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

41–50 of 72 posts

Re: Keep Android Open

#41

Post by [deleted] »

syoleene wrote: post #29
bjornroberg wrote: post #6

The detail that keeps getting lost in these threads: the "advanced flow" for power users is delivered through Google Play Services, not the Android OS. That's the whole game. It means the safeguard is not part of AOSP. It ships as a closed component that Google can narrow, gate, or remove in any Play Services update, with no Android version bump, no OEM coordination, no user consent beyond the usual auto-update. "Ope…

If the "advanced flow" is delivered through play services, what does this mean for degoogled Android phones? Or are those not concerned with the new side loading limitations? Put simply, If I were to install plain AOSP and F-Droid would I be able to continue installing apps normally?

[deleted]

Re: Keep Android Open

#42

Post by JeremyNT »

tantalor wrote: post #15

> it will no longer be possible to develop apps for the Android platform without first registering centrally with Google This is inaccurate. The enforcement is through Google Mobile Services. The article fails to point out that some manufacturers build versions/forks of Android that do not include GMS, but these are still technically Android.

A distinction without a difference.

If you want to develop an app for more than a miniscule fraction of Android devices, you need Google's blessing.

Re: Keep Android Open

#43

Post by flotzam »

getpokedagain wrote: post #17

Question. How will this play with distributions like graphene that allow for no Google play services?

They are not affected (except through second order effects, e.g. some FOSS app developers might give up on development)

Re: Keep Android Open

#44

Post by lapcat »

takluyver wrote: post #35
lapcat wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In order to enter the mainstream market and challenge the consumer OS duopolies, a new OS needs at least two things: 1. Retail presence 2. A large advertising budget This is why it's so difficult to challenge the existing duopolies on desktop and mobile. If a consumer can't walk into a retail store, see a device on the showroom floor with the new OS installed by default, and buy a device with the new OS installed by…

And to underscore the scale of that challenge, Microsoft couldn't make Windows Phone a significant competitor to Android & iOS.

I suspect the app ecosystem was a problem with Windows Phone. iOS and Android already had a head start of a few years, with Windows Phone not appearing until late 2010, and "Windows" was a bit of a misnomer, because desktop Windows apps couldn't run on the phone, so the preexisting software ecosystem didn't help.

Re: Keep Android Open

#46

Post by drnick1 »

zb3 wrote: post #27

Android was never open. Its security model / the permission system is anticompetitive and the user is a third class citizen. Google can do everything as they control the system - this gives full innovation capabilities. Then there are vendors which are restricted by Google via CDD (checked by CTS/VTS), they might add "privileged apps" but they can't touch what Google does on the system.. And only then there are regul…

It depends on what you mean by "Android." FOSS distributions such as Lineage or Graphene are unaffected by developer verification or other restrictions, and are truly open in the sense that they are controlled by the user.

Re: Keep Android Open

#47

Post by curt15 »

bparsons wrote: post #5

It feels like there is a wide open opportunity for some new OS's to enter the mainstream marketplace. I see nothing but dissatisfaction with the incumbents.

Will the new OSs be able overcome Apple and Google lobbies to restrict banking apps to "secure" (i.e. under their control) devices?

Re: Keep Android Open

#48

Post by zb3 »

drnick1 wrote: post #46
zb3 wrote: post #27

Android was never open. Its security model / the permission system is anticompetitive and the user is a third class citizen. Google can do everything as they control the system - this gives full innovation capabilities. Then there are vendors which are restricted by Google via CDD (checked by CTS/VTS), they might add "privileged apps" but they can't touch what Google does on the system.. And only then there are regul…

It depends on what you mean by "Android." FOSS distributions such as Lineage or Graphene are unaffected by developer verification or other restrictions, and are truly open in the sense that they are controlled by the user.

> and are truly open in the sense that they are controlled by the user.

I don't see them altering the permission model, you probably meant the possibility of modifying the system by tools such as Magisk, which indeed make it possible to install software much less restricted..

.. but you can do that on any device with an unlockable bootloader. Graphene/Lineage only remove some Google spyware.

Try to install a Lineage phone app on GrapheneOS to understand what I mean :)

Re: Keep Android Open

#50

Post by milkytron »

bayindirh wrote: post #21
safety1st wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What follows is the "advanced flow." I feel like there should be a class action lawsuit in response to this as when I purchased my device I had an expectation that I could install apps without this insane limitation Enable Developer Mode ↗ by tapping the software build number in About Phone seven times In Settings > System, open Developer Options and scroll down to “Allow Unverified Packages.” Flip the toggle and ans…

Even shutting down HAL9000 was easier than this, and I'm half joking.

I named my phone HAL9000 and when I read this I immediately thought, "Well yeah I just turn it off"
Post reply on HN