Skip to content

Let Google know what you think about their proposed restrictions on sideloading Android apps. - Android developer verification requirements [Feedback Form]

Technology
105 65 591
  • iOS/iPad OS has had a file manager for years? It's not great, and heavily restricted, but it for sure exists.

    In what way is it restricted? I dont do much but being able to explore to find my files is necessary.

  • iOS/iPad OS has had a file manager for years? It's not great, and heavily restricted, but it for sure exists.

    It’s not great, and heavily restricted, but it for sure exists

    That's kind of the point though. Apple's file manager portrays a "flat" filesystem, where all of your data is laid out neatly on the table - so to speak - and the actual locations of those directories within the system are buried inside vague and protected locations "for security". Android file managers embrace a more traditional Unix-like filesystem hierarchy.

  • Doubling your market share is easy when your market share is so low. It’s not on an “exponential growth curve” lol. The steam deck changes nothing for Linux as most people playing them don’t give a shit about Linux.

    Linux gaming users are in the tens of millions of people. It's not like this is some super tiny community. There are more Linux gamers than macOS gamers by around double.

    About two years ago Linux gaming market share was hovering below 2%. Now it's over 4%.

    Yeah.....it's smaller than Windows by A LOT, but it's continuing to grow every single month on the Steam Hardware Survey. With Proton, SteamOS/Bazzite, and the Deck Verified program, Linux gaming has gone from "this sucks" to "this works unless there is kernel anti-cheat".

  • What a disappointing week. I was looking to replace my five year old iPhone with an android phone and now I'm just stumped. Pixel 10 looked pretty good but then this sudden verification requirement news hit. Both platform are now equally crap. The hell with both of these shitty companies. Maybe I'll go full retro and get a dumb phone instead.

    I am really hoping that PostmarketOS will become more viable.

    I've been trying to get rid of all American service provider (dropped netflix, duolingo); smartphones are more difficult though because they need to work.

  • Linux gaming users are in the tens of millions of people. It's not like this is some super tiny community. There are more Linux gamers than macOS gamers by around double.

    About two years ago Linux gaming market share was hovering below 2%. Now it's over 4%.

    Yeah.....it's smaller than Windows by A LOT, but it's continuing to grow every single month on the Steam Hardware Survey. With Proton, SteamOS/Bazzite, and the Deck Verified program, Linux gaming has gone from "this sucks" to "this works unless there is kernel anti-cheat".

    Linux gaming users are in the tens of millions of people. It’s not like this is some super tiny community. There are more Linux gamers than macOS gamers by around double.

    Nope, not in the tens of millions:

    People using Linux computers at home, including for gaming, is a super tiny "community". Also not close to double Mac, and even if it was - Mac isn't a real gaming platform, so the fact that it's not even double Mac is evidence of how little people care about linux for gaming.

    About two years ago Linux gaming market share was hovering below 2%. Now it’s over 4%.

    Not on steam it's not.

    Yeah…it’s smaller than Windows by A LOT, but it’s continuing to grow every single month on the Steam Hardware Survey.

    Purely because of the steam deck, and windows is growing too - not everyone uses steam on windows, whereas it's really the only option for Linux.

    Linux gaming has gone from “this sucks” to “this works unless there is kernel anti-cheat”.

    And unfortunately for Linux, without this it will never take off because the overwhelmingly most played games all have kernel level anti-cheat.

  • Another honest question:

    Why wouldn't the EU force Android to allow sideloading apps just as they've done with apple?

    Issue is that I believe even in the EU Apple is in a position where devs have to be verified by Apple to be allowed to sideload.

    So it's not a problem of if sideloading is possible, but that devs need to hand over sensitive personal information to Google to be verified to be able to offer side-loaded apps on Android. So Google is positioning themselves to fully control app installs even for non Google play apps by holding the ability to deny.

    So Google is now looking to emulate the terrible sideloading state of Apple by regressing to more control by them.

  • Like I said in another comment, unless they get tens of millions of actual unique-not-spam responses they will not even consider reconsidering. People aren’t going to de-google in any great numbers from this, because most of the people this will affect are already de-googled.

    Rather than degoogling telling them you will go to Apple and opt for apple services is likely the more powerful response, since that is what the regular person is more likely to do. If degoogled is used they'll likely dismiss it assuming it is just one of those niche nerds. But an exodus to Apple is a threat that is more realistic.

  • Rather than degoogling telling them you will go to Apple and opt for apple services is likely the more powerful response, since that is what the regular person is more likely to do. If degoogled is used they'll likely dismiss it assuming it is just one of those niche nerds. But an exodus to Apple is a threat that is more realistic.

    But that makes no sense - they’ll go to someone who is even more restrictive in side loading?

    Google won’t reverse this because there’s no alternative for the relatively few people this will affect. They already don’t use Google things, and Apple don’t accomodate them. They’ve got them by the balls and they know it, which is why it’s all just empty threats even from people in here.

  • But that makes no sense - they’ll go to someone who is even more restrictive in side loading?

    Google won’t reverse this because there’s no alternative for the relatively few people this will affect. They already don’t use Google things, and Apple don’t accomodate them. They’ve got them by the balls and they know it, which is why it’s all just empty threats even from people in here.

    The ones that don't sideload obviously won't care. But the ones that do are going to have little incentive to stick around if that was the main selling point for them, and the devs for non Google play apps leave because they don't want to hand over info to Google.

    At that point why not go to Apple if Android no longer delivers the type of sideloading experience they desire? Apple is more polished, has longer support, battery life, and better peripherals.

    And those types likely will push family to move to Apple too if they are jumping ship, since they might be the ones overseeing tech support for the family anyways.

  • What will you switch to?

    For the next phone I get it'll be one with good custom ROM support and sticking with a degoogled device. But, if that too stops being an option because custom ROMs stall then hoping there will be a Linux Phone by then.

  • Linux gaming users are in the tens of millions of people. It’s not like this is some super tiny community. There are more Linux gamers than macOS gamers by around double.

    Nope, not in the tens of millions:

    People using Linux computers at home, including for gaming, is a super tiny "community". Also not close to double Mac, and even if it was - Mac isn't a real gaming platform, so the fact that it's not even double Mac is evidence of how little people care about linux for gaming.

    About two years ago Linux gaming market share was hovering below 2%. Now it’s over 4%.

    Not on steam it's not.

    Yeah…it’s smaller than Windows by A LOT, but it’s continuing to grow every single month on the Steam Hardware Survey.

    Purely because of the steam deck, and windows is growing too - not everyone uses steam on windows, whereas it's really the only option for Linux.

    Linux gaming has gone from “this sucks” to “this works unless there is kernel anti-cheat”.

    And unfortunately for Linux, without this it will never take off because the overwhelmingly most played games all have kernel level anti-cheat.

    You seem to look at it quite pessimistically imho, but I'll try and counter 😉

    developers won’t support a third platform

    We're not talking about a vastly different ecosystem. Probably Android-derived (which is open-source), very likely Linux derived. So compatibility is not going to be a huge issue, hence developing not hard. Developers will usually follow where user demand goes, not the other way around.

    nor will customers move to a platform that doesn’t have the big apps that they need

    Most of the big apps today have a smaller equivalent, check AlternativeTo.net.

    Doubling your market share is easy when your market share is so low.

    Generally true, but we're talking a growth of millions of users a year. Millions of people is no small number. 5% of the US' traffic are from Linux desktops, according to StatCounter (here's an article with many links).

    Nope, not in the tens of millions

    You're correct wrt. gaming, as 2.89% of 157 million active monthly users is about 4.55 million, which is not a small number either. 
    If you look at Linux desktop users in the US however, we're talking over 5% of 347 million, which is 17.35 million users in the US alone, which is also not a small number. It's more than the population of Greece and Bulgaria combined.

    Purely because of the steam deck (wrt. Steam Linux users growth)

    Do you have numbers? I can't find any official numbers of active users on the Steam Deck, but there are estimations of 3+ million devices sold. I feel like I keep seeing posts of people who move over to Bazzite and similar distros these days for the sake of playing games, but nevertheless, both of these factors weigh in, and are steadily increasing the adaptation of Linux systems.

    without [kernel level anti-cheat] it will never take off because the overwhelmingly most played games all have kernel level anti-cheat.

    This is denying the antecedent. The amount of games, and money in games, without KLAC is plenty substantial to make a difference in the approach of both developers and DRMs, further increasing ease of adaptation by users. Do not undermine nor underestimate the potential of marginalities.

  • The ones that don't sideload obviously won't care. But the ones that do are going to have little incentive to stick around if that was the main selling point for them, and the devs for non Google play apps leave because they don't want to hand over info to Google.

    At that point why not go to Apple if Android no longer delivers the type of sideloading experience they desire? Apple is more polished, has longer support, battery life, and better peripherals.

    And those types likely will push family to move to Apple too if they are jumping ship, since they might be the ones overseeing tech support for the family anyways.

    The type of people crying over this are not moving to iPhones lol. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it. Google know it, which is why they know they can do this with no issue.

  • The type of people crying over this are not moving to iPhones lol. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it. Google know it, which is why they know they can do this with no issue.

    The people crying over this are the ones who care about sideloading. So if that aspect is gone then why stick with Android? It's definitely not for Google play apps for me.

    If you want to defend how Google is bigger and won't be affected you are better off pointing out that sideloading population isn't that big, and that most users don't use it so would be fine with iPhone or Android.

  • The people crying over this are the ones who care about sideloading. So if that aspect is gone then why stick with Android? It's definitely not for Google play apps for me.

    If you want to defend how Google is bigger and won't be affected you are better off pointing out that sideloading population isn't that big, and that most users don't use it so would be fine with iPhone or Android.

    Side loading isn’t going away, just “anonymous” side loading. I suspect it will end up being a non-issue anyway, as simply registering as a developer through their portal so you can have your app be side loaded isn’t a big deal unless your app is doing something nefarious.

    I’m not “defending” anything, let alone Google. All I'm doing is being realistic. The tiny minority of people this will affect have no alternative, and this change is likely to make very little actual change to those people anyway.

  • Side loading isn’t going away, just “anonymous” side loading. I suspect it will end up being a non-issue anyway, as simply registering as a developer through their portal so you can have your app be side loaded isn’t a big deal unless your app is doing something nefarious.

    I’m not “defending” anything, let alone Google. All I'm doing is being realistic. The tiny minority of people this will affect have no alternative, and this change is likely to make very little actual change to those people anyway.

    Small minority of people who care about this and end up affected will just leave for something else if custom ROMs stops being an option and dev scene dies out.

    Not every Dev on F-Droid wants to hand over their info to Google.

    You can argue that Google doesn't care because they are a minority and custom ROM users provide no benefit to them, which is true. But to act like people are stuck with Google if the feature they care about affects apps that interest them are stuck with Google isn't true either. They are already doing stuff that is unusual from regular users.

    Don't worry mainstream won't be affected. I'm talking about the weird people sideloading, degoogling, and more likely to be running custom ROMs.

  • 721 Stimmen
    67 Beiträge
    357 Aufrufe
    S
    All the research I am aware of - including what I referenced in the previous comment, is that people are honest by default, except for a few people who lie a lot. Boris Johnson is a serial liar and clearly falls into that camp. I believe that you believe that, but a couple of surveys are not a sufficient argument to prove the fundamental good of all humanity. If honesty were not the default, why would we believe what anyone has to say in situations where they have an incentive to lie, which is often? Why are such a small proportion of people criminals and fraudsters when for a lot of crimes, someone smart and cautious has a very low chance of being caught? I think this is just a lack of imagination. i will go through your scenarios and provide an answer but i don't think it's going to achieve anything, we just fundamentally disagree on this. why would we believe what anyone has to say in situations where they have an incentive to lie, which is often? You shouldn't. edit : You use experience with this person or in general, to make a judgement call about whether or not you want to listen to what they have to say until more data is available. You continue to refine based on accumulated experience. Why are such a small proportion of people criminals and fraudsters when for a lot of crimes, someone smart and cautious has a very low chance of being caught? A lot of assumptions and leaps here. Firstly crime implies actual law, which is different in different places, so let's assume for now we are talking about the current laws in the uk. Criminals implies someone who has been caught and prosecuted for breaking a law, I'm going with that assumption because "everyone who has ever broken a law" is a ridiculous interpretation. So to encompass the assumptions: Why are such a small proportion of people who have been caught and prosecuted for breaking the law in the uk, when someone smart and caution has a very low chance of being caught? I hope you can see how nonsensical that question is. The evolutionary argument goes like this: social animals have selection pressure for traits that help the social group, because the social group contains related individuals, as well as carrying memetically inheritable behaviours. This means that the most successful groups are the ones that work well together. A group first of all has an incentive to punish individuals who act selfishly to harm the group - this will mean the group contains mostly individuals who, through self interest, will not betray the group. But a group which doesn’t have to spend energy finding and punishing traitorous individuals because it doesn’t contain as many in the first place will do even better. This creates a selection pressure behind mere self interest. That's a nicely worded very bias interpretation. social animals have selection pressure for traits that help the social group, because the social group contains related individuals, as well as carrying memetically inheritable behaviours. This is fine. This means that the most successful groups are the ones that work well together. That's a jump, working well together might not be the desirable trait in this instance. But let's assume it is for now. A group first of all has an incentive to punish individuals who act selfishly to harm the group - this will mean the group contains mostly individuals who, through self interest, will not betray the group. Reductive and assumptive, you're also conflating selfishness with betrayal, you can have on without the other, depending on perceived definitions of course. But a group which doesn’t have to spend energy finding and punishing traitorous individuals because it doesn’t contain as many in the first place will do even better. This creates a selection pressure behind mere self interest. Additional reduction and a further unsupported jump, individuals are more than just a single trait, selfishness might be desirable in certain scenarios or it might be a part of an individual who's other traits make up for it in a tribal context. The process of seeking and the focused attention might be a preferential selection trait that benefits the group. Powerful grifters try to protect themselves yes, but who got punished for pointing out that Boris is a serial liar? Everyone who has been negatively impacted by the policies enacted and consequences of everything that was achieved on the back of those lies. Because being ignored is still a punishment if there are negative consequences. But let's pick a more active punishment, protesting. Protest in a way we don't like or about a subject we don't approve of, it's now illegal to protest unless we give permission. That's reductive, but indicative of what happened in broad strokes. Have you read what the current government has said about the previous one? I'd imagine something along the lines of what the previous government said about the one before ? As a society we generally hate that kind of behaviour. Society as a whole does not protect wealth and power; wealth and power forms its own group which tries to protect itself. Depends on how you define society as a whole. By population, i agree. By actual power to enact change(without extreme measures), less so Convenient that you don't include the wealth and power as part of society, like its some other separate thing. You should care because it entirely colours how you interact with political life. “Shady behaviour” is about intent as well as outcome, and we are talking in this thread about shady behaviour, and hence about intent. See [POINT A]
  • X plans to show ads in Grok chatbot's answers

    Technology technology
    35
    1
    168 Stimmen
    35 Beiträge
    247 Aufrufe
    B
    But maybe it will hallucinate ads for non-existent products, like Dr. Zhivago's Peanut Butter Enema Cannon, which could be fun.
  • Combining TLS and MLS: An experiment

    Technology technology
    3
    1
    27 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    55 Aufrufe
    M
    QUIC+MLS could be super efficient since QUIC already handles connection migration and reduces handshake latency, while MLS would add the secure group messaging layer on top without duplicating crypto operations thats already handled by QUIC.
  • 75 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    46 Aufrufe
    nkat2112@sh.itjust.worksN
    This is beautiful - and a noble service for humanity. Thank you for posting this, OP!
  • Google kills the fact-checking snippet

    Technology technology
    13
    150 Stimmen
    13 Beiträge
    145 Aufrufe
    L
    Remember when that useless bot was around here, objectively wrong, and getting downvoted all the time? Good times.
  • The Problem with AI War Games

    Technology technology
    2
    1
    21 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    35 Aufrufe
    P
    Shall we play a game?
  • 890 Stimmen
    134 Beiträge
    6k Aufrufe
    Y
    Yup, but the control mechanisms are going to shit, because it sounds like they are going to maybe do a half assed rollout
  • A Presence-sensing Drive For Securely Storing Secrets

    Technology technology
    9
    1
    18 Stimmen
    9 Beiträge
    100 Aufrufe
    D
    Isn't that arguably the nature of encryption, though? If you lose the key, you're SOL by design.