Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't have to be. Most of Android is fine.
Outside of China, to a first approximation no one once to use an Android device without Google Play Services.
I would love to, for the record.
Android/Linux Dual Boot
141–150 of 169 posts
Re: Android/Linux Dual Boot
#142Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a lot of UEFI in the phone ecosystem, it's not the BIOS later that's missing - it's the ACPI layer.
I've never seen UEFI in any mainstream Android device. The problem is... in the x86 world, even the most modern systems around still ship with decades of garbage. INT 10h and VBE, every x86 system still speaks it - either directly in the card, or emulated in BIOS/UEFI compatibility layers, so even a basic "hello world" can get video output, 09h/16h gives you keyboard input, 13h gives you disk I/O, 14h a serial port.…
I have many x86 devices that don't provide a CSM, so no, it's untrue that it will run on any arbitrary x86 device. You can do something similar running entirely inside the UEFI boot services environment - and that'll work just as well on any of the large number of UEFI-based ARM phones.
Re: Android/Linux Dual Boot
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just because its the channel that google would prefer you use doesn't mean its "the usual channel". What counts as "usual" is user specific. I don't even have google play installed on my Android phone.
True, I'm speaking of the situation for the crushing majority of users (outside China I guess), not for literally every user.
Sure, but if we want to chip away at that majority, we need to encourage them to think of using the play store as a choice they have. Implicitly assuming that "install" means "install from the play store" is counterproductive.
Re: Android/Linux Dual Boot
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
because steam deck is more like "PC" than a console I know, I know everything can be a "PC" if you look close enough but hear me people can create their own ecosystem of walled garden whenever they want
Antitrust law exists exactly to prevent companies from making their own ecosystem/walled garden that competitors cannot sell into. Product tying (forcing you to buy product B in order to buy product A) falls under that umbrella. Game console are not magical in this regard.
Yeah, thats my point
game console has been doing it for 20+ years and they are fine, apple has doing it for 10+ years and they are fine
Google wants doing it???? they are fine to do that. if you have problem then you are hypocrite
Re: Android/Linux Dual Boot
#145Re: Android/Linux Dual Boot
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
"I do not believe an an OS vendor with an app store has a right to limit alternate distribution channels or that a government does something wrong by restricting such practices as unfair competition." but its not illegal and wrong tho???? if this is probihited then xbox,playstation,nintendo,ios etc would be fined already unironically android is still more "open" than all of its competitor even after all of this
It might be illegal in the EU under the DMA. As I understand it, litigation involving Apple's equivalent is in progress, and the outcome may not be known for years. Wrong in this context is an assertion about morality. I do think it's wrong in the context of consumer products for a vendor to attempt to override the wishes of the owner of the product outside of a few narrow exceptions. I would absolutely apply that to…
that's what I call hypocrite
all of big tech doing it for 20+ years and suddenly google isnt allowed to do "industry standard", like what we talking about here????
I know its bad for pro-sumer which is minority but consumer would get more protection which is majority so I dismiss HN audience because they are biases vs normal people
Re: Android/Linux Dual Boot
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
>where what you wrote doesn't apply You can configure your flatpak app so that it will have permission to read microphone in the background or have full access to the disk. Many flatpaks of real apps request dangerous permissions that users have been conditioned to ignore. For example Blender is such an app which has full disk access and background microphone access, and I'm sure many people have installed that. This…
...and if you want an Android app to actually be able to do something useful, you give it root permissions and completely bypass the permission model. The world isn't black and white. Most reasons why Android apps are being so heavily locked down don't apply to Blender. As a user, I'm not interested in Android-bis - if I were, I would just use Android after all. Nevertheless, things like Flatpak give me, the user, th…
>you give it root permissions
This is not possible on a device following the Android security model. Permissioned features should always be implemented using proper security mechanisms like permissions.
>don't apply to Blender
You say that until the SuperRetopologyTools5000.py addon you try out infects your system.
>Flatpak give me, the user, the power over application's permission
Most people are not going to bother with this. It's important for the defaults to be secure. People shouldn't have to opt in to a secure experience, and doing so shouldn't break the program.
Re: Android/Linux Dual Boot
#148Earlier quoted context omitted.
Antitrust law exists exactly to prevent companies from making their own ecosystem/walled garden that competitors cannot sell into. Product tying (forcing you to buy product B in order to buy product A) falls under that umbrella. Game console are not magical in this regard.
Yeah, thats my point game console has been doing it for 20+ years and they are fine, apple has doing it for 10+ years and they are fine Google wants doing it???? they are fine to do that. if you have problem then you are hypocrite
Lots of us have a problem with all of those things, and would like the government to enforce the law. I've never bought an Apple product, and the last game console I owned was a PS2 when I was a child.
Re: Android/Linux Dual Boot
#149Earlier quoted context omitted.
> that does mean the app is more risky since it's not monitored by Google. Why is Google the arbitrator of risk here ? As a user I'm capable of assessing the risk directly or indirectly by delegating that responsibility to another store or another program a.k.a anti-virus programs, its my choice in the end. I want Google to build software like Windows Defender and allow others to build similar software. I want the ab…
> Why is Google the arbitrator of risk here ? Because they do the monitoring and take some responsibility? I'm just comparing "install from the Play store" with "install some apk from wherever". If you bring additional context/knowledge of course it makes a difference.
Risk and responsibility are different. Monitoring, responsibility, those are just silly words with semantic games since Google's store is full of malware while F-Droid is not. Google's store is the risky one, and the words on their compliance statements are irrelevant to that fact.
Re: Android/Linux Dual Boot
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
>and that does mean the app is more risky since it's not monitored by Google. This implies the play store isn't hosting tonnes of malware right now
Yeah maybe it gives the wrong idea. It's still better than no monitoring at all. It gets tricky with alternative stores like F-Droid. I guess if you use F-Droid as a trusted source then it shouldn't be called sideloading.
There is currently zero evidence that the "monitored" Play Store is better or safer than the open internet.