Google Pixels are no longer the AOSP reference device

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Impact on GrapheneOS and Custom ROMs

  • Removal of Pixel hardware repos (device trees, driver binaries, etc.) for Android 16 is seen as a major blow to custom ROMs, especially GrapheneOS and similar security-focused projects.
  • Pixel was uniquely attractive: strong hardware security, fast and long vendor support, and trivial install paths for ROMs; many bought Pixels solely to flash GrapheneOS.
  • Some fear this is “the beginning of the end” for GrapheneOS on new Pixels; others note existing devices remain usable until their driver/firmware support and security updates end.
  • LineageOS and other ROMs are mentioned as broader but less security-focused; GrapheneOS is viewed as niche but one of the largest privacy ROMs after Lineage.

Is AOSP “Dead” or Just Weakened?

  • One side argues that without device trees and blobs for any real hardware, AOSP is effectively “dead”: you can read the code but can’t get a full, secure, feature-complete build on actual devices.
  • Counterpoint: Google is still publishing Android 16 source and says it remains committed to AOSP; there are many non-Pixel AOSP-based devices.
  • Rebuttal: Pixels were the only phones with near-1:1 feature parity (e.g., Secure Boot) when running AOSP; losing that makes AOSP a “car without an engine” or “source-available” but not practically open.

Virtual Targets: Cuttlefish, GSI, GKI

  • Google points to Cuttlefish (a virtual Android device), GSIs, and GKI as new reference targets.
  • Several commenters say “you can run it in an emulator” is not a meaningful replacement for a real consumer device, especially for ROMs and security research.
  • There is uncertainty whether these targets are realistically usable for custom ROMs on Pixels, or mostly a smokescreen.

Android vs iOS, Lockdown, and DRM

  • Many see this as another step in Android drifting toward the iOS model: more locked down, tightly coupled hardware/software, and reduced user control.
  • Some still consider Android materially more open than iOS (sideloading, open codebase), but acknowledge the gap is shrinking.
  • Discussion touches on DRM and app-store gatekeeping: some argue only regulation can guarantee alternative app stores, sideloading, and alternative OSes.

User Trust, Motivation, and Alternatives

  • Several users say Pixels are no longer attractive if they can’t be controlled or reflashed; some plan to move to iPhone despite misgivings.
  • Others criticize Google for quietly changing long-standing behavior without clear advance notice, despite knowing how heavily the ROM ecosystem relied on Pixels.
  • Alternatives like GNU/Linux phones (postmarketOS, Sailfish) are noted, but their practicality is limited by hardware vendors and binary blobs.