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

Android's sideloading limits are its most anti-consumer move

makeuseof.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 564 posts

Re: Android's sideloading limits are its most anti-consumer move

#421

Post by fooqux »

patcon wrote: post #412

I was a big proponent of the nexus phones and Google's efforts in the space, but I am hundred percent not an android fan anymore. There's a study on positive or destructive workers, from a business management pov. The finding was that the "bad" employees and the "good" are often the same people: a "good" employee scorned becomes the worst type of employee. I think Google will be discovering some variant of this from…

Too late for whom though? I suspect it's not Google. The only companies with enough capital to take them on at their own game are somehow even worse, although admittedly the gap is getting narrower by the second.

And yeah, giants occasionally fall suddenly. But mostly just in the software world. Phones require extensive hardware and software knowledge, and increasingly also require playing nice with carriers/TLA government agencies.

Re: Android's sideloading limits are its most anti-consumer move

#422

Post by Nursie »

ethbr1 wrote: post #215
rs186 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't make any difference anyway, does it? Then I might as well treat myself with better hardware & ecosystem.

Better hardware, yes. But you'll be reminded quickly how comparatively shit Apple's software is. Aka the litany of "Oh, yeah, everyone knows that's broken but just deals with it, because there's no way to fix issues on a closed platform other than {wait for Apple}."

What are all these things that are broken?

The only thing I can think of that's worse on iOS is that you're forced to use safari or another skin on webkit rather than true alternative browsers. Everything else works better thatn android AFAICT, and integrates amazingly with MacOS.

Re: Android's sideloading limits are its most anti-consumer move

#423

Post by Pfhortune »

bitwize wrote: post #360
palata wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well GrapheneOS is not Google-certified, so it is not impacted by this :-).

AOSP releases are going to stop (or become late and cursory like Darwin releases), and new Pixels will not be able to run non-Google-certified operating systems :)

> and new Pixels will not be able to run non-Google-certified operating systems :)

I haven't heard about this. Source?

I think there has been much _speculation_ around this, but no proof that I am aware of.

Re: Android's sideloading limits are its most anti-consumer move

#424

Post by crossroadsguy »

AnonymousPlanet wrote: post #320
itg wrote: post #2

Installing any app I want outside the Play Store was the primary reason I decided to go with Android, despite most of the people I know using iPhones. If I can't do this anymore, I may as well switch and be able to use iMessage and FaceTime with them.

Android is losing a unique selling point. This will have an impact on what a techie may recommend to a non-techie in the future, because everything is beige now. I have the feeling Google has given up on using nerds as beachheads. The market is saturated enough and they don't need us anymore to do grass roots spreading of their products. It's the same with Youtube. As long as there were enough people who were unencum…

Yes! Android doesn’t need an USP. Not anymore now that we have a stable equilibrium of this perfect duopoly.

Re: Android's sideloading limits are its most anti-consumer move

#425

Post by Palmik »

gizmo686 wrote: post #408
echelon wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is unacceptable. Google needs to be broken up. Apple too. The lack of antitrust enforcement is a clown show. We have no choice in the most important computing category in the world. It's a duopoly and they have everyone in straightjackets - consumers, companies, competitors, governments, ... A huge percentage of the world's thoughts and economy flow through mobile. And two companies own it. Ma Bell was nothing c…

Breaking up Google will not help in this particular case. The problem is entirely within the Android unit; and would still be present even if Android were to be split off into it's own company. It certainly seems like there is problematic behavior in the restrictions Google puts on OEMs that want to use Android (or, more specifically, play services) on their devices. However, I think it would take a different enforce…

Disabling the ability to install arbitrary apps, like ReVanced, etc. benefits other parts of Alphabet.

In general, making anti consumer decisions is also easier when you know you can fall back on income from other units.

Re: Android's sideloading limits are its most anti-consumer move

#426

Post by strix_varius »

drnick1 wrote: post #416
Fergusonb wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just switched to the iPhone with the new cycle, explicitly because of this news. Sideloading was the killer feature for me as well.

> I just switched to the iPhone with the new cycle, explicitly because of this news. And guess what, sideloading has never been allowed on iPhones. So you just went from bad to worse. The only rational option for tech-minded people nowadays is to buy a device that supports Lineage or Graphene (ironically Pixels are good for this) and to replace the stock OS.

Well no, the iPhone has niceties that Android lacks (as evidenced by its total market dominance for markets who can afford Apple devices). Lots of engineers use Android phones, but the C-suite invariably uses iPhones.

So if the reason you're choosing Android over iOS is freedom and flexibility, once that's gone, why not choose slickness, speed, battery-life, photo quality, and an integrated experience?

Re: Android's sideloading limits are its most anti-consumer move

#427

Post by drnick1 »

WD-42 wrote: post #341
hahn-kev wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably the only real benefit now is Firefox/alt browsers

Firefox with UBO is still a huge win. But Orion browser is making progress. At this point I just don’t see a reason to go android anymore. If I have to be part of a walled garden I may as well choose the nicer one.

For me the main reason to stick to FOSS Android ROMs (over a Linux phone) is that you retain compatibility with thousands of very good FOSS and non-FOSS apps. There is Waydroid, and it works very well, but if you are primarily running Android apps, an Android device makes more sense.

Re: Android's sideloading limits are its most anti-consumer move

#428

Post by goku12 »

gizmo686 wrote: post #408
echelon wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is unacceptable. Google needs to be broken up. Apple too. The lack of antitrust enforcement is a clown show. We have no choice in the most important computing category in the world. It's a duopoly and they have everyone in straightjackets - consumers, companies, competitors, governments, ... A huge percentage of the world's thoughts and economy flow through mobile. And two companies own it. Ma Bell was nothing c…

Breaking up Google will not help in this particular case. The problem is entirely within the Android unit; and would still be present even if Android were to be split off into it's own company. It certainly seems like there is problematic behavior in the restrictions Google puts on OEMs that want to use Android (or, more specifically, play services) on their devices. However, I think it would take a different enforce…

A smaller company would at least be less capable of ignoring the fines or the loss of market share. Or in other words, "too big to fail".

Re: Android's sideloading limits are its most anti-consumer move

#429

Post by edg5000 »

WD-42 wrote: post #342
jolmg wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Re: banking, not until adoption of non-Android and non-iOS devices grows. To break this chicken and egg problem, one can get an Android phone and use it exclusively for the banking app, treating it like one of those hardware security keys the banks used to give out in the early 2010s. One used to just leave it at home; maybe take it to work occasionally. Another option is to live like the early 2000s and go to an ATM…

Or use the banks website from a computer? Which banks do not allow this?

The biggest bank in the Netherlands at least requires the app to confirm payments. Although they do still have these paper slips (maybe) for transfers but that cannot be used for ecommerce

Re: Android's sideloading limits are its most anti-consumer move

#430

Post by goku12 »

Buttons840 wrote: post #377
itg wrote: post #2

Installing any app I want outside the Play Store was the primary reason I decided to go with Android, despite most of the people I know using iPhones. If I can't do this anymore, I may as well switch and be able to use iMessage and FaceTime with them.

Switching to iPhone will make it even more obvious there is an unhealthy monopoly, so that's nice. If there's no good reason to choose Android, why not?

What we really need is a fair alternative to both these abuse platforms. Choosing an unfamiliar abuse over a familiar abuse isn't exactly the smartest move. The switch over to a free(dom) platform like plain Linux must happen even if we have to make some temporary sacrifices like the loss of mobile banking facilities. It can't be worse than using a feature phone, can it? The app ecosystem will eventually attain parity if the platform achieves popularity.
Post reply on HN