“Fewer Users” Warning Hurting Specialized and New Apps • Hacker News Board

Re: “Fewer Users” Warning Hurting Specialized and New Apps

#141

Post by ff2400t » Fri, May 02, 2025, 7:58 PM UTC

Y_Y wrote: post #128

serial_dev wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My new startup idea: “upload the same release with a different version and build number about once a month till the end of times" as a service .

My new startup idea: malicious compliance as a service You forward us complaint emails and we create some AI slopscript that fulfils the least compliant interpretation of the rule it can think of. The goal would be to use automated nonsense to try to frustrate MBAs who have managed to burrow all the way to the brain of a tech giant and are now burdening humanity with their folly.

You can ask apple for all the Training that you will need for that.

Re: “Fewer Users” Warning Hurting Specialized and New Apps

#142

Post by szszrk » Fri, May 02, 2025, 8:09 PM UTC

Groxx wrote: post #117

szszrk wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are right, but those "janky ad libraries" are the very reason most of the apps on google play were created.

If you're not an app that's intentionally risking your users' safety though, you probably have some reason to trust the ad vendor to do their part. It's calculated risk for most non-malicious apps, and the major vendors are broadly fine in that respect. Ignoring privacy anyway. And we can ignore the shovelware, which probably is actually a majority of apps. Those won't care about security patches, and will probably g…

So as a conclusion, it seems we agree that those that are the ones creating most risk for users will not be impacted.

I am sticking to android ecosystem as best one I know, because I still have choices + I can use fdroid for a lot of my apps.

But when my mom uses a tablet or phone ... I have absolutely no smart advise to give her. All apps are hostile and annoying. The play game subscription is fine (apps/games cannot have apps and are fully unlocked) but other that that play store is a minefield.

Re: “Fewer Users” Warning Hurting Specialized and New Apps

#143

Post by BlimpSpike » Fri, May 02, 2025, 8:11 PM UTC

owlbite wrote: post #101

echelon wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wouldn't even be hard to achieve security: (1) sandboxing, (2) permissions system, (3) database of bad app signatures, (4) heuristics based monitoring. Most of this is already in place. There's no excuse except money and power.

Because that's worked so well for PCs?

PCs don't have sandboxing or permissions.

Re: “Fewer Users” Warning Hurting Specialized and New Apps

#144

Post by Groxx » Fri, May 02, 2025, 8:13 PM UTC

szszrk wrote: post #142

Groxx wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're not an app that's intentionally risking your users' safety though, you probably have some reason to trust the ad vendor to do their part. It's calculated risk for most non-malicious apps, and the major vendors are broadly fine in that respect. Ignoring privacy anyway. And we can ignore the shovelware, which probably is actually a majority of apps. Those won't care about security patches, and will probably g…

So as a conclusion, it seems we agree that those that are the ones creating most risk for users will not be impacted. I am sticking to android ecosystem as best one I know, because I still have choices + I can use fdroid for a lot of my apps. But when my mom uses a tablet or phone ... I have absolutely no smart advise to give her. All apps are hostile and annoying. The play game subscription is fine (apps/games canno…

Yup, pretty much. Which makes me wonder what the actual goal is, especially since they've had vulnerability scanning for years iirc

Re: “Fewer Users” Warning Hurting Specialized and New Apps

#145

Post by redserk » Fri, May 02, 2025, 8:20 PM UTC

duskwuff wrote: post #125

vineyardmike wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we don't need any new apps that do similar things to existing apps" I’m not a “Googler who may be responsible”, but my understanding is that Apple does this too… and Google App Store has a reputation for being lower quality. I assume it’s because unoriginal apps at some point are just “polluting” the market and making it harder to find higher quality products. Which is generally what users want. Some things are red…

> Some things are redundant - how many flashlight apps, weather apps, ChatGPT wrappers, etc are needed? For what it's worth, the wording Apple uses in their App Review Guidelines [1] is: > 4.3(b): Also avoid piling on to a category that is already saturated; the App Store has enough fart, burp, flashlight, fortune telling, dating, drinking games, and Kama Sutra apps, etc. already. We will reject these apps unless the…

I’ll give credit to Apple for formally writing a policy to this extent, but it’s disappointing. There’s always the risk of putting in a lot of time for an app that is genuinely unique but Apple may not think so.

I’d much rather Apple let in junk apps but do more to promote curated lists of good apps. I like the “Editors Choice” section. I think it is generally a step in the right direction to surface decent apps.

Plus there’s also already some kind of precedent: Maps does an acceptable job promoting third-party “Guides” to attractions and food for many cities.

Re: “Fewer Users” Warning Hurting Specialized and New Apps

#146

Post by nashashmi » Fri, May 02, 2025, 8:26 PM UTC

anilakar wrote: post #57

Our company just got a warning that we have sixty days to release something on Play or have our developer console account closed. The email made it pretty clear that Google wants developers to continuously push new versions to customers. We have no new features nor bug fixes in backlog. There is nothing to update. The only purpose of our software is to control hardware that our company makes. Nobody uses it for fun,…

Google should delist the app from search rather than remove it entirely from the play store for old stale apps.

Re: “Fewer Users” Warning Hurting Specialized and New Apps

#147

Post by hbn » Fri, May 02, 2025, 8:27 PM UTC

nout wrote: post #64

anilakar wrote: post #57

Our company just got a warning that we have sixty days to release something on Play or have our developer console account closed. The email made it pretty clear that Google wants developers to continuously push new versions to customers. We have no new features nor bug fixes in backlog. There is nothing to update. The only purpose of our software is to control hardware that our company makes. Nobody uses it for fun,…

You can update the version number and re-release. I think this may grant also adding the update note "Updated version number. Nothing else. Thank you Google".

Every once in a while they'll bump the minimum SDK version or whatever other upload requirements, so if you do that you may have to tweak a few other things to stay compliant, at which point it seems like their system is working as they intended it.

Re: “Fewer Users” Warning Hurting Specialized and New Apps

#148

Post by mcny » Fri, May 02, 2025, 8:27 PM UTC

kazinator wrote: post #106

nout wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can update the version number and re-release. I think this may grant also adding the update note "Updated version number. Nothing else. Thank you Google".

Since they have 60 days to release something , they should have a dummy application which does nothing, but which just increments its version number.

I am not sure

I quote

----

Limited Functionality and Content

We do not allow apps that only have limited functionality and content.

Here is an example of a common violation:

    Apps that are static without app-specific functionalities, for example, text only or PDF file apps
    Apps with very little content and that do not provide an engaging user experience, for example, single wallpaper apps
    Apps that are designed to do nothing or have no function

https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answ...

Re: “Fewer Users” Warning Hurting Specialized and New Apps

#149

Post by throwaway494932 » Fri, May 02, 2025, 8:29 PM UTC

nout wrote: post #64

anilakar wrote: post #57

Our company just got a warning that we have sixty days to release something on Play or have our developer console account closed. The email made it pretty clear that Google wants developers to continuously push new versions to customers. We have no new features nor bug fixes in backlog. There is nothing to update. The only purpose of our software is to control hardware that our company makes. Nobody uses it for fun,…

You can update the version number and re-release. I think this may grant also adding the update note "Updated version number. Nothing else. Thank you Google".

That works if meanwhile Google hasn't decided to increase the target api level requirements [1]. In that case you may not be able to just republish the app, and extensive refactoring may be necessary.

Forcing apps using old sdks out of the app store is probably the main reason they do this.

[1] https://developer.android.com/google/play/requirements/targe...

Re: “Fewer Users” Warning Hurting Specialized and New Apps

#150

Post by theamk » Fri, May 02, 2025, 8:30 PM UTC

godelski wrote: post #100

anilakar wrote: post #57

Our company just got a warning that we have sixty days to release something on Play or have our developer console account closed. The email made it pretty clear that Google wants developers to continuously push new versions to customers. We have no new features nor bug fixes in backlog. There is nothing to update. The only purpose of our software is to control hardware that our company makes. Nobody uses it for fun,…

Imagine if we talked about other computers like we talked about phones. It's just so weird - you can only install programs from our approved package manager - if you make any transactions through your program, we'll take a 30% cut - you can't be access those files, you're not root - you got root?! We're going to fucking sue you (yeah, I know about the PS3...) - you can't change these settings - you can't access that…

This only applies to iPhones, most Androids are rootable, and even un-rooted, it is trivial (I am mean really trivial, like 3 clicks) to install programs from outside of app store.

My opinion is anyone who owns iPhone knows what they sign up for, and does not care. So I don't get your rant.

- Do you own iPhone? Well, you've made your bed, now lie in it. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of phones on the market - if you chose one without 3rd party app store, it's on you.

- Do you own Android? You have nothing to complain about, push any apks you want anytime. Hey, get Samsung - it comes with 2nd app store preinstalled (from Samsung of course). Maybe even root the phone if you want to.

(Note the GP mentions "MDM", and that's why they could not use this route. MDM means corporate security, and they apparently made a rule to block 3rd party installs. This is sad, and I feel for them... but this is a corporate problem, regular users are not affected)

- Are you complaining on behalf of other people? They are all adults and made their own choice. If you want to make a difference, advocate against Apple. Or even better, advocate for regulations against Apple, to make their products worse so that more people move to Androids.