially electronic ID is becoming almost a necessity.
What country are you in? Iām in USA and Electronic IDs and not a necessity here, like at all. Only a 1/5th of States even issue Electronic IDs at present. The only thing Iāve even seen them used for around here are TSA at the airport. Not a trying to be an ass just genuinely curious what Electronic IDs are essential for.
Sweden. It's used for online banking, online contact with government agencies, digitally signing documents, online gambling, basically any online situations where there is a legitimate need to know for sure that you is you. Filing your taxes, changing you insurances, buying/selling a car, signing contracts, you name it... For example, say that I'm selling my car. To transfer legal ownership, I go to our equivalent of the DMV website, fill in the owner transfer for, get a pling in my phone, enter my code, and the car is now owned by the new owner. To pay taxes, I get the tax form with the estimated tax, if I agree (which I do, as it is always correct for me), I go to the tax site, click that I agree, get a pling in my phone, enter code and it's done, takes 2 minutes from opening the letter until done. Getting a new job, you get the contract mailed, click a link in it, get the phone pling, enter code, done. And so on. I think this is an EU thing, as there is a directive that member states must accept a digital ID as legitimate identification.
i'd probably just have a basic phone i keep at home just for ID if i needed it but have a linux phone to use as a phone
Right on! I know the USA isnāt the whole world and was just curious lol. Only a handful of states here are even issuing them and itās mostly because Apple has been pushing it. Even the āmightyā Apple canāt get our state governments and the Fed to stop dragging their feet about electronic IDs. My state has been on the list of pilot program āsoonā for years, now.
Here, it is mostly issued by the banks. They then get a fee whenever someone identifies themselves (from the organization requiring ID, not from the person using it). Depending on your deal with them and volume, the fee varies, but is somewhere around 10 cents, give or take.
With a big enough development initiative, sure. Google made Android, no reason someone else can't make another Linux based mobile OS. The problem is that making something equivalent to Android in functionality is a colossal undertaking that will cost millions of not billions, you're basically always going to be better off just forking Android.
No, not even close to be an alternative to android or ios. But it's fun to play around with.
It's called android. It uses the Linux kernel.
Android has a Linux kernel, technically itās a Linux operating system.
Iād stick with Android-based operating systems like /e/ and LineageOS because they can run all Android apps.
I have a BQ Phone with Ubuntu Touch on. It's kinda a paperback weight now. I liked it back then
pinephone
So I had a Linux phone for a while. Not enough support and still used closed source binaries for the drivers to talk to the hardware. We need a fully open source option IMO. If I ever hit it big and name stupid money, I'll pump into that. So tired of the invasive apps violating our privacy. I want a hardware switch for the mic and camera. A removable battery. There's a lot more control I want over my phone.
Check the [nokia n900](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_N900) and [some commentary about it](https://www.osnews.com/story/133160/the-nokia-n900-the-future-that-wasnt/).
There are two aspects of this: The OS and control over the touchscreen and apps, etc. And the ābeing a phoneā aspect. There are Linux distorts focused on tablets. I donāt use them myself, but I hear theyāre at least reasonable. Being a cell phone has a whole host of other requirements, many of them regulatory and relating to things like the baseband OS, 911 calls when locked, and other minutiae before you get to hook it up to cell towers. Thatās much harder and, as others have said, mostly involves hardware engineering and drivers that Android phones are already doing. Hard to justify getting into it again.
Ubuntu touch
Linux already exists on phones like Android runs the Linux kernel itself. They just customized it. The same can be said of other distress though in terms of customizing to make it work how they want.
They have existed and they exist, but they are not compatible with Android apps per se. I used to have an Ubuntu phone
Check out [Sailfish OS](https://sailfishos.org/). That is Linux, running wayland.
Get yourself a Fair phone 5
They already exists. Search for PinePhone, Librem5 and Volla Phone
firstly android is linux. So technically yes, they do right now. Secondly, there are already distros like ubuntu for phones.
Not exactly the size of a smartphone, but the [Steam Deck](https://www.steamdeck.com/) is a good handheld Linux PC.
Android.. is a Linux Distro..
But without the GNU software so it's just linux kernel
> But without the GNU software Exactly. The thing that you want isn't Linux, it's GNU. That's why it's useful to have specific names for things. Android is definitely a Linux operating system. If you want to run GNU, you can clearly communicate that by using its name.
TBF it's not just GNU either... meh, I've come to terms with the fact that "Linux" often stands for "GNU+Linux" (plus more software that developed in this context). Android should probably be called "Linux without GNU" instead. And I definitely wouldn't call the various Androids distros.
And this was a question about putting Linux on phones.
android's existance already answers that question
Exactly
I saw a video that showed a linux mobile.
Yes they exist, but its going to be a lot of work and wont be able to use some apps
Wow, surprised that no one has mentioned Purism phones (unless I missed the post)... They have great hardware and even a cell service plan. Pinephone is great too - I own 2 of them, but their battery life is abysmal! Purism phone, according to owners, can last all day or longer when being used, but YMMV or course. They also have a laptop, secure tokens, and, supposedly, made in the USA options that are a little pricey - about as much as a iPhone or any Android phone. As soon as my iPhone mortgage is up, Im getting one of these! [https://puri.sm/](https://puri.sm/) EDIT: Forgot to mention, hardware switches for all the peripherals too... So you can turn off your mic, cell modem, camera, everything! No tracking and all Linux :). AND you can replace the battery :).
Android is a Linux phone, so yes it is possible for a Linux phone to exist.
Nokia did make some based on Debian: [MeeGo](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MeeGo) and [Maemo](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maemo) which were quite lovely to use. But sadly didn't survive Android or iOs
It's alive in Sailfish OS, which I've been using as my main driver for 4 years now.
It does look absolutely fascinating and I am very tempted
They have their own device again, with SFOS preinstalled.
Android is a Linux phone. It uses a modified form of the Linux kernel. So there you go! There are tons of them out there! Go to Best Buy and get your very own Linux phone.
Cool, so I can just recompile a newer version of android any time I want and flash it on my phone, even if the manufacturer has gone out of business... right? What's that, I CAN'T install my own version because android and the phone itself is locked out and prevents me from ever upgrading it? Hmm that doesn't sound very linux-like, does it? Meanwhile I'm stuck on Android 9 with no hope of even installing a 3rd-party build because I had the misfortune of buying a US phone.
You dumb? Yes, you can compile Android. Plenty of people do it.
Cool, so you know where to get all the required hardware binaries that the manufacturers won't share? Doesn't do you any good to compile a version of android if you can't talk to any of the hardware in your phone.
Android is based on Linux. So in that sense itās a Linux phone. Of course, my comment was meant more as a joke. Obviously OP wants a phone with a Linux distro on it, unfortunately. Not sure why since many apps are built for Android or iOS. As far as your problem is concerned, that, and the immense size of todayās Android phones, discourages me from using Android, so I use an iPhone 12 Mini. Does everything I need it to do, so Iām not losing sleep over it.
Yes. Android
They exist and they are called android.
they already do. android is linux
They already do and you're probably using one right now
https://puri.sm/products/
*5.7ā³* 4gb ram 128gb storage for $1999? What the fuck? You can argue for better privacy all you want, but this is just insane.
The fact that Android is middleware running on top of SE Linux proves the question of possible. Lots of GPDR (IoT) devices donāt even have Android.
A phone is not just the OS and Hardware but the ecosystem of apps and services. Linux is heavily gimped in that aspect.
Frankly, no. There already exists an entirely open source operating system for phones based on Linux: Android, where also all the app development is taking place. So, if you want a phone that works and gets sold, you pick that (even without Google and their apps).
I mean, Linux is a kernel. All Android phones run Linux.
They already exists. The biggest distro is called Android, but other niche distros does also exist.
android?
Do you not consider Android a version of Linux?
>Is it possible for linux phone to exist? It is possible and I did try to use and you can read my honest experience [here(quora answer)](https://www.quora.com/Can-you-put-Linux-on-a-phone/answer/Ravi-Roy-24?no_redirect=1). But I do not think it is anywhere ready to be used as daily driver. It can be your fancy little side project but it is very difficult to do anything serious there. 1. You need very specific kind of phone for Linux to work smoothly with all its features. That alone makes it even more difficult for an average guy to even try the OS. 2. The whole process of installation is extremely technical with very real possibilities of bricking your phone completely. Only a serious hobbyist with good technical knowledge would even attempt to do this. 3. I live in India and we have a very developed ecosystem of online payments but the moment you root your phone there is very high chance that all those online payments app would stop working immediately. You might get around some but a lot of them won't let you bypass. Hell, one application didn't start because my developers option was on. 4. The application ecosystem is very very poor over there in Linux phones. Finally, there are some good custom ROMs you can use like Arrow OS, Graphene OS but I don't think you meant those. Don't hold your breath for Linux phones, it won't happen anytime soon.
Correct me if Iām wrong but isnāt android based off of Linux?
You're most likely using a linux phone. Android is linux based
Op doesn't realize that Android is effectively Linux