> Metadata like file size, whether there are in-app ads or purchases, etc, should be part of the store's listing - not the title. ???? Did I miss the part where Google announced they were adding searchable metadata at the same time they eliminated adding this info to the title? If not, seems like a clearly anti-consumer move.
App titles not being filled with a bunch of promo crap sounds pretty pro-consumer to me "It is what it says on the tin"
Unless the tin says anything about whether or not it includes ads.
When do they crack down more like how https://www.reddit.com/r/Libertarian will autoremove your comments if your username has the string 'ad' in it?
I'm serious, this isn't going to be enough. Liars and scammers will find out how to get around the filter and create badly named apps regardless, just like how my spam is barely readable English. I can read it but a filter can't.
It will definitely improve the readability of Play Store lists to have those titles removed.
The alternative is Amazon style titles which contains insane amount of details (because that is/was the only thing Amazon could search).
Ideally Google would allow the apps to be tagged as free, freemium, paid and app supported. I suspect part of Google reasoning is that doing so kill almost all the apps supported by ads.
I am an Android user fed up with Google, but I've never really focused on alternatives to stock Android. I briefly investigated Cyanogenmod and its successor, LineageOS, but never to the point of installing it. I do use the Gmail app on my phone, but it's not a requirement for me. Beyond that, I don't really have strong ties to the Google Suite of apps. I do have a few apps I've purchased and use frequently, but most…
have been running de googled for more than last 6 years. during original setup of phone there is a lot of opportunity to shut down Google.
how ever, can proceed and succeed most of the way with the right tools, and patience. vigilance in disable options is important.
some times you can disable all actions after install - for example location, etc.
F-droid is your primary source for apks. they have everything you need, with very good filters and warnings about privacy and other options of their apps.
If you need some apk available on that is on Google only, then there are a few other sites, that package them and seem to work quite well.
They look sketchy, they promote other apps, but I haven't had any issues using them in over 5 years. just click carefully.
for example apkpure.
You can get things like Signal, mapy. cz, Wyze and so on, better yet, sometimes older versions.
In a few apps, while running, you have to ignore the message that you need Google for this app to work. I haven't had one that actually needed it. even Google photos.
(assuming you don't want it linked to Google cloud.)
FWIW, the store itself already displays whether the app has ads -- directly below the app title [1]. This seems reasonable to me. I'd imagine you probably couldn't add [no IAPs] to a title, either.
Listings show whether they have ads, in-app purchases etc. on a separate screen
Searching 'no ads' seemingly won't query that tag, seemingly.
Seems pretty trivial to eventually add, compared to trying to enforce correctness on results from user-provided tags in titles.
I'm a little surprised you can't search for "no ads" apps outside of e.g. Pass listings, but I'm really glad they're not defaulting to just a title text search and cluttered listings of Farming Simulator [NO ADS] [NO IAPS] [NO REFERRALS] [NO TIMEWAITS] [NO DLC].
It doesn't work like that when you're one of two players in the segment, that's what antitrust is about. "It's their platform" would work well if there were any significant alternatives, which there aren't.
There are many popular app stores on Android and you're free to use any of them (or none of them, if you just download apps directly from websites) without rooting your phone, jailbreaking, etc.