Hacker News

Speaking as someone who has built local-only apps (partially because I don’t want the hassle of maintaining a server):

There are plenty of useful apps that run locally on a phone. You can even run a whole LLM on your phone.

The shiniest and most popular apps are cloud terminals but the iPhone is actually a pretty darn powerful device.

Well, they can do computing, but it's awkward and most people don't use them for that, it's true.

The question of ownership is interesting. If I buy a chair, it doesn't make a very good table, does that mean I don't own it? Most people don't know what general purpose computing is. To them a cloud terminal is a computer. So, to them, they do own their devices because that's all they are.

I feel like some of us think we got close, or anywhere near, what Stallman has been advocating for most of his life. But I'm afraid we didn't. We all chose convenience. We chose to believe that one man was enough to hold back the tide against enormously powerful corporations and governments. Some even turned their back on Stallman. And some even work for the enemy.

We haven't really lost anything here. It's just becoming more clear what we actually have.

So you mean, Macs and macOS?

All modern devices are appliances, not computers.

They perform the specific functions that they were programmed to perform, and do not allow arbitrary execution of calculations on the underlying hardware.

Many people, mostly folks who adopt the Apple ecosystem, see this as a positive thing that allows them to delegate undifferentiated decisions on security and ways of working to the vendor.

I am one of those people and hope that Android remains open so that people don't expect Apple open up their hardware, which will result in fragmentation.

> Why is this acceptable for phones but would not for the case above?

PCs happened by accident.

Before the PC, people had TVs - devices not for creating, but for passively consuming content made by big corporations and the state. And we had games consoles - devices not for creating, but for playing games made by a medium-sized company, with strict approval by a huge company (who want a cut). Strictly censored to be age-appropriate, naturally. Pirate radio? Straight to jail.

Before that people had newspapers - media for passively consuming, intended for mass readership, written at the behest of rich newspaper barons with certain political opinions they're keen to push.

And after the PC, we have smartphones - devices not for creating, but for consuming content feeds, curated by big corporations, with rich owners with certain political opinions they're keen to push. A huge company eager to take a cut. A tiny screen, and a keyboard that puts curly braces three keypresses deep. Can't even debug a web page without connecting to a PC. And soon to be strictly censored to be age-appropriate.

The PC is really the outlier here.

It’s the same situation as game consoles. Custom built hardware that is only meant to run the one specific vendor OS. There have been many other computing devices like that in the past as well. The general purpose desktop computer that allows a choice of operating systems is actually less common than the other way. Historically, people didn’t expect to run alternate operating systems on a mainframe, 80s and 90s computers like a Commodore 64, Power PC Macs, Amigas and DOS/Windows machines until Linux came along.

> we should root for an open choice for the users

I see what you did there... and agree completely. If you don't have root, it's not yours. All my Androids (none from this decade) are rooted and I plan to keep them that way.

Out of all the things that have computational power, PC is pretty much the only one that comes with a built-in way to replace its own system. Xbox, PlayStation, Telsa, Smart Fridges, etc. don't have this ability from the beginning.

So yeah, the society has largely accepted this. PC is the exception.

The vendor lock-in scenario for desktop hardware already exists with the latest x86 generation of gaming consoles. Gaming consoles are locked down because the hardware is subsidized with the expectation of revenue from the digital marketplaces they provide.

The yet-to-be-released Steam Machine is not subsidized and is unlocked. Steam is a OS agnostic digital marketplace, so it doesn't matter what OS you install on the machine.

Microsoft doesn't see a threat in allowing other OSes on their Surface hardware because the majority of their revenue comes from M365.

It's just market forces really. In the end, phones provide enough utility for the majority of users while being locked down. There's nothing stopping you from buying a fully-open phone, but there's just very little utility in it for the majority of users.

No need to play this scenario in your head, here it is in the real world: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_RT

Few interested hardware vendors, discontinued after 4 years. "mixed reviews at launch, while critics and analysts deemed it to be commercially unsuccessful"

Windows 10 S was another attempt that "Similarly [restricts] software installation to applications obtained via Windows Store." Cancelled after one year.

Exactly the fate I wish upon closed ecosystems. The only question is why iOS is different. I am inclined to say it's the brand status that overpriced luxury goods have that draws rich people initially, making it lucrative and perhaps even a tad prestigious to be there, but surely it's more than that?

If computers were invented by the Silicon Valley of the 2020s, this would absolutely be the case.

The open open choice already exists. Sent from my Librem 5 running GNU/Linux.

From the state's perspective, probably along the same lines as why long guns are allowed with permit in many countries where handguns are banned.

Unfortunately not gonna work.

Developers either want to make money or work for someone who wants to make money.

In either case they will be forced to.

What we need to push back on is making a phone a requirement to do routine banking and conducting other necessary business. There is no reason I should be required to have a phone in order to query my balance or transfer money to someone, when I have a perfectly good computer sitting here.

Bank apps in India don't run on rooted phones, need developer mode and adb disabled. At the same time, their website works fine on Firefox on Linux where I can literally go through all their front-end source, attach and run debuggers.

What even is going on? Why are banks doing this security theatre when all their apps are doing is calling some backend apis?

In my informed opinion, anybody who does banking on their phone is taking a big and unnecessary risk. I wish I could say more.

I think this is the only long term solution, even if cumbersome.

I’m curious what secondary devices people are using. I have a second hand Surface Go running Fedora 43 with Gnome, it’s a bit big but it’s doing its job well.

https://postmarketos.org is working on developing a Linux distribution for mobile devices (including smartphones), aligned with these goals: free open source software, empowering users to control their own devices.

I won't deny that a lot of application support still needs more work. But this is definitely moving in the right direction.

Is it time to bring back the Windows phone?

I keed I keed!

But unfortunately there really isn't a great alternative. I painfully attempted to use Ubuntu Touch and its always the same thing. The lack of available apps, the lack of app development in general for the platform was pretty eye opening. Add in having it only run on really old devices isn't much help either. Its promising, but a long ways off even from some of the non-standard roms I've used like Evolution X which is a Lineage fork.

If this really does cripple a lot of the known custom roms out there without any solid alternatives other than Graphene? It could really be a huge turning point.

Security is essential for an appliance like a smart phone. I fight the general purpose computing battle on my desktop with Linux, but on my phone I just need something that won’t be hacked.

This is a very HN view of Android. The "openness" of Android was for mobile device manufacturers, not app developers and end-users. Android's prominence was driven by the myriad of low-cost Android devices by multiple device manufacturers, whereas iOS is only available via iPhones.

The vast majority of users don't care about "openness" of the OS. They care about the utility of their phone in everyday life.

Can I access digital payment systems, social media apps, and entertainment apps? How's the camera on the phone? How big is the screen? Is it waterproof? How expensive is it?

These are the questions the majority of phone buyers care about. Not, can I download an app off of a random website and install it?

---

I would say that the majority of developers don't care about the "openness" either. They care about accessing a wide audience and getting revenue from their work. Free apps without ads or in-app purchases (zero-revenue apps) are the minority.

Google is also fine with losing the zero-revenue app developers because they provide no value for Google. Actually, they are probably a loss for Google, since Google provides Google Play Services.

This is going to make it more difficult for non-open source projects to get a foothold in the future because people are not going to trust a promise any more. Like, I have this thing called a smart phone. Is it open source? No? Oh well.

For you, is the openness of Android appealing as a matter of principle or does it enable you to do things you couldn't otherwise do?

> Millions chose Android for exactly that reason

Citation needed.

But even if millions did bought an Android phone for ill-defined defined, about 15 billion Android phones were sold over the years, which could very well make those millions a minority, with most having other reasons for their purchase.

Same

There's no point anymore.

> Millions chose Android for exactly that reason.

Millions? Are you sure?

Even so, Android has billions of users who want secure app management by default.

But the "opt-out" will not prevent ecosystem effects caused by the default shutdown of convenient app installs due to the policy. Not even for GrapheneOS users. It's a global policy by a body we never voted for. You can't opt-out of that different world by waiting 24-hours, the ecosystem could have permanent effects. This is coming from a company that doesn't even bother to expose a permission to disable Internet access per app. It's there underneath, but they just ... don't expose the choice.

You deliberately took the second quote out of context, in order to (attempt to) refute it. Here's the quote, with context:

> 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.

That is not false, it's completely accurate. You don't have to take my word for it, though, the Android developer docs have a helpful page detailing the plan [1].

As for the "advanced flow", the article discusses it in detail.

[1]: https://developer.android.com/developer-verification

Right on the nose. And to make that problem worse we've integrated a fair share of our lives into these devices, for which there is only 2 terrible choices. I can't tell you how many friends have expressed to me that they'd love to try GrapheneOS or get out of the mobile ecosystem entirely, but all of them use mobile apps for banking which effectively locks them in. It's basically the devil's bargain because we've added so much ease of use functionality to our day to day lives through these devices. In exchange Google is now showing us it was never ours to begin with.

This flow will be managed by google play services, not locally.

Start again. But this time, align your left top molar with the lower right canine.

I use GrapheneOS too. Most of the time it works great, with some weird bugs around group messages and needing to restart every now and then to get to a fully functional state between the browser and keyboard properly working with each other and the network connectivity going away. I do enjoy full control on network connectivity and notifications.

But beyond whether the OS is good or not, "fuck you, I've got mine" is not only sad as a position in general, it is also a bad tactical choice, because over long enough timeframes you can't assure that you can keep yours if others are deprived.

I'm running GrapheneOS too and while I've experienced the same, I'm dreading the day any of my banking apps update and suddenly start demanding full Play Integrity API support (GrapheneOS only has Basic) causing them to fail to open. Hasn't happened yet but it could.

I have a pixel 10 pro and have tried no less than 5 times to get my apps to work on graphene, no luck.

I'm no slouch either, I've developed for android for almost a decade.

I'm not disagreeing with ya, just adding a comment so folks are aware that the "Graphene just works" crowd is sometimes a bit hyperbolic.

> I don't care, I run Graphene, and my phone is definitely mine.

It helps, but your modems are still closed chipsets you have no ability to control constantly in communication with and controlled by third parties who can execute code on your hardware at any time without your notice or consent.

You should care because the install base could reduce drastically. Reducing the amount of Devs and contributions to the FOSS scene. This will degrade your experience

Sadly it works only on Pixel phones.

Devs have been warning F-Droid about this for years:

It's quite problematic that someone can currently upload a package name belonging to another organization to the Play Store and that should have been stopped years ago since it was used in many cases for scamming and squatting on package names clearly belonging to others. Package names are meant to start with a reverse domain belonging to the owner such as app.grapheneos for our grapheneos.app domain. They could enforce this based on domains authorizing usage without enforcing ID verification and that's what we would have proposed.

This is one of the ways F-Droid has ignored standard best practices including security practices in a way that's already causing problems but is now a massive issue for them. If they had started doing things properly many years ago when it was first brought up, then they'd be in a much better situation today. They're going to need to deal with this by renaming all their package names to org.fdroid. to avoid issues with the proposed changes. This is problematic because existing users will stop getting updates. It's better to use a prefix than a suffix where a developer could end up changing their mind about whether it makes sense resulting in conflict over the name, which is fair since they still own it if it's their reverse domain.

Ironically, you’ve had to pay Google for the privilege of opting out of their new rules.

How can you trust graphene or it's contributors and supply chain?

Google could lock out Graphene too, whenever they like, with no warning. I hope Graphene has a plan.

First they came for the stock Android users, and I did not speak out for I was not a stock Android user.

Being a Graphene user is fine and all, but if this continues it will have a chilling effect on OSS Android development. And that will still effect you.

That's a great attitude until slowly but surely 90% of apps used in day to day life won't function for you: banking, dating, social media, e-commerce, communication/messaging etc slowly freeze you out.

This is a bit related, but not precisely on top of the major topic we are discussing, but I'll say it anyway: I just got a brand new Samsung A56 for my personal use, and I just found out, like a minute ago, that I can't set a maximum battery charge (say 85%) without internet. It's asking me to turn on the WiFi. This makes no sense whatsoever. If I had to guess it's because Samsung wants to keep a profile of my battery settings and they need that telemetry, but not allowing me to set the bloody thing without internet is insane.

Another thing that happened yesterday when I was setting up the phone was the mandatory need of an internet connection, otherwise the phone would simply not allow me to move on with the setup.

I'm this fucking close to sell this thing and try my luck with a Chinese smartphone, which I'm pretty sure is not going to toss that shit on my face. (I had a Chinese one and a Galaxy S20 FE before, both on different Android versions, 10 and 11 iirc that wouldn't block me like that)

/rantOver

GrapheneOS proves it's not an absolute, that "the computer I carry around in my pocket" must depend upon a megacorp / gov. <3

The issue still is boiling down to GrapheneOS having less $$ for marketing vs GOOG / Alphabet / https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Google_products

Because it's their creation.

Sometimes reality is one sided, I personally see zero advantage to the new system.

And I don't see how this change adresses the number one source of scams, the Play Store.

I agree. I don't like the idea of Android being locked down, but the conversations around this topic are tipping into disingenuous.

Your phone is still yours, you can still install third party apps, and you can still develop apps without a verification. But now there's a one-off hurdle to install them.

Not ideal, but when we think of the people that it's trying to protect, this feels like a reasonable middle ground.

Very helpful and informative!

Even after Google puts this crap in place, you can still uplodad your own apps to your own Android devices, using ADB. Doing the same for iOS, using Xcode, costs you USD 100 or more (depending on country) per year.

I'm in no way defending Google here, just pointing out you're going from bad to worse and think it's a good thing.

Here is a table I just made (edit: changed to list as HN wraps code blocks now), of iOS vs Android (now) vs Android (after Sep 2026 or 2027 or whenever these announced changes take effect):

•1. Where most users can install software from:

↠↠ iOS: official store (App Store) + (in EU) other stores

↠↠ Android (now): official store (Play Store), other stores (e.g. F-Droid), arbitrary APKs

↠↠ Android (after changes): official store (Play Store), other stores (e.g. F-Droid), arbitrary APKs

•2. Who the developers of software can be:

↠↠ iOS: registered developers ($99/year)

↠↠ Android (now): any developer

↠↠ Android (after changes): registered developers ($25 one-time) + hobbyists (small distribution) + any developers (for advanced users)

•3. Installing your own apps on your own phone, without becoming a registered developer:

↠↠ iOS: using XCode: need to reinstall every 7 days.

↠↠ Android (now): using ADB

↠↠ Android (after changes): using ADB

The second row (•2) is what is changing in Android. I think "the ability to run my own code on my own device", narrowly speaking, is closest to the third row, which is not changing.

> stop being yours

As if most android maker phones don't already fully own your device - preventing you from unlocking of bootloader and installing an OS that actually doesnt enforce the restriction google is introducing in their flavour of android.

To pretend that with this change android becomes exactly like iOS is... ridiculous? I can pick any 10yo old android phone from my drawer and develop for it, no problem and without asking for permissions. And if I'm already this motivated I'm certainly motivated enough to wait 24hs on future (more locked down) devices.

Do you think people who download NewPipe and alike - to circumvent ads and enable premium features - would think twice because they need to wait 24hs? Will NewPipe devs stop developing (anonymously) because of a small fraction of users who refuse to (or won't) go through unlocking steps?

Show me all these "rebel" apps on iOS ecosystem that can be easily distributed on any channel: fdroid, github, telegram groups, etc.

But sure, if you thinking moving to iOS is the same, sounds like you never really made use of any of the freedoms android used to and will continue to provide

I still remember how Google execs were using the word "open" almost as a comma. Android was Open, Google was Open, this was so different from the Closed Apple World. Everything would be Open!

I hope we will remember this lesson and learn from it. Calling something "open" doesn't make it so, and anything owned by a large corporation will eventually succumb to the direction taken by the corporation. And large corporations have goals where you, the user, are not a consideration, you are just a part of their money-making machinery.

No, Android still offers way more features than iOS.

Replace the lock screen with a custom app

Replace the home screen with a custom app

Set default apps for SMS, phone service, assistant, camera, photo gallery. all things you can not change on iOS

Always on widgets and dynamic wallpapers

It has a much more customizable inter app communication system so that you can get more apps to be the default viewers

At allows true background tasks like say a BitTorrent client

It supports shared storage like SMB and a user accessible file system

Custom NFC apps

USB host mode

Multiple users/profiles

And about 70 other things

I have recently made the same move... mostly because it allowed me to stop using my google and microsoft accounts. Moved all personal (and family domain) and business from google workspace / O365 all into fastmail. Bought an iPhone (already worked with macs and an iPad for more than a decade. Not about particular preferences but this setup allows me to only be dependent on one bigcorp. Android still requires a google account, the rest was not necessary but I have above all else made a mental switch to simplify.

I do not feel iOS is particularly better... some things are, some things are not. Yes android was more customizable, and yes the universal back and home buttons are still better than the multi tap and hidden gestures on iOS. But overall some pleasantries such as shared clipboard, seamless headphone switch over, and overall simplification so far, is working very well for me.

I simply need a phone on a major platform, as my job (and life) requires to have certain apps which only run on (non-rooted) Android or iOS phones. And I am tired of fighting and adapting.. so I now just use most of the default apps everywhere, and whatever does or does not work, I take it mostly as-is. For now it seems to allow me to just worry less about it and focus on the things I actually want or need to do .. send email, read message, visit a website, listen to a podcast and not fret about the tiniest of UX details.

I would love to live in a world where I could run around with a customized linux laptop and some sort of privacy respecting phone (e.g. Graphene) but the hurdles are not really worth it to me anymore. Sad in a way, as without counter pressure.. things will not necessarily get better, I know. The 22C3 talk by Rop and Frank I think was depressing, and true.

We lost the war.

https://events.ccc.de/congress/2005/fahrplan/events/920.en.h...

I will do the same if they lock down Android. If I must be in a walled garden, then I'm going to choose the better kept garden, and it sure as hell isn't Google's. There is absolutely zero reason to tolerate the shittiness of Android if they take away the relative freedom it gives us. GrapheneOS is the last hope of the Android ecosystem, and if Google keeps locking things down that's not going to last either.

I used to own a house, I could decorate it the way I wanted. It was hard work, but it was mine!

Then they locked it, so I went to live in a luxury hotel, it's more expensive, I can't decide how I want it and I don't own anything, but it's such a superior experience!

GrapheneOS is the answer. Apple's software is really buggy compared to Android and Linux.

Now you just have to deal with Apple's hostile repairability situation. Cryptographically-mated parts are just the beginning.

So you moved into a walled garden in an attempt to escape what's essentially a 3 foot picket fenced garden.

> the vastly superior apple experience

After switching away from GrapheneOS to iOS after RCS stopped working for me, I can safely say my experience has been the opposite. The camera is the only thing better for me on iOS - everything else is buggier and worse. A few of my favorites:

1. Safari is buggy as hell, and requires installing apps to run things like ad blockers.

2. The settings are ALL over the place and very hard to navigate

3. The gestures are clunky - often have to try a couple times to get one of the settings quick menus to drop down

4. Why is the date not displayed at the top of the screen with the time outside of the lock screen?

5. The pin unlock is horribly broken - I have to slow way down to use it compared to Android.

6. Apple maps is hot garbage. I had to install Google Maps anyway to get decent performance.

7. The handling of audio devices seems intentionally malicious - like if I call someone from my car through car play, it shouldn't send the audio out through the phone earpiece. If a call begins with phone earpiece audio and is underway, it shouldn't switch several seconds in to bluetooth headset half a house.

I'm going back for my next phone.

I'm on this path too. Waiting a few more months to see what happens. If they indeed block my 4 apps on my phone (which aren't published anywhere), I will simply move to Apple.

Apple still doesn't allow you to control individual app volume to silence/dim certain applications in multi-play mode though, right?

As someone who hates disturbances this is the killer feature that has kept me with samsung - well that and fdroid which is currently endangered.

So basically—both Apple and Alphabet love the way you think.

You just proved that the ability of installing whatever apps you want isn't that vital, don't you?

iOS still more locked down than Google. When I started reading this I thought you were going true open source

They are absolutely not taking away your ability to run your own code

You have bought a walled garden lock, it can be picked with a walled garden lock.

You're in an even worse ecosystem now, an apple phone never even has been yours.

Dumb question, can you explain the benefits of IOS? I've only tried using an iPhone ~10 years ago before I got into tech

I did this too, but it happened almost 10 years ago when Google started locking down Android in the name of battery life. I saw the writing on the walls and said if Android is going to be just like iOS because we collectively can’t have nice things, then at least I’ll live out that sad reality on better hardware.

Leaving one abusive partner for another is hardly a win. It's pathetic.

I'm so tired of this false dichotomy. Sent from my daily driver Librem 5 running GNU/Linux.

Ah yes macOS, the notoriously open platform.

This is literally the dumbest take I have seen!

iOS charges you and limits your custom app until a few days and you have to "renew" Even before this change, I have my custom apps running forever.

Phone numbers so far have been one of the most effective unique identifiers that companies can convince people to give them

I find it quite interesting that peoples talking on a website called "hacker news" find it fine that a company selling you an OS make it harder for you to install app not approved by them, notably so when there is enough scare screens as of now to discourage any too gullible peoples to do so.

What would we think if Microsoft decided all of a sudden to do something similar with Windows? How there is no outrage about this in that community?

Like the boiled crab in the chef's cuisine, we slowly accept the rising temperature around us as totally fine and normal.

Somewhat relevant article about the demise of a culture: https://aeon.co/essays/how-yuppies-hacked-the-original-hacke...

Their FAQ states that previously installed unverified apps won't be able to install updates which suggests to me that they won't disable or uninstall them. Hopefully someone can confirm.

https://developer.android.com/developer-verification/guides/...

auto uninstall.

Unless you move to a linux phone (good luck finding one or daily driving it) your phone options are iPhone.

iOS restricts you to install only up to 3 personally signed apps which need to be resigned every 7 days only if you're in the same network of the computer that signs them. Or you live in europe and you can jump through much worse hoops to install AltStores which also break as soon as you travel outside of europe.

Tell us more about your 11 apps!

You can if you jump through Google's dubious hoops to enable "advanced mode" as described here: https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2026/03/android-de...

The steps are rather insulting and arbitrary, but at least there's some way out.

> Saying there is no opt-out is just false

I can't see where one can opt-out of this new behavior and into the existing behavior, only a description of the new behavior's bypass (which is not the same thing at all)

> easy to bypass the cooling-off period with ADB

I don't think this is a reasonable use of the term "easy". I should be able to give my non-technical friend an apk and they can use it right then, with the one "are you very sure" screen.

And I kind of buy the intent behind the cooling-off period anyway. IIRC it's to prevent people from being pressured into installing apps by scammers that could then take their phones hostage

You still need Developer's Options enabled and plenty of banking and other apps complain if you do that. Why do I need the Developer's option enabled to run an app I developed myself, to be used by myself? It's clear they're heading to a walled garden and this is just a step towards that.

> Saying there is no opt-out is just false, they even provide the information on how users can opt-out.

The article states that you can't opt-out of the update, which AFAIK is correct.

[flagged]

I take issue with the idea that openness and freedom to install arbitrary software cannot occur without strong safety mechanisms. Android/GrapheneOS/iOS have sandboxing and permissions systems that put most desktop OSes to shame. The base platform can control apps' access to every resource, and an app store can put its own caveats and reminders to users for what kind of access is needed for the functions of a given app.

It's a number of false choices. Google has complete control over Android and they could easily implement 1, 2, and 3 if they wanted. It's not as if they couldn't provide the means for certified secure enclave apps in addition to normal ones.

But how does this help? I guess most of the apps used for fraud were installed through the play store anyway

https://furilabs.com/

It runs a modified Debian and can run Android apps in containers. To my knowledge this is the closest we come to "open-source phone that actually works as a phone" today.

GrapheneOS, /e/OS, LineageOS

Ideally buy a phone with it pre-installed

They are shiny. Many aspects feel more 'human', IMO.

If you use ad-blockers, I recommend exploring that use-case with Apple / Safari. It's doable though for me is a bit frustrating.

In fact, I urge creating a list of use-cases before heading out to the store, and cranking through those while at the store. Computers/phones are such a deeply entwined component of modern life it could be a long list.

Passwords, backups, bluetooth compatibility, connecting mass-storage devices to iPad / iPhone, etc.

Hence my phone selection spreadsheet having a column for unlockability, making sure I don't forget to check it. I'm so used to root, I'd full-on buy the phone just assuming it's a thing when some vendors indeed block you

That this is now rolled out ecosystem-wide by the central controlling party is a significant change from some vendors being assholes

Alternate app stores are still allowed. It's just that they are restricted to applications signed by developers who have paid a tithe to Google.

Google are obeying the letter of the law, while openly violating its spirit. Perhaps it'll be possible to attack them in court, but it will take years, and by that time they'll have found another trick.

this change makes Android more restricted than it was but still not as restricted as Apple. If anything I'd guess the EU vs Apple situation made Google more confident that they could get away with this change.

The regulation has blatant loopholes, as usual. While it did force Apple to allow third party app stores, all apps still have to go through a review process by Apple themselves before they can be installed from any source, and they retain the ability to block any apps they don't approve of. Google is just following in their footsteps.

https://support.apple.com/en-us/118110#notarization

Also Mobian, PureOS, and many more: https://wiki.pine64.org/index.php?title=PinePhone_Software_R...

This feature only exists for phones with Google Play Services, so yes.

Sure, and don't get to go on public transport (or pay surcharges for paper tickets, depending on if your country still has that option), don't get to participate when everyone else can add music from their phone at a party, don't get to buy leftover food because the proprietary app doesn't run on there (it kicks me out for fraud detection half the time already), don't get to visit various websites that fingerprint your device and find that it might be a 'bot' (hello Cloudflare proxying about half of high-income countries' Internet), you pay extra for groceries compared to people that get discounts in some app, cannot login to government services, cannot do most things that requires being 13 years or older once this EU age verification app is implemented (no more HN for you!), etc etc. Very great option, welcome back to the soviet computing era

It's not optional anymore to own a Google/Apple smartphone in a lot of places. You can play this "just vote with your wallet" game but it's not a winning move

Dont get me wrong: I'd love the linux phone "rebel" community to be as large as the android one. But... i doubt it will be anytime soon? The problem is getting the hw investment done first.

Android ecosystem is equivalent to windows one: its open enough to sustain a large number of vendors and tinkerers.

I doubt this scare-campaign (OP link) will drive people constructively towards (effectively) innexistent linux alternatives. It's more likely to do nothing or push people towards iOS

I'm doubtful, I for a bit bought a lot of the Pine64 devices thinking about this eg. not just Android/iOS... but the lack of feature parity eg. missing drivers, lack of apps, old hardware.

Unless people are paid to do it vs. volunteer

ZERO. ZERO developers who don’t comply will make a living selling applications and services to the general public.

It's not because you can still install apps outside the Play Store. The EU commission buys these "safety" arguments (also worked for Apple, they don't care that you still can't install IPAs) and the DMA is made for businesses, not for end-users. I once wrote them about the Chrome Web Store monopoly but they insist that everything is fine because businesses aren't impacted. They are of course also interested in centralized censorship because they can order Google to block apps they don't like.

Can you install different firmware/OS (tweaked and developed by others not sanctioned by apple) on your iPhone?

Can you install unlimited unsigned apps on iPhone?

If answer is "No", than No, android is still very far from as locked down as iOS

I realize this is a different discussion, but shouldn't it be? The way that it has been since home computers were a thing, as far as I know at least? I don't think we'd stand where we stand today if Commodore and other hardware vendors had required a license on every piece of software from the get-go (if we pretend that there was a known, exportable, and safe signature scheme back then)

A phone is worthless without software.

How could they, when Apple has been doing this for years? Same anti-anticompetition rules would have to be applied to them and then the indoctrinated fans (like up to ~30% of the population depending on where you live) will overthrow law and order

Not much, as it only works on very few high end phones not sold in most countries. Hopefully their Motorola partnership will expand its availability but I'm not confident that'll happen anytime soon.

Ideally yes, otherwise any other AOSP-based ROM. There are many, and they support far more devices than Graphene, though implementations of e.g. Google Play services is more hacky.

The most well-known: https://wiki.lineageos.org/devices/

Yes, but there are issues.

You can’t use stuff like banking apps on a modified device and losing access to normal android devices would be a big blow to the momentum of the F-Droid community. GrapheneOS might not be a big enough community to sustain work on the projects delivered by F-Droid.

People don't like the phrase enshittification, but the process Doctrow describes is so accurate (serve the users, then serve business customers at the expense of users, then serve the platform at the expense of users and business customers) it's hard not to see it everywhere. Phone platforms fit the template exactly, sadly.

If you intend to buy a Motorola/GrapheneOS phone, donating in the meantime may appeal to you: https://grapheneos.org/donate

> WHERE DO I SEND MY MONEY?

Good question. Here you go: https://puri.sm/products/librem-5

Money won't fix anything here: https://www.reuters.com/technology/cybersecurity/governments...

The central control is the point.

In addition to what others have said, it means some developers who were building for Android are going to stop. You can't install an app when someone is obstructed from building it in the first place.

> every Android app developer must register centrally with Google before their software can be installed on any device. Not just Play Store apps: all apps.

> Registration requires:

> Paying a fee to Google

> Agreeing to Google's Terms and Conditions

> Surrendering your government-issued identification

> Providing evidence of your private signing key

> Listing all current and all future application identifiers

Google is not an entity you can can trust with this.

From TFA:

    Delve into System Settings, find Developer Options
    Tap the build number seven times to enable Developer Mode
    Dismiss scare screens about coercion
    Enter your PIN
    Restart the device
    Wait 24 hours
    Come back, dismiss more scare screens
    Pick "allow temporarily" (7 days) or "allow indefinitely"
    Confirm, again, that you understand "the risks"

    Nine steps. A mandatory 24-hour cooling-off period. For installing 
    software on a device you own.

This isn't referring to the efforts Google has gone to try to thwart sideloading.

It is another requirement of Google's, where all developers must be registered to them and apps must be signed by them and anything that isn't will be blocked.

From NewPipe : https://github.com/woheller69/FreeDroidWarn?tab=readme-ov-fi...

I wouldn't consider this "a few buttons", it's enough to turn off the less savvy users

Lockable bootloaders are the best of both worlds.

It is absolutely maddening that I cannot see files on my own phone.

And very very very few devices still allow getting around this. Often at a cost of significantly degraded experience, as Magisk plays the cat and mouse game of trying to hide your illegal access privileges to your own devices from your bank or some random app that decide to throw a Play Integrity check in.

Tip of the anti-personal computing spear, a complete denial of the user agency. Absolutely wretchedly forsaken.

For how long will ADB work? Obviously Google doesn't want user to install apps outside of their control

I could still push an app to my phone via adb after this nonsense gets implemented?