upvote
The app worked until a few weeks ago. GrapheneOS does not miss any functionality (nor security) for the app to work. The only change is that they started blocking non-GMS Android through the thoroughly anti-competitive Play Integrity.

Hypothetically, if GrapheneOS wanted to become a certified Android, it would probably not be blocked on technical reasons, only that becoming certified (last time a contract was leaked) requires running privileged Google Play Services (which is less secure) and pre-installing a bunch of Google apps that should not be uninstallable.

How is that not anti-competitive?

reply
The issue here is not that they didn't test on alternative distributions of Android, the issue is that they went out of their way to prevent anything but the officially blessed distributions.
reply
As is their right. There's nothing that says everything has to be open to everyone. There are other car companies.

This site talks at length about running businesses, identifying your target market and focusing hard on them. The same thing applies to other aspects of software.

If I ran a cross-platform app (built on Electron or whatever) and a certain platform made up 0.1% of my users but 20% of my customer support team's time, I'd stop supporting that platform. It's literally not worth the effort. And I wouldn't just let it rot (that would keep the customer support issues going), I'd block it.

reply
Except for the fact that the car is sold as is with the features advertised (i.e. working with an Android app with no additional qualifiers as to which kind of android) AND that users are paying for these connective services
reply
Graphene is not a kind of Android. It doesn't even advertise itself as such:

> GrapheneOS is a privacy and security focused mobile OS with Android app compatibility [https://grapheneos.org/]

reply
GrapheneOS is based on the Android Open Source Project and retains near perfect android app compatibility. It cannot call itself android for legal reasons, but the legal definition does not affect its app compatibility.

Tools such as play integrity are illegal. Using anticompetitive and monopolistic tools is not the right of application developers.

reply
The legal definition matters a lot if someone is trying to argue that VW advertising Android features is supposed to include GrapheneOS

> Using anticompetitive and monopolistic tools is not the right of application developers.

Please talk to an actual lawyer before making legal claims, because to be blunt it's very clear you don't know what many of those terms mean in a legal context. VW is not a "monopoly". They have no obligation to allow the use of their software on platforms they don't want.

reply
The legal definition of the OS does not matter at all when considering the difference between failing to support something, and using a tool that explicitly stops something from working that otherwise works without issue. Play integrity is a tool which does not base any of its certification decisions in privacy or security, rather leverages it for anticompetitive reasons. This is known and trivially verifiable.

I do know what these terms mean in a legal context. I am claiming that play integrity is an anticompetitive and monopolistic tool, of which VW decided to use. I am not claiming VW is a monopoly. What you are claiming is their right to do, is not their right at all, and is illegal.

reply
GrapheneOS is obviously an Android distribution, but I suspect trademarks mean they have to be careful about how they describe it.
reply
The basis of your argument, that users want these developers to support another platform, does not make sense, because GrapheneOS does not require apps add explicit support for it. GrapheneOS has 99% android app compatibility.

The issue is not that this application isnt tested on GOS, its that an anticompetitive, illegal tool is being used to ban non-certified OSs when these apps would work perfectly otherwise.

reply
This is one of the most ignorant comment I ever read on Hacker News. Are you from VW?

Obviously VW broke the app for GrapheneOS (or any other custom ROM) on purpose, and ironically, things usually works fine for custom ROMs than some Chinese OEM customized ROMs, and when it works, it means the developer went extra miles to implement workaround to cater the flawed OS.[1]

[1]: ref: Years of Android community experience

reply
Here it is, the true hacker mentality.
reply
Sir, this is a VC bro website.
reply
Understanding how those around you operate makes you no less of a hacker.

It can even make you a great/better one…

reply
They don’t just understand, they basically promote it.
reply
It felt more resigned than promotional to me; but yes, normalization is a fine line!
reply
Increasingly these kinds of apps are a requirement for a lot of features so ...
reply
Sure the app is not required, though one loses on all of the remote-control functionality (remote start, remote climate control, etc.).

Maybe then app developers should be mandated to open fully their server-side protocols, so people can create apps for platforms that are not supported by default. No more undocumented APIs, anybody can get an API key, no API serving limits!

reply
Unfortunately, Volkswagen has an API, but made it much harder to use it since a few weeks ago:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48319509

reply
"tEsT yOuR PlatTfORM"

Fuck that.

reply