You’ll only remove the trackers from your phone if you can add them back on? Just skip a step and keep all your trackers in that case, if you like 'em you like 'em ya know?
Before switching OS’s I need to know if it’s compatible with the features that I value. It’s okay if you don’t value the same features as I do, but there’s no reason to be both rude and provide no useful information at the same time.
Apologies if I came across as rude, but there has been several posters that are “interested” but couldn’t live without Auto or payment. It’s like of all the millions of features phones have, and the majority of dissenters here need the exact combination that GrapheneOS doesn’t support. I find that really odd. If you are one of the few that needs that, point taken and maybe it isn’t for you, but until today I hadn’t heard of Auto’s and now it’s critical and something that cannot be lived without.
Haha, I can see how that can be frustrating, especially because it seems like GrapheneOS provides a lot of value for lots of people minus those two features. After buying a car with Android Auto I have never bought a car without it. OEM car integration usually is very lacking especially when it comes to navigation. I wish there were open source alternatives to android auto. Thank you for the respectful response :)
Android auto requires deep system integration that is against the goal of grapheneos. It will likely removes all the benefit a degoogled phone will give you, since it require a close-sourced google app with privilaged access to your phone.
Thank you for the helpful links and the insight! Much appreciated! I see how the deep integration hardware integration of Android Auto makes it challenging to run it in a compatibility layer.
Does Graphene work with Android Auto?
This, and Google Pay/Wallet would be the deciding factor for me
You’ll only remove the trackers from your phone if you can add them back on? Just skip a step and keep all your trackers in that case, if you like 'em you like 'em ya know?
The two main features that aren’t biggies and GrapheneOS doesn’t support and they’re the deal breakers? Yeah, right…
Before switching OS’s I need to know if it’s compatible with the features that I value. It’s okay if you don’t value the same features as I do, but there’s no reason to be both rude and provide no useful information at the same time.
Apologies if I came across as rude, but there has been several posters that are “interested” but couldn’t live without Auto or payment. It’s like of all the millions of features phones have, and the majority of dissenters here need the exact combination that GrapheneOS doesn’t support. I find that really odd. If you are one of the few that needs that, point taken and maybe it isn’t for you, but until today I hadn’t heard of Auto’s and now it’s critical and something that cannot be lived without.
Haha, I can see how that can be frustrating, especially because it seems like GrapheneOS provides a lot of value for lots of people minus those two features. After buying a car with Android Auto I have never bought a car without it. OEM car integration usually is very lacking especially when it comes to navigation. I wish there were open source alternatives to android auto. Thank you for the respectful response :)
No it does not work with android auto. Sorry
No it doesn’t https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/2249-is-there-a-way-to-get-android-auto-to-work/ and https://grapheneos.org/usage#sandboxed-google-play-limitations
Android auto requires deep system integration that is against the goal of grapheneos. It will likely removes all the benefit a degoogled phone will give you, since it require a close-sourced google app with privilaged access to your phone.
Thank you for the helpful links and the insight! Much appreciated! I see how the deep integration hardware integration of Android Auto makes it challenging to run it in a compatibility layer.
Works on hands free for calls but not with Android auto.