• cm0002@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      73
      ·
      2 months ago

      Lol I love the “You don’t need root on modern Android, it does all the things you used to root for!” People. No, no it doesn’t lmao

      • doctortran@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        That’s generally what you hear from people who have basic use cases and simply can’t fathom other people may want or need different things from their devices.

        Which is fine, they don’t have to understand. If stock is good enough for them nowadays, more power to them.

        What I’m sick of is the condescension. This bizarre thing where they somehow think a person wanting control over a device they paid for is worthy of derision or shame.

        It’s like if someone who only checks their email on their laptop laughing at someone using a desktop for heavier work, for no real reason other than thinking using technology differently than themselves is silly.

        That other comment is a perfect example, and indictive of this weird subculture in Android spaces that hates Google but seems to be drinking from the same user-hostile Kool aid.

        Personally, I’m an odd case, in that I didn’t used to root or use custom ROMs at all until recent years. Basically since Android 10, simply to get around the needless roadblocks and restore the functions I want. I was fine with stock for a long time, until Google started becoming Apple.

        • cm0002@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Are you saying because Graphene is unrootable and 150k choose it means user space is fine?

          Because those 150k made a choice to switch to a custom rom with the features built-in that they would typically need root for on ANY stock OEM rom, such as effective system-wide Adblocking

          Ofc userspace is just fine in that scenario

          Now, if you’re saying only 150k people choose to flash a custom rom out of billions of Android devices that userspace is just fine and dandy, that’s just misleading. An absolute ton of those billions of devices are most likely Samshits, which is actively hostile to user choice and rooting and does everything they can to stop it. Up to and including (like someone else commented here) using Knox to brick the phone.

          Living with userspace because you can’t or don’t want to overcome your choosen OEMs blockers/hostility is NOT evidence that user space is just fine.

          • Uninvited Guest@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            I’m pretty sure the poster you replied to is saying exact opposite. Using the number of graphene OS installs as a proxy for individuals with root access vs the number of users who haven’t modified their device in such a way.

            Edit: Woop. I should read father next time, but yes I believe it is the second example.

        • taiyang@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          2 months ago

          Brah, if you try and root many phones, shit like Knox fucking bricks your phone out of spite. They’ve been putting anti-consummer shit into devices for decades now, let’s not pretend that puts everyone in the same 99.9%.

        • doctortran@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          Shit like this is why I can’t abide GrapheneOS or their cheerleaders.

          It’s legitimately the same attitude as Google itself. This parental, condescending tone, acting as if wanting freedom to control their own devices is somehow irrational. Continuing to push this toxic idea that handcuffs are the only way to protect users. Like a sysadmin at a workplace, but without the justifiable reasons.

          • MTK@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            Dude, not having root is objectively safer, and grapheneOS is security first.

            If you want a rom that gives you absolute freedom, there are those as well, but it’s not as secure.

            P.S you can root grapheneOS, it’s just not recommended or catered to and while I don’t agree with their tone and the obfuscation of it, I don’t think it matters as it just completely goes against security.

          • IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            For the vast majority of users it’s the best configuration. Google doesn’t cater to small user populations.

  • friend_of_satan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    65
    ·
    2 months ago

    I would love to have this for my smart tv remote that has dedicated buttons for subscription services I will never pay for. /me heads to thingiverse to search

  • NekuSoul@lemmy.nekusoul.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    2 months ago

    Ok, now I kind of want this. I only have my PC connected to the TV, so I only need the power button, volume controls, settings and the D-Pad. A specialized cover would make hitting the right buttons in the dark much easier and also remove the ads disguised as buttons.

    • FiskFisk33@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      I figured out my tv starts on the last used channel if it receives power after a power cut. All I need to control it is a smart plug

  • nicerdicer@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    2 months ago

    Neat.

    The thing that bothers me whenever I see a TV remote is that there doesn’t seem to be a remote control with illuminated keys, like on a computer keyboard. That way you can see the buttons even under dim lit conditions. Also, why aren’t there any remotes with a built-in battery that could be charged like a smartphone?

    I don’t own a TV, but I know that back in the days of bulky CRT TV’s there were some remotes that could be iluminated. White LEDs weren’t a thing back then, so they used incandescent lamps which drained the 9V battery fast.

    Why aren’t back llit and rechargeable TV remotes a thing today, especially because white LED’s and batteries are quite efficient today?

    • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Didn’t this used to be common? One button glows in the dark, and if you push it a few seconds of backlight illuminate the rest of the buttons?

      I swear half the remotes when I was a kid did this.

    • cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      If you want rechargeable batteries, just put some eneloop batteries (or some of the cheaper, rebranded ones) in the remote. They are not like the old NiMH batteries, they hold a charge for a years.

      I certainly don’t want a remote that I have to throw out in a few years because the non-replaceable lithium battery wore out.

    • AbsentBird@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Roku has a rechargeable backlit remote with remappable buttons. It’s called something like ‘remote pro’

    • ngwoo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      My parents still have cable. The buttons are backlit, they turn on when you pick it up and turn off when you set it down. There’s also a mic button you can hold down and talk to input text by voice instead of typing on a virtual keyboard with a dpad. Not rechargeable but two AAs last for a year so why bother with a battery that eventually fails and renders the remote useless?

      Even basic remotes are pretty clever now

      • nicerdicer@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Well, reading all the answers makes me realize that there might have been a kind of evolution when it comes to TV remotes. I just didn’t come across back lit remotes when I saw them with people in my social circle. Maybe my people just don’t have the latest TV set.

    • AdrianTheFrog@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      We have one like that with illuminated buttons, probably from around 2015, but it only stays on for 30 seconds or so

  • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    2 months ago

    That… is a really shitty meme that misses the point?

    If you actually look at what the overlay exposes, the User still has the ability to pick specific channels, control volume, power, etc. All they really lose are the DVR (good example) and all of the user friendly stuff related to tv guides and the like (bad example).

    I assume this is just AI engagement farming bullshit that someone fell for and posted to lemmy but… I would actually say it would make more sense if the overlay were almost inverted.

    • Curiousfur@yiffit.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      You also lose the ability to access the TV settings, leaving you stuck on the default settings, which is one of the reasons why most people root their phones.

    • 0x4E4F@sh.itjust.worksOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      One is for all, the other is just the TV. It’s probably a remote for a smart box or something, you can program some of the TVs commands on them, like on/off, input switching, etc… so you don’t have to juggle with 2 remotes in your hand.

          • Petter1@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            I want to play switch and turn it on using a controller, CEC turns TV and switch screen is on, then the turning on TV triggers CEC that wakes up Apple TV, which in turn starts sending video over HDMI, making TV show Apple TV screen 🥴

            I have no TV remote (only use it in dump mode for AppleTV which is controlled using siri remote) and turning off apple TV turns TV and Switch off.

            My solution: Shortly undock switch so it’s hdmi get excited and TV switches input to Nintendo switch

            It is just so wonky, lol

            • the_artic_one@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              I have the same issue with my switch, I usually mash the button for its port on my receiver remote until the other devices give up but about 10% of the time that refuses to work and I have to redock.

        • jqubed@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          If the TV supports it. I haven’t come across many in the wild that really use it, or at least situations where a TV and device both work well with the protocol.

          • IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            What crack are you on? Not widely supported?

            You’d be better off at listing the models and devices that don’t support CEC.

        • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          CEC is pretty amazing for any relatively modern device (console, blu ray player, etc) in a “normal” setup.

          The main problems are if you are a bit of a “power user” and have a receiver or something (although I have also heard issues with soundbars) with it not always being clear what audio outputs will be used. And as consoles become more and more glorified computers you can run into issues where a simple workflow like:

          1. Start xbox
          2. Start download of big game for later
          3. Go back to “TV” to watch youtube

          Results in the xbox shutting down and not actually downloading the game.


          As a “power user” I just got a sofabaton (Just as mediocre and finicky as a Harmony but you won’t have forgotten that because your config is a decade old). but I keep telling myself that I should futz with my nvidia shield to see if I can use my receiver’s remote for everything instead.

      • jqubed@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yes it’s for a cable box/DVR. The Spectrum logo is for Spectrum cable, the brand that resulted from the Charter Communications purchase of Time Warner Cable and Bright House Networks.

  • tun@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    2 months ago

    Does the clip to remove the cover has label “sudo”?

    • rbn@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      As sudo applies only for a single command, removing the cover is more like su, no?

      sudo would be more if above every covered button there was a tiny hole through which you could push it with a needle or so.

  • Mango@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Raise your hand if you own your phone!

    Then say if you raised your hand because we can’t see you.