This defeats the entire purpose of me having android
Like I’m just going to switch to an iPhone now. Not because Apple is any better, but because I have more family with them.
They took away our SD cards, they took away our removable batteries, they took away our headphone jacks. Now they’re taking away side loading apps, and that’s it. I’m done. The death of android.
Tbf, you can a very cheap android phone for around $100 USD, the cheapest iPhone starts at around
$400(edit: Actually I got curious and looked it up, apparantly the iPhone SE is gone and the cheapest new iPhone right now seems to be the 16e which start at $600). Also, Apple developer account cost $99 per year, Google developer account cost $25 one time fee, so the cost is gonna trickle down to the user, sometimes you find free apps on google play and then you look at apple and it cost a few dollars, its most likely due to the recurring costs to maintain a developer account.Also, Apple doesn’t allow torrent clients, You can’t use firefox with ublock origin on iOS.
(But then again, these advantages could also go away in a few years… 👀)
Friend you can buy a much cheaper android phone, which is why I don’t really care much about this, though it is still obviously bad. I hate my phone, I hate cellphones in general, they’re shitty feature locked mini laptops with a subscription so I can, what, make and receive 12 phonecalls a month? Download half a gb when I’m out of wifi range? Use google maps, the literally only truly useful thing my cellphone does for me?
Anyway, because of my disdain I buy the absolute cheapest cellphone on the market that has no attached plan, once every three or four years. I got a new one last month.
It cost thirty bucks. My monthly unlimited talk and text and data plan comes to about 22$ a month.
It’s a piece of shit, obviously. But if all you’re doing is begrudgingly using it to make a couple calls, send some texts, scroll Lemmy while you’re pooping and occasionally use a map the price is appropriate.
Wait no Firefox on iPhone? Fuck that I’m back in
There is a “firefox” but its just a re-skinned safari basicly, because Apple has some weird requirement of using their “webkit” or whatever, and no extensions allowed on the “firefox”. I used an iPhone before (because I was a young adult and iPhones looked shiny) and I was so sad to find out I couldn’t use uBlock Origin on it. And then finding out torrent apps are non-existent just made me cry.
Yes they do have “adblockers” like Brave or those Adguard thing on safari, but those are dogshit and they broke like half of the time, and many ads get through anyways, especially on youtube (where as uBlock Origin only break sites like 5% of the time).
Removable batteries are coming back, as they become mandatory in the EU in 2027.
Or you can already get one with a Fairphone (which also has SD card slot).
As for the headphone jack, I’m afraid it won’t come back. Bluetooth alternatives are far better these days (I got both, so I know from experience), and good adapters (like Apple one) are barely more than $10.Bluetooth alternatives are far better these days
Disputable.
- they are cable-less, thus need to be charged separately
- they are cable-less, thus it is easier to lose them
- bluetooth implementation is a potential security vulnerability
- transmission by radio will always be less energy efficient than transmission by wire
i’m a musician, have a trained ear and even with mild tinnitus have yet to see any BT audio transmission that matches the fidelity of cables.
I liked the whole not having to charge headphones thing more than anything.
I have two devices, one is my phone, and one only plays music. I only ever use my phone as my phone, and my music device as my music device in my car, and both run over Bluetooth.
It is a crapshoot as to which role my car will assign to which device. Sometimes I have to put my phone in airplane mode so that the car won’t try to assign it the media player role in Bluetooth settings. I’m not impressed.
Bluetooth alternatives aren’t better, that’s laughable.
You cant buy beyerdynamics DT-990s with Bluetooth, you cant get Sennheiser HD 490 Pros with Bluetooth, you cant buy Audeze LCD-5s with Bluetooth. I could go on and on but you get the point. Good headphones don’t use Bluetooth.
The nice headphones a lot of us have had for years, well before the headphone jack was removed don’t have Bluetooth.
So when you say they’re better 1. You’re wrong. And 2. You’re missing the point.
If you prefer Bluetooth, fine, but phones with headphone jacks still have Bluetooth. You’re only ok with it because it doesn’t effect you and I think that’s appalling.
Imagine phone manufacturers remove the ability to use Bluetooth headphones and I say “that’s fine, wired headphones are better anyway”. It’s not about that, it’s about removing your freedom to choose and it should NOT be tolerated
I know it’s not really ready for it yet, but I guess I’m gonna be looking into a Linux phone before I thought I would.
Same, though I think this will be the push the community needs to really launch a good Linux phone. It’ll suck for awhile, but I’m looking forward to debating phone distros with all of you.
Sorry it took so long to reply, I was waiting for Gentoo to finish compiling on my phone.
I’m using arch mobile btw
Mobile arch, march.
March of the penguins.
My main problem with linux phones is that many apps only exist only for android or ios.
Sure some apps are basically a website that you can acess by web browser but many apps cant be replaced able (banking, tickets, public transport, games)
Waydroid works really well to run Android apps on mobile Linux, even for games. Doesn’t help for banking apps though as they’ll usually lock you out due to not passing Google safety checks.
Most Android apps can be run under a mini-VM in the Linux systems I’ve tried - but some apps won’t function well that way (banking, NFC tickets, etc)
My main problem with the current crop of Linux phones is, or at least it’s my impression - is that they still struggle with the basic phone part. As in network connectivity (at least in the US), making and receiving calls, SMS & MMS, and VoLTE support. If there’s a Linux phone where that stuff is solid and works, I’d buy one. I don’t really care about the whole app ecosystem - I barely have any apps on my Android phone now.
Wait, Linux phones are a thing? How do they get the market share to compete with the big tech?
That’t the neat part, they don’t. They’re still very niche
I think I’d be willing to let go of the handful of things that are exclusive, given that I could probably do more with a proper Linux system. It’s the basic phone functionality (as others have mentioned) that keeps me from switching.
This is about Revanced, isn’t it? They failed to kill it via the YouTube backend so now it’s down to lock down the os and browsers as much as possible to keep feeding people the juicy ads.
This is bigger than “just” Revanced though. It is about using any open source software that could replace a Google app and losen Google’s grip on your data.
It’s time to start self hosting your own services people!
Yeah, but that doesn’t help if you can’t make apps that support the hosted services. Google is trying to have complete ownership of what runs on your phone.
I hate this move and love my sideloaded apps. However, there are plenty of self hosted apps on the play store. It’s just putting in a unique address at setup, not compiling a whole unique app for each server.
fuck google tbh
Their arguments are kind of lame. To install APKs from outside the store is already an involved process that generally makes it harder for the uninformed to sideload. Make sideloading a bit harder, but possible. My xiaomi makes me wait and read warnings before installing APKs, for example.
“Uugfhh, but the users don’t read the warnings!! They just click yes until it works!!”
And that’s my problem because??? For fucks sake
Side loading will still be possible but the apps themselves will need to be signed by the developer through Google, so Google ultimately still controls what can be installed. Maybe someone will crack it.
Remember everyone…Google never cared about you or your phone or your privacy. They are a marketing company and make money selling your data. Your data is all they care about. They don’t offer a wide range of products, like search and Gmail and all of their office products for free, just for the fun of it.
This is the risk of “trusted computing” architectures. Who is governing the “trusted” part of that.
These cryptographic signatures are not as much of a death knell for Android as some would have you believe. The trick is to get a common code signing cert into your device, that is then used to sign any third party APK you want to run. You can avoid the Google tax this way. I assume that’s how most sideloading sites and apps are going to handle this.
The question is, how do you add that certificate? Is it easy and straight forward (with plenty of scary warnings), as a user? Or is it going to be a developer options deal? Or will I need root to add the cert?
I’m not sure what that answer is right now.
I just want to finish this post with a few words about trusted computing models. Plainly: Apple has been doing this for years … That’s why you download basically everything from an app store with Apple. Whether on your Mac OS device, your iPhone, iPad or whatever iDevice… Whether the devs need to sign it, or the app gets signed when it lands on the store, there’s a signature to ensure that the app hasn’t been tampered with and that Apple has given the app it’s security blessings, that it is safe to run. Microsoft and Google have both been climbing towards the same forever. Apple embedded their root of trust in their own proprietary TPM which has been included with every Mac, and iDevice for a long ass time. Google also has a TPM, the Titan security module, I believe that was introduced around pixel 3? Or 4?.. Microsoft made huge waves requiring it for Windows 11, and we all know what that discussion looks like. Apple requires a TPM (which they supply, so nobody noticed), Google has been adding a TPM and TPM functionality to their phones for years, and now Windows is the same. None of this is a bad thing. Trusted computing can eliminate much of the need for antivirus software, among other things. I digress. We’ve been going this way for a long time. Google is just more or less, doing what Apple has already done, and what Microsoft will very likely do very soon, making it a requirement. Battlefield 6 I think, was one of the first to require trusted computing on Windows and it will, for damned sure, not be the last that does. The only real hurdle here is managing what is trusted. So far, each vendor has kept the keys to their own kingdoms, but this is contrary to computing concepts. Like the Internet, it should be able to be done without needing trust from a specific provider. That’s how SSL works, that’s how the Internet works, that’s how trusted computing should work. The only thing that should be secret is the private signing keys. What Google, Apple, and Microsoft should be doing, is issuing intermediary keys that can sign code signing certs. So trusted institutions that create apps, like… Idk, valve as an example, can create a signature key for steam and sign Steam with it, so the trust goes from MS root to intermediary key for valve, to steam code signing key, and suddenly you have an app that’s trusted. Valve can then use their key to sign software on their store that may not have a coffee signing key of it’s own. This is just one example based on Windows. And above all of this, the user should be able to import a trusted code signing cert, or an intermediary cert signing cert, to their service as trusted.
Anyways, thanks for coming to my Ted talk.
Thanks for sharing all of that. I got to think a little bit about stuff that normally I would take for granted.
What even is the reason for this? All this is going to accomplish is less Android market share.
Because of people installing malware.
Its only recently that most Android phone owners even used the internet features, now you need apps just to park your car. There’s nothing stopping someone from having you install malware from a pirate QR code someone puts over the proper sticker.My guess is that it’s because people are using apps to get around Google’s revenue generating mechanisms, like apps to get YouTube without ads.
DING DING DING
Oh yeah, I forgot that I use YouTube ReVanced. If they block that, I’ll honestly just use Brave with its adblocker.
So ,i install graphene OS on a pixel phone ,problem solved
Only a matter of time before Google will shut that down too.
GrapheneOS is one of the last bastions of freedom remaining. I don’t know what we’ll do if that happens.
deleted by creator
Something kind of concerning I just found - there’s an option for “limited distribution” which is “Intended for ‘students, hobbyists, and other personal use.’” One of the differences is the following:
Has “capped number of apps and installs”(specific limits not disclosed)
Doesn’t this imply there’s going to be global tracking of what apps people are installing even through sideloading or APKs? I can’t think of any other way to enforce this. They would have to know how many times people installed an app even when its not through any kind of app store or even from the internet at all.
They provide the OS, what makes you think that kind of tracking isn’t already happening?
App stores provide the apks but then you’ll use your phone’s installer to actually, well, install the apks.There are some alternatives to the default apk installers
Presumably that will work like test flight does where you can only install the app through an invite system
I’m pretty sure that was implemented a while ago. My install of VLC from F-Droid started showing up in Play Store’s update list.
It couldn’t update since the signature didn’t match, but Google knew about it and included it anyway.
Could be, but that could also just be done locally. Like your phone checking the apps you have installed and seeing if the same ones are on the play store. Having an install limit for an app - assuming that means that the app can only be installed some total number of times globally (a local install limit wouldn’t make any sense I think) - necessarily implies that when you install an app through an APK, it has to tell Google that you installed that app so it can track how many people have installed it and not approve installation of the app if it’s over whatever the limit is.
That has just always been the case as long as the app in both stores uses the same package string. (Like org.blitzortung.android.app or org.videolan.vlc)
Wasn’t always the case (I think it changed within the past two years), but upon doing research on when it changed I stumbled on this gem.
“Google would never do something like that” comments just one year ago. Oh my! Google dropped the “don’t be evil” motto a long time ago.
