541–550 of 694 posts
I'm already annoyed by the fact that when I upgrade my own apps, self-developed and only used by me, which are installed either from Android Studio or by letting the app itself download the update from my server (with the app installation permission) and me then installing it, that I must send the app to Google for them to make a security check. It's not an option, even if they pretend it to be one: if I click the te…
Is ADB over wifi also a non-starter?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The network permission was displayed in the first versions of Android, then removed. I heard ( hearsay alert ) at the time that it was because so many apps needed it, and they wanted to get rid of always-yes questions. IIRC this happened before the rise of in-app advertising. If people always answer yes, they grow tired and eventually don't notice the question. I've seen it happen with "do you want to overwrite the p…
Could have been easily solved by granting it by default, but I doubt that was original intent.
I want to be able to install apps from alternative app stores like F-Droid and receive automatic updates, without requiring Google's authorization for app publication. Manually installing an app via adb must, of course, be permitted. But that is not sufficient. > Keeping users safe on Android is our top priority. Google's mandatory verification is not about security, but about control (they want to forbid apps like R…
Yes, it's all about control. Control the platform. Control the access to the platform, and the world is your oyster. And the political and legislation system are their friends. It is the establishment. The only way to fight is to indoctrinate the next generation, at home, and in school, to use FOSS. People tend to stick to whatever they used in childhood. We the software engineers should volunteer in giving speeches…
I cannot think of a more detached and idiotic ruling than that.
Verification sounds great on paper, but if this turns into “prove you’re a real dev by jumping through 12 forms of bureaucracy,” it’ll just push more talent to sideloading and open platforms.
Still, if Google actually nails this — transparent, fair, and fast — it could be the first time in years Android feels safer without feeling locked down. That’d be a plot twist I’d love to see.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, it's all about control. Control the platform. Control the access to the platform, and the world is your oyster. And the political and legislation system are their friends. It is the establishment. The only way to fight is to indoctrinate the next generation, at home, and in school, to use FOSS. People tend to stick to whatever they used in childhood. We the software engineers should volunteer in giving speeches…
Really its probably the dumbass judge that told Google "The apple app store isn't anti-competitive because they don't allow any competitors on their platform" when google asked why the play store was ruled a monopoly and the app store wasn't. I cannot think of a more detached and idiotic ruling than that.
From the very first announcement of this, Google has hinted that they were doing this under pressure from the governments in a few countries. (I don't remember the URL of the first announcement, but https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/08/elevating-... is from 2025-August-25 and mentions “These requirements go into effect in Brazil, Indonesia, Singapore, and Thailand”.) The “Why verification is important” s…
Considering phone scammers often convince their victims to: - install remote desktop software - run commands in the windows terminal - withdraw cash from the bank - lie to the bank teller about their purpose - insert their cash into a bitcoin ATM at a gas station - ignore warnings about scams which appear on the screen of the ATM - insert the scammers bitcoin address into the machine It isn't a stretch to imagine the…
Warning about scams is fine, as is taking steps to make it harder, but once you start trying to completely remove the agency of mentally sound adults "for their own good" then we have a problem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's all indeed valid. > One of the best features of Android is that even built-in default applications like the keyboard, browser, launcher, etc can be replaced by alternative implementations. When sideloading is barred all that can easily change. If you are forced to install everything from the Google Play Store, Google can easily bar such things, again in the name of "security" - alternate keyboards can steal yo…
> alternate keyboards can steal your password, alternate browsers can have adware / malware, alternate launcher can do many naughty things etc. etc. It's plausible that Google is done some of these things, like doing some sort of data mining on everything that you type for example (steal your password), and many official google apps have ads if you don't pay them
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We've always called it "install".
There is a distinction between installing something via the primary or a secondary mechanism. If someone said I just had to "install" a windows program and it turned out I had to compile it from scratch and set all the registry entries myself, I would be "astonished"(as in: The Principle Of Least Astonishment). I fully understand that language matters and if this was an attempt by Google to de-legitimize this way of…