[–] utopiah 2 days ago
[–] palata 2 days ago
My hope is that Motorola will continue like this, with cheaper models too.
[–] tommica 2 days ago
But I agree with your sentiment, there is hope!
[–] subscribed 1 day ago
Just buy something older (ideally version 8 or more recent) and switch to Motorola after few years, when Signature 27 is much less expensive.
[–] wiseowise 2 days ago
[–] phasephantasm 1 day ago
[–] stonewhite 1 day ago
[–] andai 2 days ago
[–] silisili 2 days ago
That said, I've never seen a regular Moto phone nearly this expensive, so who knows.
[–] judge2020 2 days ago
[–] alpha_squared 2 days ago
[–] Forgeties79 2 days ago
[–] wtallis 2 days ago
The M4 Mac mini was announced two years ago with 16GB RAM standard, starting at MSRP of $599, without anything like an education discount (which knocked another $100 off the machine), and stayed at that price until early this year when supply simply evaporated. Then the M6 model this fall went up by $300 for the same base memory and storage capacities. +50% in overall price of the entry-level machine, and probably not much of it was due to the M6 being a more advanced processor than M4.
[–] Kirby64 2 days ago
[–] californical 2 days ago
That was still after the RAMpocolypse had started but hadn’t hit Apple yet, I remember thinking Apple was immune
[–] hypercube33 1 day ago
[–] girvo 2 days ago
[–] freedomben 2 days ago
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] bjoli 2 days ago
Every time I buy sometning that is not Motorola I regret it, and it is like 85% because of this feature. I don't know how they do it, but it triggers reliably, never misfires.
People always suggest apps that supposedly should allow the same thing, but they never work, which makes me think Motorola uses some lower level sensor access to do it.
[–] terribleperson 1 day ago
Shake to flashlight is the perfect combination of easy to remember, easy to trigger, and actually useful. It should be industry standard.
[–] rickydroll 1 day ago
On a hike a few moons ago, as I approached a scenic overlook, another hiker pulled out their phone, twisted it, and took a picture. We had a brief conversation about our love for Motorola gestures.
If Motorola comes out with a lower priced phone with GrapheneOS and a Pixel quality camera or better, I'm there.
[–] annex-winged-cr 2 days ago
I was hoping that by being pre-installed, GrapheneOS's public image will slowly transition from being an "obscure OS that scary hackers go out of their way to install" into just yet another stock OS found on certain brands.
[–] tranq_cassowary 1 day ago
[–] newsy-combi 2 days ago
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] JumpCrisscross 2 days ago
I'm unconvinced there is a market for a premium GrapheneOS phone. It seems to do well in a niche where phones built for another OS get repurposed to it on the cheap.
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] ngl999 1 day ago
[–] tranq_cassowary 1 day ago
Generations of MTE improve over time. The implementation of MTE used on a Pixel 8 for example has certain side channels which arent present in the MTE used on an iPhone 17. That being said, it being imperfect doesn't make it irrelevant.
[–] kybernetikos 2 days ago
[–] JumpCrisscross 2 days ago
I’m glad to hear this. And I hope it succeeds. The top comments all complaining about price may just be reinforcing my biases.
[–] palata 2 days ago
Me too! And that more Motorola phones will support GrapheneOS later, including cheaper ones.
My first impression from the comments here is: if the only thing people complain about is the price, I guess it's not too bad :-).
[–] matheusmoreira 2 days ago
[–] tranq_cassowary 1 day ago
[–] AtHeartEngineer 2 days ago
[–] phasephantasm 1 day ago
[–] AtHeartEngineer 1 day ago
[–] HybridStatAnim8 2 days ago
[–] solyin 2 days ago
[–] bpavuk 2 days ago
[–] drnick1 2 days ago
[–] microtonal 2 days ago
[–] JumpCrisscross 2 days ago
To be clear, I’m not criticizing anyone balking at a $1,600 phone. I’m expressing skepticism at marketing a GrapheneOS phone at that price point.
[–] HybridStatAnim8 2 days ago
[–] sneak 2 days ago
If your max price point were $600 or something, sure, but once you’re above $1k what’s the difference? You already value it greatly.
[–] palata 2 days ago
2k is two times 1k. There are many things that I would not buy for double the price.
[–] Zetaphor 2 days ago
[–] kakacik 2 days ago
[–] spankibalt 2 days ago
Yeah, well, to me flagship is a one-word descriptor for "overpriced and enshittified device for suckers". Just in this case, now that the OS seems to deliver, it's the hardware. If you don't offer 3.5 mm audio, active stylus, full-feature USB-C 3.x+, and a uSD slot with a good enough screen in a slab you can get lost. It's that simple.
[–] zrobotics 2 days ago
Just those 2 alone disqualify a lot of the market. I'd like to have both, but I'm currently typing this on a pixel 9 with neither simply because the market isn't there for them.
[–] spankibalt 2 days ago
And Lenovo (Motorola)? For me, so far, nothing. Unless this or next year's successor to the Moto G Stylus 2025 model comes with a much better USB-C port (i. e. not just that cheap 2.0 garbage), runs on GOS, keeps the audio jack as well as the dedicated uSD slot, and improves the not-so-hot stylus.
[–] JCattheATM 2 days ago
[–] port11 1 day ago
[–] JCattheATM 1 day ago
[–] selectodude 2 days ago
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
People will be able to install GrapheneOS on supported devices themselves but it hasn't been stated that it will be the only option. There will be further announcements about support for it.
[–] matheusmoreira 2 days ago
You guys are going to reach a much wider audience now. Google doesn't sell Pixels worldwide but Motorola does.
[–] selectodude 2 days ago
[–] HybridStatAnim8 2 days ago
[–] selectodude 2 days ago
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] palata 2 days ago
GrapheneOS literally puts Motorola on the map for me.
[–] johnsea 2 days ago
No wonder if I see the "crap" my collegues have to endure with their Samsung phones in comparison to my rather quiet GrapheneOS phone. It has security and cost/time consequences. They could configure their phones better but don't care (due to insecurity what could break & complexity).
[–] Brybry 2 days ago
Pixel 11 Pro Fold is MSRP $1900+
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 MSRP is $1900+ ($2100 for 512GB storage)
Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra 512GB MSRP $1600 (and this was before a lot of hardware price increases, I imagine the Galaxy S27 will be more expensive)
iPhone 18 Pro Max 512GB $1500 on Apple Store
As memory and storage chips get more expensive, phones will continue to get more expensive. Even Qualcomm SoCs have seen significant price hikes. [1]
[1] https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/stocks/articles/qualcomm-t...
[–] Hello71 2 days ago
is motorola's phone folding?
[–] Brybry 2 days ago
There's not a lot of flagship phones that released recently which is why I included them alongside phones that do not fold but were released a bit earlier.
I think the most fair comparison will probably be the Galaxy S27 when it releases in early 2027.
[–] Kirby64 2 days ago
[–] hypercube33 1 day ago
[–] glenstein 2 days ago
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] mixtureoftakes 2 days ago
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
We're not currently putting a large amount of resources into finding Linux, AOSP or Chromium vulnerabilities this way because many others are doing it with far more resources including Google. There are much higher impact things for us to focus on instead. Our focus remains systemic privacy and security improvement rather than case-by-case fixing of bugs. We definitely do that much better through shipping Linux and Android patches much faster than the Pixel OS along with fixing many issues ourselves but it's not our priority for the most part. Certain parts of it are priorities such as finding and fixing VPN leaks because Google doesn't consider it to be a relevant security issue.
[–] charcircuit 2 days ago
[–] e12e 2 days ago
Been considering getting a couple just to test/use with Graphene...
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] 3abiton 2 days ago
Honestly I was looking lately for some deals for black friday or 11.11, and I saw that the Oppo Ultra 9X or whatever it's called, had a rom and a bootloader cve that would allow you to root it and replace god awful COS with someone AOSP based. The 12/256 is 1200€! And that's the chinese version. A phone with a last gen chip! Absolutely crazy. The ram prices are way worse than I thought.
[–] b112 2 days ago
[–] kQq9oHeAz6wLLS 2 days ago
I'm not saying none of them do, but you've made a heckuva blanket statement there with zero citation.
[–] b112 2 days ago
If you set your pricing by what it costs you to make, you're not very good at capitalism.
Prices also skyrocket relatively fast, and come down much slower, for the same reason.
[–] Dylan16807 2 days ago
[–] 71bw 2 days ago
In battery life and thermal performance alone, where Google seems to have conveniently ignored valid criticisms since the Pixel 6 series.
[–] anal_reactor 2 days ago
1. Most companies release their most expensive models first, and then follow up with cheaper ones. Like, that's business 101. Nvidia does it, Lego does it.
2. You're comparing a new flagship to a three-year old phone, bought second-hand. Like, those two serve completely different markets.
[–] pjmlp 2 days ago
[–] droserasprout 1 day ago
[–] thatsabadlook 2 days ago
[–] hcal 1 day ago
Im running linux/phosh on my 6+ now, but i playes with both the default os and the supported e/os systems on it too. All were good
[–] tranq_cassowary 1 day ago
/e/OS degrades security compared to AOSP, bundles privileged MicroG which makes connection to Google by default etc.
Linux/Phosh is based on a traditional Linux desktop OS which lacks system wide mandatory access control and an obligatory enforced app sandbox with a fine grained runtime permission model. Lots of its user space is using tech stacks written in memory unsafe code with much less exploit mitigations than modern Android.
It's not the same category of hardware and software.
[–] blackfawn 2 days ago
[–] Number-Six 2 days ago
[–] t0bia_s 2 days ago
[–] tranq_cassowary 1 day ago
[–] y-c-o-m-b 2 days ago
EDIT: after reviewing other comments in this thread, I can see how my post here wasn't received well by some. It looks like some people are questioning the trust put into Graphene. I definitely am not. When I said "strange partnership" here, that's not what I meant at all. I think Graphene is operating in a very hostile ecosystem and the more doors Graphene can open for their platform to reach people, the better. The "strange" part of the equation was more aimed at Motorola (and Google) for allowing privacy intrusions to happen and even encouraging it in some ways (Gemini), yet actively supporting a project that would counter it. Maybe I should have used the word "funny" instead of "strange".
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] y-c-o-m-b 2 days ago
[–] cromka 2 days ago
[–] y-c-o-m-b 2 days ago
[–] cromka 2 days ago
[–] rendaw 2 days ago
[–] y-c-o-m-b 2 days ago
[–] HybridStatAnim8 2 days ago
[–] y-c-o-m-b 2 days ago
The word strange as defined by the dictionary is "different from what is usual, ordinary, or expected".
You have a large publicly traded corporation advocating using a platform known for large privacy intrusions. This same corporation has partnered with a team that is providing a mechanism for fighting against those privacy intrusions. That is unexpected. I never said it was good or bad, just that it is strange.
EDIT: Here is another data point. Motorola themselves have been sued for breach of privacy:
https://classactionu.org/our-news/motorola-solutions-faces-p...
https://www.classaction.org/news/class-action-lawsuit-claims...
EDIT2: I can't reply to the posts any more, so I'll just finish this discussion off by saying I am merely making an observation. I see people here are getting offended and maybe misunderstanding my intentions. This is not an attack on GrapheneOS, I actually like Graphene and what they are doing. I just find it interesting that the very companies breaching our privacy are the ones that are partnering with Graphene. I did not say this was a bad partnership. The opposite, I actually think it's a very good thing. If I gave the impression this was somehow a jab at Graphene, it's not, I apologize if it came off that way.
[–] cromka 2 days ago
This is the problem. Did you expect grapheneos to somehow convince a major manufacturer to release a flagship phone JUST for grapheneos?
WHAT do you find strange in that relationship? Motorola offered to support some of their phones to be installed with Grapheneos and maybe a dedicated, pre-installed phone sometime down the line. This particular phone is the former.
You're seriously being irrational here. Maybe make your point exactly first because it's hard to tell what is it.
[–] HybridStatAnim8 2 days ago
Motorola stands to make a lot of money from this. They need to improve hardware but they benefit from that hardware. They likely provide early access but they already have that access themselves. From Motorolas perspective, they take on very little risk, if any, to tap into a market that has since been ignored, for existing GrapheneOS users, prospective GrapheneOS users, and for alternative OS users that benefit from yellowboot support. This is the most ordinary approach that could have been taken.
[–] sam1714 2 days ago
Motorola Solutions, the radio and public safety company, was split from the phone company shortly before Google purchased the phones in 2012.
There's no way the largest provider of police radios in the US and EU would be owned by a Chinese company.
[–] y-c-o-m-b 2 days ago
[–] Andrex 2 days ago
[–] newsy-combi 2 days ago
[–] Ritewut 2 days ago
[–] y-c-o-m-b 2 days ago
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] gonzalohm 2 days ago
You are going through the trouble of installing a privacy first OS and the first thing you do is handle your data to AI companies? That's pretty odd
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] nvme0n1p1 2 days ago
[–] lern_too_spel 2 days ago
[–] johnsea 2 days ago
I don't think so. And don't see a problem running GrapheneOS and using paid Gemini as long as the latter is properly separated. (This said, I use other AI atm).
[–] sidm0623 2 days ago
[–] y-c-o-m-b 2 days ago
[–] ThePowerOfFuet 2 days ago
[–] smithbob 2 days ago
[–] jrexilius 2 days ago
[–] aseipp 2 days ago
Radio firmware is probably somewhat broken in practice (what isn't these days) but ultimately the openness stuff is a red herring IMO as far as security is concerned, you either assume it's compromised or not.
[–] ysnp 2 days ago
Baseband firmware/processors are still making strides in terms of defending against attacks so I don't think we are at the point where backdoors are needed. More likely that undocumented AT commands, plausibly deniable bugdoors and existing memory corruption vulnerabilities are already convenient reality. However, part of that reality is also that once the cellular modem is exploited OTA it is still a massive task to traverse IOMMU restrictions and get device owner data/secrets from the userspace OS. It doesn't even grant visibility into application traffic which has been aggressively TLS encrypted since the mid 2010s.
[–] abdullahkhalids 2 days ago
The entities that are putting in backdoors don't respect the law, and obviously will do what they can to obfuscate the backdoor enough to pass regulatory reviews.
My threat model is precisely entities that don't respect law or are unethical. So, the question then boils down to whether current regulatory review processes can catch such backdoors and the people running these processes cannot be bribed or otherwise forced to skip proper review?
[–] ysnp 2 days ago
[–] cowlevel 2 days ago
[–] abdullahkhalids 2 days ago
Obviously since phone calls and text messages are unencrypted the baseband chip could send them elsewhere. But your internet communication should already be encrypted before it hits the baseband chip. So is the threat model Motorola has intentionally introduced a backdoor to leak data from the main chip to the baseband chip?
[–] jrexilius 2 days ago
[–] inkyoto 2 days ago
If I understand it correctly (but please do correct me if I am wrong), Qualcomm supplies the baseband OS as a signed binary blob.
[–] jrexilius 2 days ago
[–] eigenspace 2 days ago
I'm pretty uncomfortable with how many smartphones I'd like to buy end up being Chinese owned companies. I wish Fairphone had a better camera, if it did, I'd just buy one of those and call it day.
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] lucb1e 2 days ago
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
Fairphone is marketed as being a sustainable device with good long term updates and an ethical supply chain. However, the updates are very poor from the beginning and get much worse over time. It isn't clear that the marketing about the supply chain is much more accurate. Pixels and iPhones get much better updates and hold up better over the long term. It isn't clear whether a Fairphone has better working conditions than an iPhone and it's quite possible an iPhone has lower overall environmental impact per device mainly due to the efficiency of scale.
[–] ysnp 2 days ago
Independence from the Chinese manufacturing hegemony probably means opting for a flagship Samsung, 11-series Pixel or pre-2025 Sony flagship.
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] sellmesoap 2 days ago
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] cowlevel 2 days ago
[–] iamnothere 2 days ago
[–] creaturemachine 2 days ago
[–] ThePowerOfFuet 2 days ago
[–] lucb1e 2 days ago
[–] ram1500natrluvr 2 days ago
[–] deltoidmaximus 2 days ago
[–] drnick1 2 days ago
[–] sneak 2 days ago
[–] drnick1 2 days ago
This is still much better than handing over control of the entire OS and native apps to Google. The problem with email is that even if you operate your own server, realistically most emails will be sent to Google, Microsoft or Apple.
[–] anal_reactor 2 days ago
2. I know it's whataboutism, but from the perspective of a non-US consumer, it doesn't exactly make a difference which country exactly spies on me. I use a Chinese web browser because it covers all my use cases and I don't see a problem with that.
[–] LtWorf 2 days ago
[–] jazzyjackson 2 days ago
What non Chinese manufacture are you looking at? I liked Xperia I for being made in Japan but it’s still Chinese components underneath and as you say there’s no control of all the code.
There’s always Bunnie’s Precursor phone if anyone is interested in commercially developing something reasonably secure and auditable.
[–] manofmanysmiles 2 days ago
At the same time, the state has its flaws and I'm questioning whether a top down system can ever really work, not out of some kind of "fuck the man" point of view, but more of an engineering and systems design perspective. If the system is perfectly factored, there are no cross-cutting concerns. But in such a system there is no need to communicate or coordinate laterally, only up and down. This sounds very lonely.
And if this system has a flaw, not a specific flaw, but rather a flaw in the assumption that tree structures with abstraction are a good way to organize systems, it might be impossible to change from let's say a tree with a single root to multiple interacting trees, with multiple roots of authority. Or maybe this is possible if people can learn to exist in multiple seemingly incompatible realities simultaneously?
[–] glenstein 2 days ago
I also think it's easy to underestimate your footprint when it comes to ecosystems that involve money in any capacity. No Amazon, Steam, no card information on a Netflix app, no signing in to Google to read a NYT article.
I think either you care about these things categorically or you don't, and I don't think anybody is going to be in the middle space you seem to be envisioning, which is concerned enough about the risks to avoid all banking but still a casual enough attitude about a compromised phone that you're fine with it for uses you consider non-secure.
[–] iamnothere 2 days ago
The major problem is banking, although some banks still work with Waydroid, and a few banks have full featured websites that work. But you do have to be more selective.
[–] glenstein 2 days ago
Is a browser on compromised hardware supposed to be more secure than an app? Amazon, steam etc still risk exposing accounts authorized to make payments using your money. It's easy to think "I just won't use banks" and underestimate the risks of doing anything on compromised hardware, and the answer isn't to play the "what could possibly go wrong" game, it's to not use compromised hardware.
[–] iamnothere 2 days ago
I’m not really worried about mainstream Chinese manufacturers stealing my bank credentials. Fly-by-night budget phones full of crapware, yeah sure.
[–] Dylan16807 2 days ago
Also when I use my phone to watch something in a focused way, that's a high quality HD screen filling my field of view even better than a theater. The audio isn't quite as good, but the overall experience beats most TV setups. So unless you dismiss Netflix as a whole, I think your notion of the phone experience is overly narrow.
[–] z3c0 2 days ago
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] z3c0 2 days ago
[–] boterock 2 days ago
From a latin american POV, it is same-ish as USA manufacturers, they're also tracking everything we do to sell us more unneeded stuff.
The difference is that chinese government is just trying to sell stuff, while USA government is trying to convert all the southern continent into a colony to impose governments and suck up minerals in the meantime. If you ask me if I trust more China or USA, at least China's intentions are clear and direct.
Of course, you people will always have the argument of "national interest" which for us (at least tech-literate people) that's no argument, but still you will find some bootlickers in the mobs.
[–] kspacewalk2 2 days ago
Are you sure the Chinese government is choosing not to pursue these $evil_intentions[] you ascribe to the US, or are they simply yet unable to?
[–] boterock 2 days ago
Still, china are not the ones poisoning people criteria with AI ads and overtaking governments to sell entire countries to US funds.
Not talking about good or bad. I just say south people should defend south's national interest, which is not US interests as it has been demonstrated over the years.
[–] n2j3 2 days ago
[–] glenstein 2 days ago
That part is assumed, and the whole argument unravels once its established that the assumption doesn't hold. And then either the tankies show up, or everyone forgets about it until the next thread where the process plays out again.
[–] mcmcmc 2 days ago
[–] boterock 2 days ago
If we're talking about national interest, it's easy to tell which countries espionage affects us the most.
[–] solyin 2 days ago
Fascinating. The propaganda I've been fed is that China is the one hoovering up all the minerals so that they have control over the global supply chain for eg cobalt.
[–] boterock 2 days ago
US strategy is to pick up a fool with good marketing, inject a lot of money, win an election and rig the law so no contest happens.
So long for the "competitive capitalism" they so much preach about. You know how your politicians work in the inside, what makes you think they are less abusive with people they have no concern about.
[–] joshkojoras 2 days ago
[–] rootusrootus 2 days ago
[–] joshkojoras 2 days ago
[–] 999900000999 2 days ago
At this point I might as well code a messaging app called the honest spy.
Honest spy emails transcripts of all your conversations straight to the law enforcement in your jurisdiction.
[–] tranq_cassowary 1 day ago
[–] Sopel 2 days ago
[–] throwaway_9438u 2 days ago
[–] smithbob 2 days ago
[–] tranq_cassowary 1 day ago
[–] throwaway_9438u 2 days ago
[–] NoGravitas 2 days ago
[–] droserasprout 1 day ago
I don't know if you consider Moto G52 "history" already (rhode, 2022), but I've recently upgraded to this model and am very content. Official LOS 24, microSD, 3.5 jack, 5000 mAh, side-mounted FP, silicone cover. And a refreshingly humane for a non-Pixel phone bootloader unlock procedure — two fastboot commands and a webform.
I've always had a negative bias against Motorola Mobility, as with other companies that "exploit" old trusted brands they didn't create (HMD Global "Nokia", "Aiwa" franchise). But the hardware is actually great and relatively freedom-ready. I hope that Motorola/GrapheneOS teams will agree on offline bootloader unlock as mentioned itt. The perfect scenario would include relocking it with user-provided keys too.
About choosing a top-tier >$1500 model as a first collab: I think it's reasonable. Niche small-batch hardware is always expensive to produce. Why not maxx out the specs to cover both "normie" and "enthusiast" audiences to see how it goes?
[–] mjcarden 2 days ago
[–] ada-h00k 2 days ago
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
Pixels fill the need for budget devices well via the 'a' series, especially when purchased as used devices. 7 years of decent updates from launch for budget devices is very unique and makes used devices much more useful.
[–] ysnp 2 days ago
Is this confirmed as the latest iteration of the Qualcomm SPU or a different dedicated secure element?
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] x5q8 2 days ago
[–] drnick1 2 days ago
[–] warrantisall 2 days ago
[–] agile-gift0262 2 days ago
[–] izacus 2 days ago
[–] Grimeton 2 days ago
[–] unregistereddev 2 days ago
I've run a g power for 4 years straight, only replacing it because the phone had become unusably slow. My current 2024 model is still going strong and I have no plans to replace it.
But man I wish it were smaller. I'd be fine with it being thicker if only I could have a smaller screen.
[–] embedding-shape 2 days ago
I'd probably kill someone (bad) for the 3rd generation Moto G but with modern specs.
[–] passive 2 days ago
[–] lucb1e 2 days ago
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
https://www.motorola.in/smartphones-motorola-signature-27/p?...
[–] lucb1e 2 days ago
[–] brendyn 2 days ago
[–] collabs 2 days ago
[–] bordercontrol 1 day ago
Now, it could technically only communicate with other apps that have Google libraries. I doubt these libraries include any code that does that. They are not that big, and we can reverse-engineer them very well nowadays with AI.
A targeted attack is still possible, but they won't systematically exfiltrate your pictures through other apps. That's way too much traffic. They would easily get caught if they did this, for example, on my network.
[–] gonzalohm 2 days ago
[–] cromka 2 days ago
[–] szszrk 2 days ago
It showed up on some Polish listings (media expert) for ~7500zł and a thousand more for 16GB version. We are talking of a range of 1800€ for a phone.
[–] dmantis 2 days ago
Not like consumers have any choice really.
You either get a Pixel or a Motorolla at this point or get a dumb phone but loose a lot in everyday comfort.
Everything else is a locked system with age ids, company-approved software and espionage coming.
[–] drnick1 2 days ago
[–] szszrk 2 days ago
What is not normal is for a new Motorola to have prices at the level of iPhone pro MAX with 512BG of storage. That's an insane pricing.
I'm a Motorola phone user, using their flagship from a few years ago. It has amazing spec: at the time of release it had almost everything better than top Samsungs. I mean it - 1TB of UFS 4, 16GB of RAM, 120W charging with 50W wireless - none of this was a thing in Samsung back then (duh, even now!).
But I got my Motorola for half the price of those top Samsungs (~$750 with taxes), around 10 months after the release. At $1000 more? No, thank you.
[–] Sopel 2 days ago
[–] canucker2016 2 days ago
Motorola signature 27 will be available in markets worldwide in the coming months, with a starting MSRP of $1,599. For local price information and availability, please contact your local PR team.
but https://mobilesyrup.com/2026/11/05/motorola-signature-27-rev... says: ... and while we expected a Canadian release soon, Motorola is now saying that the device will be exclusive to the U.S. with no availability in Canada at this time.
So are they saying the same thing (US only at start, slow rollout to other countries later) or is it US only?[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] drnick1 2 days ago
[–] eckelhesten 2 days ago
I love grapheneOS but let’s not pretend that Gcam isn’t superior to the stock grapheneOS camera in terms of photo and video quality in the current pixel phones.
Would love to hear a response from the grapheneOS account on this subject. Would be awesome if we’d receive all the usual Motorola tweaks in the stock grapheneOS camera app.
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] eckelhesten 1 day ago
[–] goda90 2 days ago
[–] Telaneo 2 days ago
I would buy this, if nothing else to show my interest, but this is literally more than 2.5 times the cost of my current phone, which I bought brand new not much more than a year ago. I'm willing to pay a premium for GrapheneOS, but I'm not willing to pay a premium something we already had before the world went even more crazy than it already was.
[–] brnaftr361 2 days ago
[–] sam_lowry_ 2 days ago
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] laweijfmvo 2 days ago
> The world’s best camera system launched in 2026[25]
1. dxomark is flawed in terms of overall camera rating
2. there is no footnote 25 on the page[–] jauntywundrkind 2 days ago
One of the most exciting things is that GrapheneOS folks insist the bootloader not be locked. I continue to think actual Linux on the phone is kind of just waiting for us, that it'd be imminently possible. If we had some modern-ish devices with unlocked bootloaders. Especially if they are Qualcomm chipsets, which have been seeing a lot more linux upstreaming/mainlining support than any other ARM platform. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49361686
[–] HybridStatAnim8 2 days ago
GrapheneOS, Android, and android based OSs, are all linux distros.
[–] jauntywundrkind 2 days ago
I think most readers are able to understand what I mean when I say Linux.
Given that Android doesn't respect me as a user at all, that it sandboxes me out of my own system, I can maybe regard it as a Linux perhaps, but as it ships: it's never my Linux. It's Google's Linux. Running on my device.
[–] abound 2 days ago
This will likely be my next phone, my biggest hope is that Android Virtualization Framework (AVF) is well-supported along with DP Alt Mode, as the chips in modern smartphones are powerful enough to be a full-on laptops, just add a keyboard/mouse/display or a laptop shell.
[–] ysnp 2 days ago
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] ysnp 2 days ago
[–] milkytron 2 days ago
Specifically wondering about the audio, camera features, EVS sensor (idk what this is tbh but seems to improve camera features), OIS, etc.
I would happily buy this for $1600 if all features are supported on GrapheneOS, but if Graphene ends up severely handicapping the hardware, it seems like the price may not be worth it compared to the Pixels that support Graphene.
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] fooqux 2 days ago
[–] anonym29 2 days ago
• Google stopped publishing Pixel device trees and driver binaries with the Android 16 AOSP release (June 2025); the Pixel 10 was the first device shipped under that regime.
• In August 2026, Google moved to gate Pixel kernel source behind a manual Google Form / Google Drive handout with squashed commit history.
• Google shipped the Pixel 11 with firmware that force-disables MTE (arm64.nomte); QPR2 Beta 4 restored firmware-side MTE but the OS still has it disabled, and whether Google ever deliberately cut it rests on leaked documents.
• Google has been shipping QPRs to AOSP late.
• Google has began enforcement of strict identity verification for Play Store publishing, and add additional friction to the process for users to install APKs from outside of the Play Store.
On the value side, tensor chips have never been particularly performant, Pixel hardware has always been middling at best, and accordingly, Pixels were never a great value to begin with, they were midrange phones priced like they were flagship phones.
If anything, I think the only real downside here is that this offers "just enough" of an escape hatch from the most detestable properties of Google's increasingly user-hostile Android ecosystem to stymie what might otherwise be enough frustration from privacy-minded power users to start adding momentum to the non-Android linux smartphone ecosystem/movement.
[–] izacus 2 days ago
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
Pixel 11 series should get MTE with Android 17 QPR2 and we plan to support those once they have it. Our requirements were not lowered due to Pixels missing a security feature. We had Pixel 11 support essentially completed but didn't ship it due to this. We didn't know it was going to get fixed via updated firmware but that now appears to be the case. We were expecting that we'd have to skip supporting the devices after doing most of the work.
[–] UnreachableCode 2 days ago
I've cut out social media and a browser. The only thing left that I want now is a smaller, less distracting form factor
[–] drnick1 2 days ago
[–] user2722 2 days ago
That being said, have you tried putting all apps in 2nd profile and forcing somehow the keyboard to always show?
PS: don't forget to enable T9!
[–] UnreachableCode 2 days ago
Do you mean to say I'll find it difficult? Challenge accepted.
Thank you! No I really just want to get rid of the large screen phone. Yes, I like T9 a lot and will enable it.
[–] lucb1e 2 days ago
Anyone know what ThinkShield is? "from the factory to the phone" sounds, well, weird, but maybe they mean it's some sort of tamper proofing from where they flash the firmware until you get the phone? Is that new for GrapheneOS versions?
> Motorola’s commitment to bringing cutting-edge security to everyday users across the globe. \n\n That commitment runs deeper than software: GrapheneOS sets demanding requirements for the hardware it runs on and how it’s kept updated
Besides providing timely security updates, which one would hope they do regardless of Graphene pushing them, isn't it Graphene doing all the actual software work? Since motorola refer to commitments "deeper than software", it sounds like motorola made some software commitments as well
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] ysnp 2 days ago
https://www.motorola.com/gb/en/business/thinkshield has been around for a few years and definitely predates their GrapheneOS partnership. My best guess for what it is would be an equivalent to Samsung's Knox https://www.samsungknox.com/en. A suite of features and tools and compliance certificates that make enterprise-oriented security easier.
>Besides providing timely security updates, which one would hope they do regardless of Graphene pushing them, isn't it Graphene doing all the actual software work? Since motorola refer to commitments "deeper than software", it sounds like motorola made some software commitments as well
They are probably referring to meeting GrapheneOS's hardware-backed (deeper than software) requirements which include things like usable MTE support, a decent quality integrated secure element with Weaver support, hopefully things like Wi-Fi privacy improvements and so on.
I still think it is miraculous that Motorola committed to seven years of security and OS updates, and I am not surprised they have mentioned things like "bi-monthly updates" and qualifiers like "up to seven years of security updates" in various bits of marketing copy so far. From my understanding Motorola intend to adopt some GrapheneOS features with Thinkshield rebranding for their Moto OS (for which they are solely responsible). GrapheneOS may well help them with AOSP bug fixes and security fixes, but Motorola will also have no involvement in GrapheneOS.
The phone will be released with Moto OS as normal and Motorola's developers will do all the work for it. It will however be fully compatible/relockable with GrapheneOS.
[–] ipsum2 2 days ago
[–] ahmedbaracat 1 day ago
[–] Rooster61 2 days ago
A) China's intelligence laws greatly suggest those blobs are going to have backdoors, particularly for the modem
B) Even if they weren't using backdoors, there's nothing stopping the US from unilaterally banning all Chinese made devices (something I definitely don't put past them since the TPLink incident)
It's already not guaranteed that the US govt won't outright ban the use of GrapheneOS, so adding the extra risk of Chinese manufactured phones getting the kibosh stateside makes me not want to risk $1600 on a phone.
[–] iamnothere 2 days ago
[–] fooqux 2 days ago
A) This is already the case for basically every phone for sale, and thus isn't really applicable to this article. Also, I thought the modem was by Qualcomm?
B) Sure, they could ban all Chinese made devices but that would basically mean banning all devices. Pixels are made in China just like Motorola, so again, not much of a difference here (I'll allow that there may be a difference of just how much of the phones are made in China.)
C) How is the government going to ban the use of an open source OS? And why would they? Apple has spit in the government's eye a few times and yet they don't ban iOS.
[–] Rooster61 2 days ago
A and B) Sure, but you said it yourself: that how much is a significant factor. And Pixels use Samsung modems, not Qualcomm
C) How does the government ban anything? Through legislation and enforcement. That can take a number of different forms
[–] fooqux 2 days ago
Yeah and Samsung foundry makes Qualcomm chips. So does TSMC, but I'm pretty sure China doesn't control that despite what they may say. At no point while searching online did I see mention of these chips being made in China.
> Not intended to be FUD, legitimate concern. I could see how it could come off that way.
No problem!
[–] tranq_cassowary 1 day ago
Not sure why GrapheneOS should look at USA isolationist tendencies when making partnership decisions. If it were to take into account all hypothetical future trade barriers and regulations of all possible countries, no decisions could be taken anymore.
[–] wildzzz 2 days ago
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] Rooster61 2 days ago
[–] bigstrat2003 2 days ago
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] warrantisall 2 days ago
[–] InsidiousWombat 1 day ago
[–] Grapho 2 days ago
[–] jon128 2 days ago
[–] mlu 2 days ago
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] nsvd2 2 days ago
[–] Itoldmyselfso 2 days ago
The curved display edges seem like a weird choice also, nobody seems to prefer those. Hoping to see better options with GOS support next year.
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] Propelloni 2 days ago
[–] yaro330 2 days ago
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] kevincox 2 days ago
[–] luca020400 2 days ago
The truth coming from graphene or Moto won't be a factor.
[–] drnick1 2 days ago
[–] caust1c 2 days ago
Heck yeah, I'll buy one. Seems like a great phone to hack on. Shame it's so cost prohibitive for most people right now though.
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] vollbrecht 2 days ago
[–] Glyptodon 2 days ago
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] corroclaro 1 day ago
But if it drops down to ~1300 EUR, it'll be a go.
[–] class3shock 2 days ago
[–] moogly 2 days ago
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
https://www.motorola.com/us/en/p/phones/signature/motorola-s...
[–] hypfer 2 days ago
I suppose the target audience here is "tech enthusiast whales"? I kinda doubt they truly need the protections GrapheneOS provides, though.
Or rather, whatever data those protect is probably thrown out of the window anyway for other and likely not very smart reasons.
[–] bschwindHN 2 days ago
Phone hardware from the past decade can handle this content no problem and they cost in the low hundreds of dollars. The only reason you would need faster hardware is for gaming, but if you're serious about gaming, I'm not sure why you're on a phone to begin with.
[–] fooqux 2 days ago
[–] rcMgD2BwE72F 2 days ago
[–] hypfer 2 days ago
Whereas with the laptop, spending more does. Up to a point anyway, but that cut-off sits higher than with phones.
[–] bigstrat2003 1 day ago
[–] mapierce2 2 days ago
… "an privacy" …
A confidence-inspiring typo, unless there is a novel way of pronouncing "privacy" that I'm unaware of.
[–] jazzyjackson 2 days ago
[–] Rooster61 2 days ago
[–] gib444 2 days ago
If you say "an privacy" it'll sound like English isn't your first language.
[–] Rooster61 2 days ago
Also, it's not even the noun phrase according to the sources I'm looking at (namely Merriam-Webster) which state that it is always dependent on the word directly following the article, not even the entire phrase.
[–] gib444 2 days ago
[–] dazhbog 2 days ago
[–] ysnp 2 days ago
[–] ethagnawl 2 days ago
[–] HybridStatAnim8 2 days ago
[–] koterpillar 2 days ago
¹AD
[–] fooqux 2 days ago
[–] newsy-combi 2 days ago
>an privacy
>The motorola signature 27 includes the world’s best camera sytsem launched in 2026
>sytsem
What are even doing here. This level of sloppiness/laziness/cheapness in an announcement for a 1.6k product that promises quality above all. Insane.
[–] rcMgD2BwE72F 2 days ago
[–] aiwejrlawjr 2 days ago
[–] fooqux 2 days ago
1) The best camera is the one you have in your hand... Or in your pocket. Your fancy Sony or whatever doesn't help if it's at home or turned off in your bag with no lens on it when something magical starts happening that you wish to capture.
2) Most people don't care. They're not photographers. All they want is to take a picture, have it look "good enough" with zero effort, and be able to immediately share it with friends. You're taking about an entirely different market.
[–] dingaling 2 days ago
Not necessarily. Sometimes it's better to forget about taking the shot if all you have is a phone camera.
The best camera is ... the one that's best tailored for the shot. Everything else is a compromise or, as we used to say, a waste of film.
[–] fooqux 2 days ago
They'll pull their Pixel out of their pocket, hit the power button twice, and immediately take 100 photos that will all end up looking at least halfway decent.
I carefully plan my art. I know where the sun will be. I know where I'll be standing, with what cameras, and what lenses on them. I'll have the manual settings already configured. I'll even have in my head what frame the final picture will go into.
But if my daughter suddenly starts running through my leaf pile with a huge grin? In pulling out my Pixel.
[–] kartoshechka 2 days ago
[–] reaperducer 2 days ago
Apple gets accused of being too flashy, but at least it shows you what you're expected to pay $1,500 for.
There should at least be links to download images for publication.
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
https://www.motorola.com/us/en/p/phones/signature/motorola-s...
[–] yitchelle 2 days ago
[–] Forgeties79 2 days ago
Proofread your stuff, folks. Right there in big print for all to see.
[–] maelito 2 days ago
[–] bahmboo 2 days ago
[–] busymom0 2 days ago
[–] monegator 2 days ago
[–] CivBase 2 days ago
[–] HumblyTossed 2 days ago
[–] warrantisall 2 days ago
[–] Onavo 2 days ago
[–] yaro330 2 days ago
These prices are insane though. Just absurd.
[–] Onavo 2 days ago
The OnePlus tablet 4 would be amazing if not for the corners they cut..
[–] yaro330 2 days ago
[–] dopa42365 2 days ago
Somewhat surprisingly, Lenovo/Motorola here has some of the more affordable mainstream phones (200€-ish for the G56), beating other Chinese brands that played around tiny margins and got hit even harder by memory prices now.
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] asnelt 2 days ago
I'm currently using a Pixel 9 Pro with GrapheneOS and not in the market for the Signature 27 because of size and low RAM. But I'm definitely considering upcoming Motorola devices with GrapheneOS support.
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] Onavo 2 days ago
[–] Andrex 2 days ago
Awesome project though.
[–] hd4 2 days ago
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] mr_machine 1 day ago
I want to financially support Moto for supporting Graphene, but the wild cost for unnecessarily-powerful hardware makes that sorta unlikely.
The big differentiator could be desktop mode. I've played with it on my Pixel and with a bit more attention, it could be a total game-changer. To do that, though, I had to enable stuff that Graphene's guidance suggested would diminish security... defeating the purpose of running Graphene to some extent.
I beg you to lean into the desktop thing. I'll give you money if that helps.
[–] hd4 2 days ago
I already have a 9a running GOS and it's good enough for me for the next few years, no plans to upgrade and certainly not for the price Motorola are asking here. You need to understand that typical users don't notice the difference between the hardware in the upper percentiles of performance, "budget Snapdragon" is really just already very good. I know it's a win having Motorola onboard, albeit. Also thanks for your great work!
[–] matheusmoreira 2 days ago
[–] Ritewut 2 days ago
[–] samteeeee 2 days ago
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
https://www.motorola.com/us/en/p/phones/signature/motorola-s...
[–] bens74 2 days ago
I've used Apple devices my whole life and am just getting so so tired of the constant squeeze! Recently I decided enough is enough and started replacing devices. So far Framework+Linux instead of Macbook and HTPC+Linux instead of Apple TV. I've agonized a lot about what to do with the phone (the one company I hate more than Apple is Google!) While GrapheneOS project looks nice, it only works on Google phones, is still Android based, the open source Android ecosystem does seem like it's getting progressively squeezed by Google, and certain things (Android Auto, tap to pay, certain apps) won't work without Google components. None of this makes me happy, but with a non-Google phone option it might just make sense.
[–] Freak_NL 2 days ago
(I hate this. This Pixel 6 works fine. But the end is in sight nonetheless.)
I'm glad GrapheneOS exists, so my next device will be this or another Pixel. At least the next one should last two years longer.
[–] lucb1e 2 days ago
It's my work phone and it's newer and faster than my personal phone (both cpu and display refresh rate), there's only essential apps installed, every week it (grapheneos) notifies me of various updates, the screen and shell look pristine... Everything is literally good as the day it was bought but my work will say we need to have a new device be produced now :/
[–] Freak_NL 2 days ago
Pixel 10 pro and 10a seem to be available for decent prices. Those are the newest GrapheneOS supports (Pixel 11 is not supported due to Google not supplying them with the MTE security feature), so one of those is a likely successor. At least these will be supported until August 2032 (10 pro) and February 2023 (10a).
Motorola's new phone is interesting too, but probably won't offer me much over the Pixel 10 pro.
[–] Groxx 2 days ago
... I don't think I've ever heard MTE described as a caching system.
Also holy shit, $1600? That's gonna be a hard no, sorry. No phone is worth that much, and I really don't want one even bigger than the too-big one I have now. Though I'll happily wait for a different model.
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] Groxx 2 days ago
[–] ndom91 2 days ago
[–] tasubotadas 2 days ago
[–] steelframe 2 days ago
[–] gitowiec 1 day ago
[–] miloignis 1 day ago
[–] gausswho 2 days ago
[–] grapheneos 2 days ago
[–] rarisma 2 days ago
[–] 1232ag6 2 days ago
Does anyone think Motorola would allow GrapheneOS against government wishes?
[–] nstents 2 days ago
[–] 202508042147 2 days ago
But ... why? I have been running all my smartphones at close to minimum brightness and heard lots of people complaining that even at the lowest setting it's still too bright at night.
No doubt it's a way WAY better device, really, but I don't see where I would actually need that. I happily toss the one I have around and don't even care if it gets stolen or lost one day, different preference.