Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FOSS app removed from the Play Store for linking to the project's website

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 293 posts

Re: FOSS app removed from the Play Store for linking to the project's website

#271

Post by jamil7 »

depressedpanda wrote: post #267
AJRF wrote: post #125

I’m an iOS developer but I would never ever start an iOS or Android app as a side project. Don’t support this madness anymore. PWAs aren't as good but they are good enough for most use cases. Just refuse to make apps for these platforms anymore. If every dev does it there will be overwhelming pressure for Apple and Google to improve PWA support. Just keep pushing back against this.

In what way(s) aren't PWAs as good, would you say? Personally, I think >90% of all apps I've used could be implemented as a PWA, as nothing they do really require native performance. The main issues I see are 1. The DX needs some improvement 2. Apple are dragging their feet implementing new web tech on Safari, and are therefore holding everyone hostage since you cannot install any other browser on iOS.

From my perspective (also iOS and macOS dev) PWAs can be great for a lot of use cases, especially if you just need a mobile offering for an existing SaaS product. If Apple actually implements some of the required features for PWAs in Safari they will still always be missing native controls, gestures, navigation will be off and I think the biggest difference is you'll be missing access to all the deeper integrations you can do with the OS through Apple's various frameworks and APIs. Whether or not thats important to your app varies a lot, for a lot of CRUD apps that need something in the stores the PWA approach with capacitor is likely fine.

For the record I'm also pro Apple implementing richer PWA support as I personally see both approaches coexisting.

Re: FOSS app removed from the Play Store for linking to the project's website

#272

Post by lobocinza »

grawprog wrote: post #214
jcranberry wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This may also be relevant to those wishing to switch. In the part of the FAQ concerning using your own account to login. >However, you may want to be careful as Google retains full rights to block any account under their Google Play Terms of Service §4 (opens new window), because using Aurora Store clearly violates their terms of services. Being banned means that the very Google account you used to sign in with will…

>attempt to, or assist, authorize or encourage others to circumvent, disable or defeat any of the security features or components that protect, obfuscate or otherwise restrict access to any Content or Google Play. Am I reading this correctly in that, this seems to me like just telling people about something like Aurora is against the terms of services and can get you banned whether you use it or not? As in, even the…

> That's fairly intense if so.

Nobody wants to lose his milky cow.

Re: FOSS app removed from the Play Store for linking to the project's website

#273

Post by totony »

grawprog wrote: post #255
SomeBoolshit wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An excellent comment. Terms of service still tend to be mostly words but they matter a lot.

I've always considered TOS's an abberation of contract law myself. I've had many professional contracts with both private and commercial clients. In none of those cases was I ever allowed to provide a contract where I could just decide whatever I want, whenever I want and the customer is forced to agree otherwise...fuck them...and I still get paid.

It's more akin to guidelines than contract. This is why it's so aberrant to see them get so long and convoluted.

Re: FOSS app removed from the Play Store for linking to the project's website

#274

Post by oauea »

Too wrote: post #252
nousermane wrote: post #111

Another example of arbitrary playstore rules killing a FOSS app - playstore version of termux is stuck on a 2-year-old release (0.101) and can't run on Android 10 at all. If you install from F-Droid - latest version is available (0.117) and works on Android 10, too. https://github.com/termux/termux-app/issues/1072 https://wiki.termux.com/wiki/Termux_Google_Play

I would not call that arbitrary play store rules. Rather the general app sandbox has had tightened security, which affects api compatibility, thus play rejects it to make sure it’s future proofed by author. In the meantime, during phase-out, sideloading works so old versions of app suddenly don’t stop working, but eventually that call will stop working. Whether apps should be allowed to download and execute code out…

Oh yikes, Google is going down the Apple path of forbidding downloaded code? That's awful. How long until third party web browsers are banned on Android as well?

Re: FOSS app removed from the Play Store for linking to the project's website

#275

Post by oauea »

kyrra wrote: post #218
nousermane wrote: post #111

Another example of arbitrary playstore rules killing a FOSS app - playstore version of termux is stuck on a 2-year-old release (0.101) and can't run on Android 10 at all. If you install from F-Droid - latest version is available (0.117) and works on Android 10, too. https://github.com/termux/termux-app/issues/1072 https://wiki.termux.com/wiki/Termux_Google_Play

Googler opinions are my own. I know nothing about the space. At least skimming the termux issue here is that it was done for SELinux policy changes in trying to improve security of application running on Android. Is that correct? Then the app store is trying to enforce this newer policy via forced API upgrades. As you said, you can at least still side load if you would like?

How about just adding a permission to the already present permission system? Oh, that's right. Google and Apple don't trust their users and want full control over everyone's devices.

Re: FOSS app removed from the Play Store for linking to the project's website

#276

Post by warkdarrior »

squarefoot wrote: post #208
gowld wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aurora isn't an alternative App Store. It's an alternative Play Store client .

Mine was a broad statement, just by searching for alternatives you tell Google you know that they exist. You can use Aurora today and move to a different store tomorrow, or go straight there just now. Either way, you send the message that you know there is a world out there, and you know how to choose, which is what advertisers hate the most, because they want to be the ones that make you decide if and when you shoul…

That is wishful thinking. Do you think anyone at Google reads through all of the search queries? Or do you think the search terms for alternative app stores will start trending sufficiently to catch Google's attention?

Re: FOSS app removed from the Play Store for linking to the project's website

#277

Post by CodesInChaos »

sterlind wrote: post #213
nbardy wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or the other reams of world class machine learning research and model weights they've released freely.

perhaps this is whoosh, but I thought Google wasn't releasing their model weights or source code, at least for a lot of things. like with WaveNet, it was easy to train but computationally infeasible to run the way they published the paper. then it turns out there's a trick that makes playing it forward far more efficient, which Google later acknowledged using internally, but didn't disclose.

What kind of trick? At a glance wavenet looks like you could reuse most of the computation from earlier timesteps (would gave to take a closer look to see if it'd actually work), but I assume you're talking about something less obvious?

Re: FOSS app removed from the Play Store for linking to the project's website

#278

Post by binarybanana »

scrollaway wrote: post #142
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the web felt a lot larger and more reachable in the Lycos and AltaVista days, I'd be happy to go back there over the nightmare we have now.

You're wearing so many layers of rose-tinted glasses that you're probably Redshift-compatible. There were some nice unique things back then. It also sucked a lot. By the standards of back then we're living in pretty much a utopia. We have devices that Star Trek barely thought of. Seriously, I have a tablet that can speak to almost anyone anywhere in the world, instantaneously, translate into any language (imperfectly…

I don't share that view. While there are things that I'd really miss in 2000 era Internet today like Wikipedia, GitHub and maybe YouTube, the only thing that really sucked was the IE monopoly (almost like Chrome today) and the Internet connections themselves. Only a few years after that DSL/cable became commonplace and since then the only thing different today is that websites became a lot more bloated and slow.

If you told me in 2000 about the things you listed I'd tell you you're a slowpoke, that's obviously coming and most things were actually already there like SIP, ICQ, IRC, translator software, browsers, etc. existed on the smartphones of the day. What wasn't there was the adoption by the masses, but the tech was there.

Re: FOSS app removed from the Play Store for linking to the project's website

#279

Post by anticensor »

Borgz wrote: post #121
crazygringo wrote: post #91

This is a perfect example of a line having to be drawn somewhere, but wherever you draw it is never going to be perfect in every case. First of all -- app stores need to make money or at least break even. They cost a lot of money to run. So app stores take a cut of all transactions. If they let developers implement their own payment mechanisms, either in-app or with a single link, then developers will make every app…

Google already allows/requires tax-exempt donations to not be done with Google Play billing. This doesn't apply in the case of this app because the developer is supposedly an individual rather than a non-profit organization. >Or a rule that "donations" are allowed? Well then you get "donations" that come with "bonus functionality" and so forth, and a new line has to be drawn. There really isn't any ambiguity about wh…

Why do they forbid tax exempt donations through Google Play billing? I would instead require everything including physical goods to be paid through them, and apply double cut to donations (kidding indeed, I am not a narcissist).

Re: FOSS app removed from the Play Store for linking to the project's website

#280

Post by BrandoElFollito »

grawprog wrote: post #255
SomeBoolshit wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An excellent comment. Terms of service still tend to be mostly words but they matter a lot.

I've always considered TOS's an abberation of contract law myself. I've had many professional contracts with both private and commercial clients. In none of those cases was I ever allowed to provide a contract where I could just decide whatever I want, whenever I want and the customer is forced to agree otherwise...fuck them...and I still get paid.

The TOS are subject to change but at least here (France) tout have to be informed about the change and you can leave the contract at no cost of you do not agree.
Post reply on HN