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

Keep Android Open

keepandroidopen.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 907 posts

Re: Keep Android Open

#141

Post by LogicHound »

xvfLJfx9 wrote: post #131
LogicHound wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really isn't. This is a temporary sugar rush that comes after pretty much every time Microsoft does something awful. After a while the buzz will fizz out and the majority of those PC gamers that looked to switching go back to Windows. IME a lot developers don't even use Linux on their desktop machine. I've met three developers that use Linux professional IRL. A lot of devs have a hard time even using git bash on W…

I mean, this strongly has to depend on what kind of software you are developing. I don't know a single developer who primarily uses Windows. Literally everyone around me uses Linux for development work (and a large portion of them also use Linux for their personal machines).

Of course. However if a developer isn't using Windows typically they are using a Mac.

In corpo-world. Everyone is using Windows. If they are using Linux it would be through a VM or WSL. I guarantee none of those people are using Linux at home.

So for every developer you know that is using Linux, there are many more people using Windows supplied to by their IT department.

Re: Keep Android Open

#142

Post by munchlax »

Dead_Lemon wrote: post #128
kragen wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having a trustworthy channel for verified app loading is a vital security tool. F-Droid is such a channel; the Google Play Store is not. F-Droid inspects the source code of the applications they build, removes malware and other antifeatures from them, and compiles them from source to ensure that the binaries they deliver correspond to the source code they've inspected. The Google Play Store doesn't do any of those th…

I'm not sure about the NewPipe angle, as Grey Jay exists (Backed by FUTO/Louis Rossman) on the Play store, which has ad-block and sponsor block incorporated into it. Google is just being malicious towards opensource and privacy, under the guise of security

Not neccesarily a guise of security, but perhaps a different means of security. E.g. securing stock investments, profits, monies, etc. Nothing is 100% secure, you can't be in the void and still call it a void, etc

Re: Keep Android Open

#143

Post by pyeri »

jeena wrote: post #58

Back in the 2007 or when it came out in Sweden I bought the iPhone and started developing for it. This was cool, new and exciting and it was fine as long as my company was paying the $100 fee every year. But then I switched jobs and worked at a company which produced mostly open source code. Suddenly I would have to pay $100 every year just to be able to put my own software on the phone ... This is why I switched to…

This situation would have been avoided if we, as community of engineers, had insisted on full and uncompromised open source (Stallmanist or GPL way) right from the start instead of going the ESR way of half-hearted open source where it's technically open but corporates get to have a free lunch and make abuses.

Like most coders, I also prefer the permissive MIT/Apache/BSD licensing for most software projects but incidents like these make me question the direction we are heading towards. They raise fundamental questions about freedom itself - looking at the broader picture, is having a restrictive kind of freedom (GPL) often more beneficial than having full permissive freedom (MIT/Apache)?

Re: Keep Android Open

#144

Post by codedokode »

maxloh wrote: post #46
codedokode wrote: post #29

Before buying a smartphone I tried to find an inexpensive model that supports open source OS, but I couldn't. What open OS support is ether expensive Pixels, or outdated models. The solution, I think, would be a regulation that forbids manufacturers of any chip or device CPU from making obstacles to reprogramming the device (using fuses, digital signatures, encryption etc). So if you buy a device with CPU and writabl…

Most vendors (at some level) allow flashing custom distributions, as long as you didn't buy that device from carrier: https://github.com/zenfyrdev/bootloader-unlock-wall-of-shame... You will lose DRM-based apps (e.g. Netflix), Payment apps, and bank apps though.

I wouldn't want the bank to access my phone, so it doesn't matter that the app doesn't work, and in a weird case where you urgently need to transfer your money to scammers while not being at home, you can use bank's web app.

Re: Keep Android Open

#145

Post by giamma »

While I understand the reasons behind this campaign, I have mixed feelings about it.

As an iPhone user, I find it frustrating that deploying my own app on my own device requires either reinstalling it every 7 days or paying $100 annually. Android doesn't have this limitation, which makes it simpler and more convenient for personal use.

However, when it comes to publishing apps to the store, I take a different view. In my opinion, stricter oversight is beneficial. To draw an analogy: NPM registry has experienced several supply chain attacks because anyone can easily publish a library. The Maven Central registry for Java libraries, by contrast, requires developers to own the DNS domain used as a namespace for their library. This additional requirement, along with a few extra security checks, has been largely effective in preventing—or at least significantly reducing—the supply chain attacks seen in the NPM ecosystem.

Given the growing threat of such attacks, we need to find ways to mitigate them. I hope that Google's new approach is motivated by security concerns rather than purely economic reasons.

Re: Keep Android Open

#146

Post by codedokode »

munchlax wrote: post #129
heavyset_go wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even phones from Motorola require you to literally ask permission to unlock your bootloader via a form on their website, which they then unlock remotely or you enter some generated code. Other manufacturers do the same, where you have to wait a period of like 45 days before being able to unlock, and then have to ask permission on their website to unlock your bootloader.

And good lock unlocking anything over 5 years old because the updated website doesn't support what you've got. Been there, it sucks.

To be fair, for "anything over 5 years old" you can probably find a privilege escalation exploit.

Re: Keep Android Open

#147

Post by willtemperley »

rafaelmn wrote: post #116
4gotunameagain wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are not talking about software distribution or admitting it to a store, we're talking about executing something on your own device, a device that you purchased.

You can do that without dev license ?

Yes, but app is only usable for 7 days on iOS.

Re: Keep Android Open

#148

Post by LogicHound »

anonymous908213 wrote: post #135
LogicHound wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really isn't. This is a temporary sugar rush that comes after pretty much every time Microsoft does something awful. After a while the buzz will fizz out and the majority of those PC gamers that looked to switching go back to Windows. IME a lot developers don't even use Linux on their desktop machine. I've met three developers that use Linux professional IRL. A lot of devs have a hard time even using git bash on W…

> This is a temporary sugar rush that comes after pretty much every time Microsoft does something awful. I think what it fundamentally comes down to is that for consumer-oriented Linux to see widespread adoption, it needs to succeed on its own merits. Right now, and since forever, Linux exists in a space for the majority of consumers who consider it where they think "I might use it, because at least it's not the othe…

I agree, with a caveat. The vast number of consumers don't even know Linux/BSD or any the alternatives exist.

I have zero faith in a Linux smartphone. What will happen is that there will be some GNU/FSF thing with specs that are 15 years out date and you will have to install Linux via a serial console using Trisquel and the only applications available will the Mahjong (yes I am being hypobolic).

Re: Keep Android Open

#150

Post by monegator »

frankacter wrote: post #83
jeena wrote: post #58

Back in the 2007 or when it came out in Sweden I bought the iPhone and started developing for it. This was cool, new and exciting and it was fine as long as my company was paying the $100 fee every year. But then I switched jobs and worked at a company which produced mostly open source code. Suddenly I would have to pay $100 every year just to be able to put my own software on the phone ... This is why I switched to…

>This is why I switched to Android, just for Google now to pull the rug from under my feet again 1) You can continue to install unsigned APKs via adb with the upcoming update. 2) Signing APKs for sideloading requires a Google development account which is a one time fee of $25, no yearly fees. So still a free sideloading option available, and if you want to avoid adb it is a one time cost that is 1/4 the annual rate o…

1) Oh yes of course, here friend you just need a PC and the command line tools (unless soon you'll need to be a registered and VERIFIED developer) to install revanced or any open source app

2) Unless they decide to ban you (they can if you don't show any activity in the developer account for X months) and of course because you were verified you can't simply apply again and pay again, because you were banned!!!!

Post reply on HN