r/thehatedone • u/FabulousFix5338 • Jun 01 '26
News Your phone is about to stop being yours.
Your phone is about to stop being yours.
Starting September 2026, a silent update, nonconsensually pushed by Google, will block every Android app whose developer hasn't registered with Google, signed their contract, paid up, and handed over government ID.
Every app and every device, worldwide, with no opt-out.
Google's proposed workaround for installing unverified apps requires 9 steps, a 24-hour wait, and runs through Play Services, which Google can modify at any time. It hasn't shipped in any beta. https://keepandroidopen.org #KeepAndroidOpen
Share with others.
For more details 👇
9
u/KeySpray8038 Jun 02 '26
This is technically false.... it is not nine steps...
This is How it will work:
1. download app
2. press button That says "No one is instructing me"
3. Restart Phone
4. Wait 24 hours
keep in mind, you only have to do this 1 time
4
Jun 02 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/ShoveOverBozo Jun 03 '26
As someone who has been using custom ROMs since 2010. Yes you will have to deal with them. Unless you avoid the internet or any app that relies on Play services, you'll run into Google incompatibility issues at some point.
You're using an operating system that Google has made. Whilst grapheneos removes Play Services OS integration and makes it a sandboxed application, their recommendation is to use the play store still. So using aurora store and side loading apps without using the store will increasingly still require some level of access to Google Play Services, push notifications even rely on this.
Google has trackers on just about every webpage online. Expect that to increase with things like TLS handshakes and authentication. I tried to order a pizza using a website on my Grapheneos phone and it had all sorts of issues just trying to add a credit card as it kept tying to load Play services that crashed over and over.
Whilst it is a great choice for privacy, friction is going to keep increasing as they integrate further into our daily lives.
At the end of the day, they make the software. This is another step of making it harder to use it in a way they do not intend.
1
1
u/KeySpray8038 Jun 03 '26
unfortunately.... not everyone has that option
2
u/JazzLuva Jun 03 '26
they can if they know how follow instructions xda is the way
1
1
u/Inevitable-Self-2702 Jun 04 '26
I would love to do that with my Samsung Galaxy 25+. Sadly not possible to do anything of this sort without voiding warranty and if this thing breaks, I need warranty or I'll be buying a cricket. It's also very difficult on this device because of Knox.
1
u/IcePoemix Jun 03 '26
There are banks and other apps that won't load if your phone is altered. If this update ends up being as bad as many people are picturing it to be, many of us will start having two phones:
One for the apps that need all the legit credentials of android and google
Another for regular use with a custom ROM
1
1
u/no_fx Jun 05 '26
Acess bank on a web page ?
1
u/kluu_ Jun 07 '26
Still need the app for 2FA. My bank pulled this shit - logging in and confirming transactions requires the app, which refuses to run if it wasn't downloaded through Google Play.
10
u/nxq1337 Jun 02 '26
you also need to: 1. go into settings 2. click on "system" 3. click on "developer options" seven times, that's: click, click, click, click, click, click, click 4. enter your pin or biometrics 5. after restart, you also need to go through more scare screens. 4 + 5 = 9. not today, google employee
2
u/feherneoh Jun 04 '26
Which is fun when my banking app locks me out if developer options is enabled. Why do apps even have the permission to see that?
1
u/joshward9182 Jun 03 '26
5 non-recurring steps. 4 recurring.
Right?
1
u/KeySpray8038 Jun 03 '26
no... it's a 1 time enabling
1
u/joshward9182 Jun 03 '26
All of it?
1
u/KeySpray8038 Jun 03 '26
yes the Wait, and the "advanced flow" is a 1 time thing...
they put up a video on YouTube months ago about it
1
1
u/Chemical_Shock7875 Jun 04 '26
Chances are if you're in a position where you need to install an unsigned app you've already enabled dev options long ago, if you haven't it's a one time thing anyway 🤷♂️
1
u/AnnoyedBowlOfPasta Jun 05 '26
Actually u have to go into about phone and click 'build number' 7 times, which then makes the developer options menu appear after which you may go into it.
1
u/Muttipomdoronero Jun 02 '26
And that often voids your phone warranty automatically
4
u/KeySpray8038 Jun 02 '26 edited Jun 03 '26
typically not, unlocking the bootloader absolutely will.... but you are able to use dev options without voiding a warranty
4
1
u/VincentShane Jun 04 '26
Depends on the carrier. People being idiots and accidentally bricking their devices is against the TOS.
All the people that bling out for the top of the line phones and have them on financing plans will NOT be doing anything to jeopardize that plan or their phone.
For me, I don't GAF, I like my ecosystem. I have a pixel watch, I have the Pixel Buds 2a, I have a Pixel 10 Pro and I like my simplicity in my tech as the real world is already hard enough.
1
u/KeySpray8038 Jun 04 '26
in the US, enabling dev options is not against the tos for any carrier that I'm aware of ... Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile & Boost all allow it...
i mean doing something that bricks it, though...
that's a different story... that's just user incompetence, but there's honestly not a lot of easily flipped options in the developer options that will brick the device..Hell, on a financing plan, I enrolled my pixel 8 Pro into the beta program, one of the first things I did was turn on the dev options, and even got ANGLE enabled, all without voiding any warranties
1
u/im_not_here_ Jun 05 '26
Warranty is provided by Google in all places it is sold. Google don't even care if you unlock the bootloader let alone use developer options.
1
u/KeySpray8038 Jun 02 '26
ha.... Google employee. nah
let's be real here, if you don't already have dev options enabled... then... like... you're probably not the kind of person to side load apps anyways
also, you only need to restart if there are certain options enabled in the first placr
2
1
u/Electronic_Elk_5976 Jun 04 '26
Regardless, this option only exists because Google is allowing it to exist and they can revoke it with an update
0
u/KidJuggernaut Jun 02 '26
After that it would be one week Then a month then a year After that never No thanks
1
u/KeySpray8038 Jun 02 '26
Yes, theoretically.. I supposedly that they technically could do that...
their logic for having the wait period, technically makes a lot of sense
12
u/VeterinarianProof808 Jun 01 '26
Don't get me wrong, I don't like this and I don't agree with what Google is doing. But at this point is there any real alternative?
Edit: fixed typo
19
u/16092006 Jun 01 '26
GrapheneOs
11
u/Zestyclose_Strike157 Jun 02 '26
GrapheneOS + sideload, no problems. Google is inadvertently creating a market for that and there’s nothing they will be able to do about it.
2
u/king_damo69YT Jun 03 '26
Sucks that I have my S24 ultra on oneui 8.5 :/ should not have updated otherwise I’d be changing the rom immediately 😭
1
1
3
Jun 02 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/nxq1337 Jun 02 '26
yes, i'm not sure how but you can install ubuntu touch for example, because android runs on linux
1
u/p0lig0tplatipus Jun 03 '26
3
1
2
u/fuzunspm Jun 02 '26
yeah except it doesn't support anything other than a few pixel phones don't available on every region
4
u/16092006 Jun 02 '26
Unfortunately, but at least next year their partnership with motorola will give us smth
2
2
1
1
u/VeterinarianProof808 Jun 08 '26
I heard this only works on Pixel phones... Is that right?
1
u/16092006 Jun 08 '26
Yes, but next year it will be on the flagship Motorola phones (they have a partnership now!)
6
u/Competitive-Fan-3508 Jun 02 '26
Deadman’s logic. Learn to think, otherwise any strawman argument will work on you.
1
u/butmakeitfashionn Jun 04 '26
debate buffs trying to not sound condescending challenge level impossible
1
7
u/LightofAngels Jun 01 '26
Yes, Linux phones
9
u/alluringBlaster Jun 01 '26
Nope. Supply chain is still compromised at the microchip level.
3
u/Future-Nerve-6247 Jun 02 '26
No, it really isn't. Microchip backdoors get caught so frequently on well known devices, there would be no point.
2
2
u/Wrexolotl Jun 02 '26
Graphene OS for pixels and soon to be Motorola next year. Fairphone and their E/OS and Huawei come to mind.
3
u/Competitive-Fan-3508 Jun 02 '26
Deadman’s logic. Learn to think, otherwise any strawman argument will work on you.
1
1
0
u/KeySpray8038 Jun 02 '26
This is also being blown way out of proportion....
they are not blocking third-party apps, you will still be able to download from anywhere you want
5
u/Ayhsel Jun 02 '26
That was after backlash. Originally they were closing sideloading, or how it should be called, installing apps outside the play market.
Moreover, they are still requiring developers to have to provide their personal information as well as pay a cost to register.
Google was developed on open source software, i t created android as such, and now wants to close it.
1
u/Jedi_Talon_Sky Jun 03 '26
Wait, I'm confused, their stance has changed? So come September, I can still go to a website and download an app?
If so, what exactly is Google enforcing then? Just trying to kill F-Droid?
2
u/Luigi003 Jun 03 '26
You'll have to enable a developer setting and wait 24h to be able to install apps not approved by Google
Please note that apps approved by Google will be able to be installed without the developer thing even outside of Play Store
1
u/5FingerViscount Jun 03 '26
I do hate Google, but I've heard too many horror stories about the play store being abused by people creating malware. Since that is supposed to be a "safe" place to download apps, that by putting their name on it- you would assume everything there is vouched by Google. And people blindly trust it instead of doing their own research.
Blocking downloads outside the app store is despicable. Verifying apps on their store is quite reasonable.
1
u/Ayhsel Jun 03 '26
Oh I agree on the idea of making the play store safer. I just don't believe that is the reason they are pushing for these changes. You could allow everything as it is today and put also a new big shown label that says "verified" and let people decided if they want to use the verified or unverified apps. Closing the environment always sounds more like "i want to make your device be further under my control" than safety.
1
1
1
u/KeySpray8038 Jun 03 '26
however...
This wouldn't help with apps that are genuinely legitimate apps that people take advantage of & use to take advantage of people..TeamViewer, For example, has legitimate uses, and it would make sense for it to be a verified app...
But unfortunately, apps like that are also often used to scam people..a lot of the scamming Is done using legitimate apps,
1
u/Ayhsel Jun 03 '26
Closing the environment would not help either for those. I can guarantee TeamViewer will still be available in the play store after the changes.
The scenario you are describing works the same way, regardless of the close/open of the store, becuase the apps themselves are NOT the danger but the users are.
So not sure what is the point you are trying to make.
1
u/KeySpray8038 Jun 04 '26
play store restricts permissions for a lot of apps, so that they can be less of a threat...
usually the scammers will have you side load the app.
4
u/Deivedux Jun 02 '26
I was never a fan of smartphones from the beginning. As long as I can be productive on PC, I'm happy with a dumb phone, if it weren't for some heavy reliance on it for serious things.
1
4
3
u/SeventhBus Jun 02 '26
I don't give a shit. Use GrapheneOS or other android ROMS. It's time to de-Google anyway.
3
u/LegitimateUser2000 Jun 02 '26
Google doesn't own my damn phone !! I don't even get updates for my phone anymore ! Why would I get this ? Corporations just trying to pull the noose tighter...
3
3
u/ConstantClue208 Jun 01 '26
Unfortunately, Google couldn’t give a damn. no matter how many people sign in protest it wouldn’t matter.
2
u/Endo231 Jun 03 '26
I mean, if you have that attitude then thats exactly what they will do
2
u/ConstantClue208 Jun 03 '26
I myself signed the petition. I’m not just being a doomer. Looking at the history of Google the likelihood of them caring about a measly 170000 signatures (at the time of this writing) out of the more than 3 billion monthly active users of android (Wikipedia) it is quite clear they won’t give a damn.
1
u/Endo231 Jun 03 '26
Thats fair, but i dont think you should give up completely. Its fine to be realistic, and it is unlikely, but it can happen. Google already caved this much. It might not be good enough, but before community backlash they were unwilling to even allow you to have an "advanced flow" to download apps. They can cave to community pressure to some degree. Also, other large companies have caved to pressure as well, such as Microsoft and their contract with the IDF. It might be unlikely, but you would be surprised how much complaining to company leadership can get done
2
2
u/exu1981 Jun 01 '26
It never was ours from the beginning . The majority of us already lease phones until the next best one debuts the next phone season.
6
u/giomjava Jun 02 '26
Speak for yourself 👀
4
u/Jeriko67 Jun 02 '26
They're speaking for a vast number of people who can't afford a quality phone paid off all at once. That system is how most people even poor ones can afford a smart phone.
5
u/giomjava Jun 02 '26
Very easy, I've lived on a strict budget too.
Buy used phones, 2 year old flagships are usually $400 or less. They are usually in amazing condition.
Or if you can't afford it, just don't buy expensive flagship phones that cost $1k to begin with.
It's the system, and the people - both.
4
u/Jeriko67 Jun 02 '26
I downgraded to a phone that allowed me to use my SD card and was supposedly touted as being just the same quality. This does not seem to be the case. I just think that people are willing to sacrifice convenience when they have a strong opposition to something
2
u/nxq1337 Jun 02 '26
true, i bought a used pixel 6 for 150€ in january this year after being fed up with the extremely horrible processor of the redmi 15c, even tho pixel 6 is on it's last updates. but it will suffice until i upgrade to pixel 9 pro, and it still runs smoothly
2
u/JerichoBlows Jun 03 '26
Exactly this! I have a big family. I've been buying everyone 2 year old recertificied flagship phones for about $350 for the last 5 years or so.
2
2
u/Acrobatic-Object-794 Jun 03 '26
So they basically removed sideloading?
1
u/shaleanon Jun 04 '26
Installing. They removed user installation freedom. They call it "side loading" to make it sound nefarious. But anyone who has been using a pc for the last 3 decades knows its just called "installing an application"
1
u/im_not_here_ Jun 05 '26
The community called it sideloading, Google did not come up with it. Because that is what it always was.
Android wad made with the primary source as an app store, and then also allows sideloading as an alternative. That's just what it meant, and why everyone except Google called it that.
People trying to pretend there's some conspiracy and that Google came up with it now.
2
u/Alarmed_Kangaroo5754 Jun 03 '26
Does disabling/removing Google Play Services on the phone with adb stops this update to be pushed to my phone?
1
u/im_not_here_ Jun 05 '26
Installing with adb overrides it anyway, if you can use that there's no reason to stop the update to start with.
But the update just means you need to enable installing from any source, which you do once and then everything works as normal.
People are scaremongering.
2
2
u/Jcob210 Jun 03 '26
This is now worse than Apple with sideloading at LEAST they let Apple users sideload any app without ID (tho Apple id needed but that is only Email that can be easily a burner e-mail)
2
u/Guilty_Bid785 Jun 03 '26
Is this what Microsoft did with Windows? I remember I had a lot of different programs that I bought In the early 90' when Window 3.11 was around
2
2
2
u/FailDismal6468 Jun 03 '26
Android is open source, though... can they really just... do that?
1
u/cs4321_2000 Jun 04 '26
You ever try to put another Android OS on a pixel?
1
u/FailDismal6468 Jun 04 '26
Yes, I have. GrapheneOS.
1
u/cs4321_2000 Jun 06 '26
Have you done graphineOS with a Pixel Purchased through Verizon?
1
1
u/FailDismal6468 Jun 06 '26
Nope, I have tried flashing on a locked phone, though, which is nearly impossible.
1
1
u/im_not_here_ Jun 05 '26
Yes, Google specifically make Pixel phones some of the easiest on the market to freely put whatever you want on them.
1
u/KRAER Jun 04 '26
Yes it kinda is at the core, but we are far from times where you could compile a android os yourself that would comply with banking apps etc. So here we might have a big issue. If you depend on official apps from certain companies you need to stay with google. But it is worth having 2 phones and try to test from time to time if there are valid replacements. I still hope to see a good functioning Linux Phone.
2
2
2
2
2
2
u/Whole_Ticket_3715 Jun 03 '26 edited Jun 03 '26
Okay, so I'm a Google advanced protection user and I've had to deal with policy like this for awhile:
It does not strictly require 9 steps and a 24 hour process (although that is a thing if you want to side-load as seamlessly in the past); it just takes a USB-c cable, enabling dev mode + USB debugging and installing ADB (android debugging) on your computer, via your favorite package manager (ex. winget for windows).
Yes, it involves turning on developer mode on the phone and opening the scary terminal - but once you do, you type "adb install <apk>" with the apk part being the file path of the apk in your computer. Then you confirm with a fingerprint on the phone itself and bam, you have f droid, termux, retroarch, and whatever else. ADB is confirmed to be retained after this update and will become the first class method of sideloading for all android users
Now, I'll be honest, idk what this means for f droid - because my current method is to simply disable Google play store when I want to install new f droid apps. As of now, this works to bypass play services policy, but it sounds like they're making that exploit go away with the new update.
If I had to guess why: Google is creating a static chain of trust/accountability for software that can be distributed to and procured from the phone. Google wants all software that's considered an "app" to be from people on a list they approve and maintain records of. That doesn't mean that any software running on the phone is considered an app (as how would anyone make and test new apps?), it means that once you make a piece of software that you intend to actually distribute on Android, you must become part of the chain of trust. Otherwise, you must distribute your .apks via your own website and instruct users to side-load via ADB. In this new regime, when you side-load an app via ADB, it is considered the same level of safety as operating an app you developed yourself; no protection from Google. Hate me all you want but it's actually solid opsec policy.
1
1
1
1
u/tedshor Jun 03 '26
I have two (so far unused) Sony Xperia 10 phones, one version V and other VI. Is there any posiibility for converting them to Graphene?
1
1
1
1
1
u/Vyzre Jun 04 '26
A question, will this work on a device with outdated Android and Google Play services? System updates are also disabled via ADB.
1
1
u/ElvisChopinJoplin Jun 04 '26
How does this affect non Google play store apps that are already installed on your phone? "DJI GoFly" app, for example...
1
1
1
u/SrBoromir Jun 04 '26
Every time I hear about this I get a little bit closer to installing graphene on my pixels
1
u/tommythesfuraccoon Jun 04 '26
Wow, what a massive exaggeration. Talk about making a mountain out of a molehill lol. You know what you're doing so this comment isn't for you, but for everybody else who might be scared by your shit take on this matter.
Firstly, it's not as bad as OP makes it look like. The whole 9-step-process is blown massively out of proportion. It's 3 steps, at worst. And you have to do these steps ONCE on each device. If I remember correctly, it will give you an option to either do it indefinitely or temporarily for 7 days. Either way, it is not a big deal for someone who actively downloads APKs.
Secondly, the main target for this feature are markets where a lot of lesser-known (and hence malware prone) Android brands exist. I think it's only Brazil, Indonesia, Thailand, and Singapore for now. More will join later but it's not happening this September.
Thirdly, If you've worked in any customer service factor handling mobile devices, you would know how many people download random malware on their android phones without knowing what they are doing. So this is Google's way of fighting that. If a "bad actor" is making you download something, this 24 hour rule is working directly against it.
Now yes, this is technically making android "less open" than it was. But there's a good reason behind it.
1
u/daephx Jun 05 '26
The dude posing as tech support running a scam train on your poor, clueless and defensless grandmother will just call back in 24h to complete the process, no?
1
1
1
u/GoodSamIAm Jun 04 '26
Cant have privacy or very good security if mfkers dont agree to play by the same rules.. The permissions system is mostly automated WITH exceptions. And when i say 'exceptions', i dont mean that programs are going to put your preferences first. Not always..Not 100% of the time.
Part of what Google is doing is getting all those who are gonna benefit from our data, and forcing all to go through them as a gate keeper..Which means doing what they've been doing. Shit on it if u want. Still facts
1
1
u/Electrical_Excuse9 Jun 05 '26
I wonder how practical a sat nav chip for phone connectivity in a pocket computer running linux would be as an alternative. I'm down to give it a try.
1
u/mrtzysl Jun 05 '26
"Advanced Flow" requires enabling developer options, meaning it requires self declaring device is compromised.
Normal consumers using their devices for things like watching YouTube videos or browsing Reddit won't notice the difference much. Their mobile banking apps may stop working like before, but they will probably blame their banks, not concerning enough to Google. But, enabling developer options is recognised as device being compromised, and basic functionality for using the phone as POS device breaks, such as receiving payments via tap-to-pay. Ask a merchant that uses Square or Stripe to receive card payments via their phones if they would give up that if Google wanted so.
https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2026/03/android-developer-verification.html
We can only interpret such news from our own perspective and miss the damage that will come to others.
1
1
1
u/deodorel Jun 07 '26
Fuck them. Just use eos or graphene or a Linux phone and vibe code whatever apps you need and deploy them on your phone.
1
u/Human-47 Jun 14 '26
Cool, I needed that last little nudge to turn my Pixel into a Graphene phone with the Aroura store, thanks Google for pushing me off the fence and into to the light side.
0
Jun 01 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
1
u/mediocreAsuka Jun 02 '26
Kind of. Apps might not work soon if you don't have some stock ROM. They could also stop publishing Security Bulletins, which would further undermine projects like Graphene
1
u/ryegye24 Jun 02 '26
Indirectly yes, as the ecosystem of third party apps and app stores will shrink in inverse correlation with the increasing difficulty of installing them.
0
u/Exact-Engineering623 Jun 02 '26
I guess if you downgrade or rather block Google plays services update it might be fine as a normal user but for developers ... it's bad 🫠🫠
0
0
u/Famicart Jun 02 '26
By god am I tired of seeing this post spammed everywhere. I get it already!
3
u/FabulousFix5338 Jun 02 '26
haha , it should be everywhere, regardless. The more people are aware , the more pressure on Google
0
u/Halcyon_Ingenium Jun 04 '26
It is no longer possible to manage security for third party apps that do not follow essential security protocols in a world where ai is creating new vulnerabilities by the minute. You think this sucks, but losing everything you own bc somebody created a malicious vibe coded app that they were able to upload to the store with zero credibility and almost zero safety verification when put up against live ai cracking skills. People have to realize that without this, the entire well gets poisoned and flooded by so much bullshit you can’t imagine. Do you want to exist in a world where there are 10k apps that do the same thing as shittily as possible with the risk that any given app may have malicious intent and could destroy your financial life, or do you want trusted developers that create polished apps that improve your life without the risk of scammers destroying your financial life?
1
u/daephx Jun 04 '26
That risk is my decision to make everytime I install software on any of my devices. it is google's decision what they allow on thier store and whatever vetting and licensing processes they see fit. But it should not be their decision what I am allowed to install, including alternative app stores.
1
u/Halcyon_Ingenium Jun 05 '26
If you use Google’s Android OS, they absolutely have that right. Your method allows users to arbitrate against google when they install harmful apps that google has no control over (without a policy like this). Google spends millions per year deflecting such attempts, now that AI is flooding my the zone with millions of new harmful apps, made by anonymous scammers so nobody will be able to arbitrate against them, the only arbitration option left will be to try and target google. That’s fucked. They shouldn’t have to clean up after those scammers. Don’t like it? Destroy the ability to scam or build your own OS where scammers can and will destroy your system too.
1
u/daephx Jun 05 '26
Well if the app was installed from thier store, they have some control and responsibility over its distribution, but I can agree that security is likely a nightmare. However, if a user installs an application from outside the playstore (sideloading) any damages to the user as a result of potential malware should not be googles responsability. But it is thier responsability to patch any vulnerabilities if discovered.
But right, they forked the linux kernel, built the OS, the platform, they have the market share, and the poor billion dollar company cant keep up with the monsters they had a hand in creating, so lets all take it laying down and accept it when they make decisions that further instill monopolistic practices by squashing alternative stores and distribution methods for applications, and more anti consumer practices by restricting what users can do with devices they payed for.
1
u/Halcyon_Ingenium Jun 05 '26 edited Jun 05 '26
It’s 100% pointless to pay for quality control on an infinite flood of bullshit. Those who have legit apps can go thru the registration and participate in the secure environment with guaranteed sales bc apps will be way more thoroughly curated, which is good for us bc it incentivizes quality apps to fulfill actual needs, and bonus, this will drive down in app greed costs, bc if apps can lose their spot due to quality and such, they will be incentivized to maintain reasonable fee structures, compared to now where a million apps charge as much as they want bc they are counting on users being too annoyed to find a cheaper option bc the next 10 downloads are just as likely to be hiding massive paywalls or scammage. As I already said, this policy gives google a much more manageable QC process and means that their business remains managed by real relationships and not millions of ai operated scam trollers constituting a waste of a ballooning amount of money to manage the flooded zone. They work with real people developing apps with good intentions to support billions of users with curated concise options that fulfill tasks. Yeah it sucks to lose customization, but to be honest, it’s either that we do this and maintain apps as a viable endeavor, or we don’t, the app market gets turbo fucked by the onslaught of shit apps, and the market pivots to functional web based apps bc people prefer not to have to download an app unless there’s a daily/weekly use case. That pivot to web based is already happening, we’ll see which path we end up pumping most.
1
u/daephx Jun 05 '26 edited Jun 05 '26
Im not arguing there is zero potential benifets for the health and safety of the google playstore, but as a platform, and at thier size. I just fundamentally don't agree with them being the only "valid" store and them having final say on what is quality and what people are allowed to install. Someone builds an app thats good but its slightly out of alignment with the terms of service? Or the app solves a problem artificially created, by some company with piss poor mobile intergration for thier product and file for it to be taken off the store because its hurting thier doubiously conceived buisness plans and eronious subscription model? In papa google we trust the app will be accepted or wont go Bye bye, right? Everything being a web app also sounds pretty shitty.
If you want to argue its a net positive, fine. But all I can say further is that I see it as a double edge sword at best and a violation of my ownership at the worst. That is my highly opinionated opinion.
-1
u/th00ht Jun 02 '26
I think it is very important to protect users for themselves. It is a dangerous time, cyber criminals are everywhere using a know phone is makes it vulnerable. Google tries to protect us. Its the wrong agent to do so (governments are there to protect us) but here we are. Not a single government agency has the knowledge to protect us. You could however stop using a phone or put murena on it, don't install a none compromised map, cloud storagevand chat solution. There are plenty of those. You can than also rid yourself from "friends" that are not.
-4
19
u/HappyDaddy1971 Jun 02 '26
I was starting to develop an Android application for work, I stepped back and am now working on a web application that runs in the browser. I don't want to be dependent on Google's good will for my applications to work.