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

Google is forcing us to make our open source VoIP app worse

voys.co.za

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 296 posts

Re: Google is forcing us to make our open source VoIP app worse

#261

Post by sangnoir »

BlueTemplar wrote: post #205
sangnoir wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Android can be more open but let’s not pretend that a lot of devices have locked bootloaders Not all Android handsets have unlockable bootloaders - but all handsets with unlockable bootloaders run Android.

I think you meant to say can run Android ?

I realized my comment could the interpreted the way you did as I was writing it, and left it ambiguous (because that too is a good thing enabled by Android's openness)

However, my main point was that outside of niche devices[1] that are rounding errors for smartphone consumer market share: the vast majority of devices sold with unlockable bootloaders already run Android: I'd guestimate > 95%. Looking at the list of devices supported by LineageOS (after enabling "Legacy Devices") is awe-inspiring. In the past, Samsung, Sony and Motorola had a solid lineup of unlockable devices.

1. I say this as someone who almost succumbed to the temptation of buying the Pine64 phone with the intention of contributing code

Re: Google is forcing us to make our open source VoIP app worse

#262

Post by gizmo686 »

pjmlp wrote: post #123
bakugo wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So why not just remove the Contacts API entirely then? If it exists, "shady operators" can misuse it. Oh and, camera apps made by "shady operators" could be sending your pictures to questionable places so why not remove the Camera API as well? And we can't forget that "shady operators" could be snooping through your files so let's remove the filesystem API too. Actually now that I think about it, any app could be mal…

They already removed filesystem API for quite some time now, you're only allowed to read inside the application directory, anywhere else on the device requires SAF. https://developer.android.com/about/versions/11/privacy/stor...

Android still has an API to allow access to all files that were previously allowed. It just requires an explicit opt in from the user.

https://developer.android.com/training/data-storage/manage-a...

Re: Google is forcing us to make our open source VoIP app worse

#263

Post by pjmlp »

gizmo686 wrote: post #262
pjmlp wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They already removed filesystem API for quite some time now, you're only allowed to read inside the application directory, anywhere else on the device requires SAF. https://developer.android.com/about/versions/11/privacy/stor...

Android still has an API to allow access to all files that were previously allowed. It just requires an explicit opt in from the user. https://developer.android.com/training/data-storage/manage-a...

Read the fine print,

>To limit broad access to shared storage, the Google Play store has updated its policy to evaluate apps that target Android 11 (API level 30) or higher and request "All files access" through the MANAGE_EXTERNAL_STORAGE permission. This policy takes effect in May 2021.

Re: Google is forcing us to make our open source VoIP app worse

#264

Post by indrora »

danuker wrote: post #139
godshatter wrote: post #67

Can they put it on f-droid and point their users there? Downside is that users don't know what f-droid is and have to install it, upside is they find a new "app store" that has some new techy things on it. Not sure if f-droid gets around having to tell your phone it can run third-party apps, but if it does that would be a win as well. I didn't see in the post if they sell this or give it away.

Completely open source means no place for supposedly secret Firebase Messaging credentials, which requires developers to bend over backwards, if they want reasonably quick notifications: https://github.com/deltachat/deltachat-android/issues/82

All this makes me yearn for the days of Windows 10 Mobile again.

I built a very simple websocket based app and there was not only support for "you need a long lived TCP connection and occasionally might need to read from it" but "you need background services that might depend on the state of the radio" and more.

Honestly it was an absolute dream to develop for, and it's a damn shame upper management seems to have had a fit that they weren't winning out of the gate.

Re: Google is forcing us to make our open source VoIP app worse

#265

Post by amluto »

secretsatan wrote: post #40

I kinda sorta see google’s side. There are just too many shady operators out there who will swear blind they’re completely honest, and maybe they are, but they also employed a third party to write code or maybe just imported a 3rd party lib (i am in no way saying this is the case) As to, why don’t they look at the code? bugger that being standard practise, i’m not handing over my code to google or apple. Even if they…

> Even if they did, how to check final the uploaded binary?

By requiring and verifying a reproducible build. It would be awesome if open source apps on an app store has a badge indicating which commit of which git tree they came from and only allowed updates that similarly come from public trees.

Even failing that, favoring reproducible builds would add a considerable degree of traceability to the entire distribution process.

Re: Google is forcing us to make our open source VoIP app worse

#266

Post by fragmede »

sgc wrote: post #212
esprehn wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds like iOS? Only Apple apps have access to all the system level capabilities and you can't replace any of the system apps, not even the browser.

It would be fair if one were to conclude that I don't like iOS. But my comment made a few different points, including about google's app quality, not only forcing default apps but also disallowing user choice where it should exist in a pervasive, hard to see way (for the end user), and invasive tracking. Frankly, over the last week I have been looking into whether there is a relatively straightforward way to write an…

We have the technology for virtual machines, and phones are pretty beefy these days. where's my Linux phone hypervisor with android guest?

Re: Google is forcing us to make our open source VoIP app worse

#267

Post by outworlder »

donmcronald wrote: post #50

> We even sue governments for protecting the privacy of our users. Lost in translation?

Probably not a translation, confusing for/to is pretty common for non-native speakers.

(Native speakers on the other hand will say 'loose' vs 'lose', 'rouge' vs 'rogue', or even 'could/should of')

Re: Google is forcing us to make our open source VoIP app worse

#268

Post by woojoo666 »

mynameisvlad wrote: post #202
lathiat wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a mistake I see on iOS a lot. You can use a 'system picker' for some things without a permission - photos is the most common one - many apps request full photo library access which I never want to grant when they could just use the system photo picker instead. In a similar way you could (in iOS) for this same feature just popup the share sheet to send a message. Though I am not familiar with the Android analo…

I believe in recent OS versions, whenever an app requests full library access, the OS asks you if you want to grant it, deny it, or grant a subset of photos which it fakes as the "full library" to the app.

I believe Android does this too, letting users pick a specific directory they want the app to have access to

Re: Google is forcing us to make our open source VoIP app worse

#269

Post by woojoo666 »

savy91 wrote: post #238
binkHN wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a list of the affected brands?

I do not. I can tell you that a Xiaomi device I tested was not affected. All Samsung devices I tested as well as Realme (and therefore I assume also Oneplus and Oppo) are affected. This issues also hints that at least 4 years ago it was an Android issue and therefore all phones were affected. A lot of users still use phones from 4 years ago that have not been updated to the latest Android version by the manufacturer.…

One of the major advantages of Apple is how they can get all their users to update OS in a timely fashion, whereas Android users tend to lag behind

Re: Google is forcing us to make our open source VoIP app worse

#270

Post by sgc »

fragmede wrote: post #266
sgc wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be fair if one were to conclude that I don't like iOS. But my comment made a few different points, including about google's app quality, not only forcing default apps but also disallowing user choice where it should exist in a pervasive, hard to see way (for the end user), and invasive tracking. Frankly, over the last week I have been looking into whether there is a relatively straightforward way to write an…

We have the technology for virtual machines, and phones are pretty beefy these days. where's my Linux phone hypervisor with android guest?

There is Anbox, which just uses the same kernel for Linux and Android. But it is incomplete and not very active. Basically, we don't even need a hypervisor, but apparently it's still not easy.

https://github.com/anbox/anbox

Post reply on HN