Samsung has decided to proceed with the Bootloader blocking also in Europe, a move that has caused a lot of discussion. Behind this choice is a European regulation that will come into force in August 2025 and which risks changing smartphone usage in Europe forever. This is why other manufacturers may soon follow suit.
From 1 August 2025, new provisions will come into force RED Directive (Radio Equipment Directive), which redefines the compliance requirements for all radio devices sold in Europe. This is a significant change, not so much for the amount of regulations introduced, but for the effect they will have on the entire Android ecosystem. The issue revolves around three articles that impose specific protections: against network interference, personal data compromise, and digital fraud. These are, in themselves, sacrosanct rules.
But the crux comes with the interpretation prevailingEach device must ensure full compliance not only with the hardware, but also with the software that controls the radio modules. This is where the bootloader comes in. Unlocking it essentially allows you to replace the original operating system with an alternative one, such as LineageOS or GrapheneOS.
But these systems, if they modify the radio drivers even minimally, invalidate the CE certification. An uncertified device can no longer be legally marketed or used, at least according to the most stringent reading of the law.
This scenario has therefore led Samsung to protect its devices. Not on a whim, but to avoid any software modifications falling under your legal liability. If a user installs a ROM that interferes with radio frequencies or compromises communications security, the manufacturer (and in some cases the importer) may be held directly liable.
RED does not explicitly talk about unlocking the Bootloader or custom ROM, but it opens one regulatory space in which the margins for maneuver are they narrow. And in doing so, it provides a solid argument for those who have been trying for years to close the loop between hardware, software, and services. After all, customizing the operating system also means breaking away from proprietary services and, therefore, from the model that ties the user to the brand.
Samsung is just the first to move, but it's hard to imagine it will be the only one. Starting in August 2025, it's very likely that other manufacturers will follow suit, at least for the European market.
The whole smart phone thing is such a lesson in letting go of the rope.
Once you let corporations get away with a little, they will eventually take everything.
Every time we lost a bit of control me and a few of enthusiasts were screaming, but the regular populace just shrugged...
Even on reddit you'd have to argue with idiots "oh just use Bluetooth headphones! Oh who needs sd cards, just use the cloud! Oh who needs rooting, it's not needed"
I swear to god if Windows / OS were invented today 80 of people would just shrug as all control of their PC was taken away.
Also, for any of said idiots who may be reading this. If you see someone bitching about functionality being removed that you yourself don't need, the correct response is to just not respond. You don't have to gargle corporations balls. Removing things isn't making your phones cheaper/better. There's no reason to defend it.
Yea that's what pissed me off the top of most. Google / Apple fanbois gargeling corporate balls
Some of those things have some minor benefit to some users. There are plenty of people who like the reduced thickness that removing some of those features provides.
The issue is that corporations like money, and the big money guy (apple) removed those things and made more money so all the other guys figured they could too if they just copied that. Now all of us have to deal with the reduced functionality and options.
Yeah, incredibly minor. My phone has all the features that have subsequently been removed from newer models and is still only 6mm thick. I have a case on it and it's still fine. But regardless. If people want thinner phones without that stuff, fine, make them. What we are bitching about is that there are NO options with the functions we want and practically everything has the same minuscule feature set these days. We want a variety of choices.
Of course, I personally think the biggest failure of Android is the apple-ifying of the phone design. There are exceptions, but it feels like every flagship is trying to just make an android flavored iPhone.
it's like modern chat clients. can't do even 10% of the stuff a chat client could do 20 years ago and yet here we are. everyone on their fb messenger, and literal businesses refusing support tickets sent outside of metas platform.
I'd argue that especially on Reddit, you're always up against brigades, claques and other coordinated actors pushing corporate or state narratives on the naive parts of the populace. In hindsight, it's really awfully obvious.
You're absolutely right. It's also incredibly susceptible to snowballing. The early votes matter the most on who's opinion wins out, and those are super easy to rig.
I have long contended that the computer industry is course-correcting with Android/iOS/mobile. They realized their prior "mistake" of letting people actually own, control, and modify their devices. Apple and iPhone is the worst in this regard.
I agree with essentially everything you're saying but can't wrap my head around the last sentence. Would you mind elaborating so I can add more fuel to my rage?
He means that windows is built on a fairly open system that allows too to install and manage your own drivers, updates, etc. Over the last several years MS has been trying to lock this down and be more like a managed service/phone, not a computer you own.
If the PC were to be invented today, he's saying it would be like a phone with limited freedom and most people wouldn't care. He's right and that's sad. We take for granted what we have with older versions of Windows and Linux. It is being pulled away from us and that's why I'm trying to move off of Windows instead of go to 11.
I feel like an open system starts with the hardware. It doesn't help that we have open software if we don't control the hardware that it is running on. Maybe that's a thought of relevance for the future.
I think they mean that if the standard OS was Linux instead of Windows, and therefore everybody had full control of their computers, that if windows was suddenly released and installed on all pc's instead of Linux, people would still shrug and be fine with it.
The Linux forums would probably be even more insufferable for a while, considering an influx of newbies to what's basically a power user sphere.
Not an arch user clearly
Isn't that actually the case? I know of these issues. And around me, I talk about them (without being pushy I hope). At work, the privacy issues with windows are seen as glaring warnings. But beyond that… I'm pretty sure the vase majority of people don't care. Some are probably even enthusiast to have a "new update", having no idea what it means.