• Tollana1234567@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    13 hours ago

    so it basically permanently “damages” the phone when you try to root it, seems like they are asking for a lawsuit at some point.

      • ramble81@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        I thought the difference there is that they were upfront about the feature in Knox and you can still install another OS, it just disables Pay and the Secure Notes part. Also it was something there from the start.

        This feels markedly different as it’s retroactive and a full brick, which is much more severe and a bait and switch.

        • Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          My last contact with it was on my Samsung S8. I was not aware of any “For your security we will monitor for OS changes” communication

      • Nollij@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Why would they start with the harder one? Samsung is much better funded, and therefore will be a much more difficult case.

        And no, it does not matter that Samsung did it first.