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

491–500 of 564 posts

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

#491

Post by lieks »

Pfhortune wrote: post #423
bitwize wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

They have already shown themselves to be both able and willing. Hopefully the backlash from this current decision will delay their plans long enough for GrapheneOS, Lineage and others to figure out how to work around it somehow, which is why I'm eagerly watching where this is going.

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

#492

Post by disgruntledphd2 »

strix_varius wrote: post #426
drnick1 wrote: post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

> (as evidenced by its total market dominance for markets who can afford Apple devices)

This is only true in English speaking markets, the rich countries of Western Europe are much more Android heavy.

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

#493

Post by dangus »

gkbrk wrote: post #453
vbezhenar wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try Xiaomi.

Xiaomi phones have built-in ads, that's one of the reasons it gets to be cheaper.

The Chinese phone ecosystem is basically unavailable in the US. Huawei was banned, and none of the other brands sell products officially besides OnePlus, which has iPhone-adjacent pricing.

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

#494

Post by disgruntledphd2 »

edg5000 wrote: post #429
WD-42 wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

> The biggest bank in the Netherlands at least requires the app to confirm payments

This is (I believe) part of PSD2, so basically all EZ banks require this now. Hilariously enough, they still have absurdly weak passwords but apparently they meet security requirements by forcing you to confirm stuff on your phone.

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

#495

Post by throw101010 »

Escapade5160 wrote: post #476

People choose Android because they need / want more control over their system. If Google continues to remove that control, they lose the only thing that gives their OS an edge.

Some people do, most choose it because Android phones are a lot less expensive when you buy new (outside of the flagship/newest phones).

The share of users who find this business move to be a deal-breaker is likely small enough for most manufacturers to not care.

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

#496

Post by wltr »

nagonago wrote: post #391
kube-system wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could certainly say that. But if you go up to a normal person on the street and say "Google has prevented you from installing apps on your phone", while they're still able to install from Google Play just fine, they're going to look at you like a crackhead. Language is for conveying information to other people. If your audience doesn't understand what you're saying, you're effectively screaming into the void.

"Google has prevented you from installing apps outside the Google Play store on your phone."

And the average person would understand that as a non-issue. The issue is you need a developer account to distribute your app, and Google can censor you not explaining anything to you or others. The issue is Google being a gatekeeper. And the fact that there’s malware in Google play store, is a cherry on top.

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

#497

Post by wltr »

schlauerfox wrote: post #334
sudo_and_pray wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably Linux phones, they are not there yet, but maybe by the time Android becomes an iOS it will be there. Problem will be with banking apps and such, well you can get an used iphone and in lockdown mode it should be fine even if it reaches EoL.

Bought a used iPhone 7 for a specific project requiring a supported OS (iOS15) and having a hardware security module and the phone worked fine for that but Microsoft Authenticator refused to install below iOS 16 for no obvious reason.

My bet is that YOLO is the reason for Microsoft being unable to make the authenticator work on an older iOS.

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

#498

Post by scbzzzzz »

palata wrote: post #475
bitwize wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't confirm this yet but with Google refusing to provide device trees for new Pixels things definitely look headed that way; they're at least starting to make installing an alternate OS difficult. The Graphene devs are trying to set things up with a handset manufacturer to ship a GrapheneOS phone, but good luck connecting that thing to a US carrier (who allowlist handsets and often limit the allowlist to models t…

> Google refusing to provide device trees for new Pixels things definitely look headed that way So you're just speculating.

With all the things google is doing for custom os last few years ( play protect, no major updates to asop and bundling updates to closed source google libraries etc). It is not speculation it is predicting with high certainty. Google wants custom os market to die and they are doing it brick by brick. We should Open our eyes and look at the timeline and realise it is not speculation and actual reality before it will be too late. Source: i am an owner of device with custom os and i know things i have to do to fix broken apps.

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

#499

Post by scbzzzzz »

jamesnorden wrote: post #169
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.

>I may as well switch and be able to use iMessage and FaceTime with them I, too, love vendor lockin.

It is not just that. In my case , everyone around me are using iphone . I made the sacrifice to not easily connect with them and use android so that i have freedom ( to install, customise what ever). Once that freedom aspect is taken away. There is no reason for me to make that sacrifice.

Until EU's cross compatibility between messaging apps is passed, we are forced to be in vendor lockin.

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

#500

Post by wltr »

seanw444 wrote: post #305

If nothing prevents this from happening, then when it does happen, I will make it a point to carry nothing but a laptop and a dumb phone, maybe a hotspot. If I need something from the internet, I will get it before the trip. If I can't get it on the trip, and forgot to beforehand, I will either find another way, or not do whatever it is. I don't know why I don't do that now, honestly. Sounds pretty interesting.

You don’t because it’s not reasonable. It’s fun to play with (speaking from experience), but it’s not reasonable in day-to-day life. That’s why smartphones are so successful. That’s why we need to actually open platform.
Post reply on HN