It's no surprise that Google will start mirroring Apple more if closed ecosystems cannot be monopolies.
If the court is doing its job properly, it shouldn't be considering this at all. Their job is not to decide what outcome they find preferable. Their job is to assess compliance with the laws. If you don't like the outcome, then you ought to be complaining to your legislators to fix the broken antitrust laws, rather than saying that the courts are evil.
Of course, that's how things are supposed to work. It doesn't always work out that way. But let's at least try to use the system as it was intended rather than trying to force it even further out of spec just to get your own preferred outcome.
If you create an open platform it is subject to antitrust law.
Ask Microsoft about the difference in the legal restrictions on what they are allowed to do on their Windows platform vs their Xbox platform.
Google verifying developer identities but not controlling distribution, satisfies all relevant economic considerations. If it was about not letting Google control Android, they certainly wouldn't be letting Google decide the development roadmap. (The $25 fee doesn't count - the government has no problem charging multiples of that for anyone who drives a car or wants an ID card.)
As for Apple, they still have their antitrust lawsuit ongoing. Apple v Epic was only the first fire.
"Developers will ordinarily earn 50% of the V-Bucks value from sales in their islands, but from December 2025 through the end of 2026, the rate will be 100%."
https://www.fortnite.com/news/fortnite-developers-will-soon-...
But hey, I can surely launch my own storefront to sell in-game items on top of Fortnite right?
Right?
Oh.
Google chose accelerated platform growth in exchange for being bound by antitrust restrictions.
If you create a new platform that that customers know in advance is a walled garden, like XBox, you do not face the same restrictions.
That's how the existing law works.
If you don't like how the existing law works, you have to do what the EU did and change it.
DEVELOPER_VERIFICATION_FAILED_REASON_DEVELOPER_BLOCKED is very clearly the purpose of the whole thing. Presumably this one can be triggered on an already installed app - a key question being how that triggering occurs. i.e. will the Play Store act to push out details of developers that are now blocked so devices can act on it?
Your "presumably" is doing a _lot_ of work; these strings are from the PackageInstaller, and go along with all of the other reasons you can't install an APK.
Historically, apps that were pulled from the Play Store and developer accounts revoked due to malware do _not_ affect apps on the end-user device, and there's no current sign of this changing with this specific project. Google have generally achieved this goal using Play Protect, the separate app/service which _can_ download revocation lists and signal end-users to delete malicious apps, and there's no indication this will change.
I don't have much of a problem with developers getting blocked, blocking malware shops is the entire point.
Installations failing because of a network problem is different, though. The Android ecosystem can trivially leverage the existing app certificates + occasionally updated CRLs to verify app developers. Android needing to call to the net before installing an APK seems over the top.
for building an alternative YouTube frontend. Or a torrenting app. Or due to sanctions / trade wars. (If you think these can't happen to you personally, imagine a Mega-Trump who's even Trumpier than Trump getting elected US president.)
What's malware to Google isn't necessarily malware to the user.
It seems like we're going from a reasonably acceptable option (GrapheneOS), to nothing.
If memory serves me right, in early days of Android, Google engineers were writing drivers on behalf of manufacturers because OEM drivers were too buggy.
Think about the amount of work and the kind of talent this requires.
If you are starting from scratch today as a no-name company, I doubt any hardware manufacturers even want to talk to you.
Apps that require Google Play Service or some form of attestation will not run on a Linux phone either.
GrapheneOS only runs on the Google Pixels, and Google may decide to render future Pixels unusable for GrapheneOS (e.g. by preventing to unlock/relock the bootloader).
But another Android manufacturer could get to the point where GrapheneOS endorses them. It feels like it shouldn't be that hard for an Android manufacturer, and they would immediately get quite some attention. Maybe not mainstream attention, but largely profitable, I think.
There's only speculation that GtapheneOS will stop existing.
They're working with a manufacturer to get first-class support for a new phone, which will be hard for Google to simply kill off.
Short and medium term GrapheneOS will continue and long-term I'm also hopeful.
They apparently feel very differently.
We got rid of the license on the OS; but they found other ways to put a license on the phone.
We used to say, that online speech, is not the same as in-person speech.
Online, you can yell horrible things, imply that somebody should "do something" about another person, but police showing up at your door is a tyranny, even if those same things on a street corner would've had you on involuntary commitment. Online, a developer might build an app that pulls off phishing scams, but they have the complete right to be anonymous. Meanwhile, the person cutting your hair, preparing your food, or even selling you flowers needs registration, if only for taxes. In person was a "real" threat, while online was just "venting," "trolling."
That's dying. Online is now the real world. With real world consequences.
Without most of the benefits of the real world, mind you.
Are you reading your own words? You're saying online is now offline because of consequences meanwhile the Bluesky posters you're complaining about are not actually being arrested by riot police.
With this planned change my reasons to ditch Android and go to Apple increase dramatically. Why would i want half assed google walled garden when I could get the Apple one?
Sucks for the people who can't afford an Apple device and honestly sucks for all of us who enjoyed installing all kinds of apps on our devices.
Combined with bad security practice from OEMs, preinstalled bloatware, app fragmentation (I love having Samsung "Phone" app and stock phone app at the same time) and customer service (try replacing your phone battery and compare the experience of ubreakifix and Apple store), I don't see a reason to go Android.
(P.S. people who cannot afford the latest iPhone can always purchase a two year old used/"refurbished" phone. It's a solid choice and many people do that. The fact that you can now add Apple Care to 4 year old device makes this more viable.)
They just shipped security updates for the iPhone 6S which came out 10 years ago.
Another time my wife wanted Apple Care, but decided on the last day and the website didn't offer the option anymore. She called, they were really helpful and again called back a few days later to check everything is good on our end.
They are a big-tech company, but actually being able to call someone and getting swift help is refreshing.
Edit: I only now realize the accidental pun: you probably won't be getting 'Swift' help. :p
Here Timpsons provide the service outlets for Samsung, although that probably does not help you. But it is basically the same price.
And that’s for battery. Just take a look at screen repair if you want to cry.
Samsung.com/uk says £79, so I don't agree with that.
At least, the standard version. If Samsung or someone keeps it open, I'd probably move to that.
And if Android's removal of rights lags 5-10 years behind Apple again in the future, that's a win.
Apple is prohibitively expensive here, there's no official warranty and much difficulty with doing quality battery replacements, so I will probably have to own two phones.
So I can install my F-Droid on one of the partition, and actual personal stuff on the other. Bit like my Chromebook with Crostini.
But good suggestion to try this again!
It works the same way, there is a Linux terminal application that runs Debian inside a VM. They recently added a button to launch a display window. This then functions as your "monitor" and applications you launch that provide a GUI display there.
Still experimenting with it not clear if you can launch android inside that with waydroid or similar
However banks can use the hardware attestation API instead of Play Integrity API to allow alternative distributions like GrapheneOS [1]. All of my financial apps happen to work on GrapheneOS.
[1] https://grapheneos.org/articles/attestation-compatibility-gu...
Play Integrity is focused on checking the OS is original and the runtime environment of the app (your banking app in this case) isn't being messed with. Installing other apps as a developer isn't related to that. If you're not flashing a custom OS or modifying your bank's APK you'll be fine.
(You _should_ be able to use custom OSs and Play Integrity is awful, to be clear - but not because of anything directly relate to normal app development & sideloading)
But for security updates they've pushed it up to 10 years. The 6s, 2015, got a security update this month.
They're actively supporting (at least security updates) iOS 15, 16, 18, and now of course 26. 17 was skipped because no devices lost support with it, everything that could run 17 can run 18.
Everything else, it isn't like I am a public figure that has to have ultimate security devices.
So ultimately they own the devices that connect to them. That's why I've already stopped paying for phones and just get free ones when offered. If I do pay for one again it'll just be the cheapest Chinese one available.
Can’t disagree more.
Android has both better phones and better UX. Apple is usually lagging the Asian brands by years.
I went from a Pixel 3A to an iPhone 13 and just switched back to a Pixel 10 Pro and gosh the iPhone was a complete wreck. It’s even worse with their new UI.
Unless you are somehow stuck in the Apple ecosystem, I don’t understand why people pay more for it. The idea than the Android experience is somehow subpar when all Apple has done for the past five years is merely copying it is crazy to me.
extreme, EXTREME minority opinion stated as fact
> when all Apple has done for the past five years is merely copying it
This is a popular refrain but never passes the sniff test. Android has nothing equivalent to AirPods, airdrop, find my, list goes on and on.
AirDrop → Nearby Share (Google), Quick Share (Samsung)
Find My → Find My Device (Google)
AirPods: can simultainiously be paired with iPhone, Apple Watch, iPad and Mac. The switching between the audio you hear is fully automated and generally "just works" using sensors on both the AirPods and your 'source device'. e.g. listen to audio from your mac, but get a call? You can 'just pick it up' without any Bluetooth hassling or switching.
AirDrop: the hardware Wifi chips in your device actually gets configured in a peer to peer mode that enables (very) high capacity transfers. Think of pushing multiple gigabytes. It does not require any configuration, the devices can figure it out themselves if nearby and unlocked. It also works between Mac's, iPads and iPhones.
Find My: It's not just for devices, you can share your location with family and friends, with reasonable control over things like 'for how long'. You can set alerts for leaving or arriving a particular location (Apple informs both parties of such geofencing). It also integrates with the workout app or navigation app, e.g. keeping folks updated on the ETA.
I've done this on android/linux with random bluetooth earbuds. I'm sure apple is more reliable or whatever but this is not a unique feature to them.
Multiple pairing and fast switching have worked correctly for ages on multiple brands but they are completely unaware.
Nearby Share works exactly the same than AirDrop with regards to pair to pair mode on supporting device. It also works on anything supporting one of its client which covers a lot of material.
Find my: Google has exactly the same functionality and has had it for years.
You are completely disconnected from the state of the art. Meanwhile it’s 2025 and iOS still can’t properly deal with notifications.
Wifi direct. Apple didn't invent it. Android also does that. Also that's now also an optional part of the bluetooth spec (to use the wifi radio as well)
Sony has a product which is considerably better than the AirPods and the Pixel Buds are competitive.
Google has an alternative to Find my which works the same and allows to use trackers from multiple brands, including some which are better than AirTag.
Android has a default feature called nearby share which works the same and has had sharing via WiFi for much longer than Apple including some options which are not annoyingly gimped proprietary technology.
It’s always the same issue with Apple fan. They are completely unaware of how far behind Apple is because they don’t want to even look outside.
So my text messages will arrive twice as fast to the destination? Or phone calls will be two times shorter? Or I will read HN comment twice as fast while taking shit? Or the route found by Google Maps will have two times less traffic lights?
Nobody cares about how fast their phone cpu is. My iPhone 13 was significantly less performant than a top of the line modern Qualcomm CPU and never felt slow. Apple chips are also no more twice as fast as the competitions. The gap has been smaller for years.
If that’s all you have, you have basically nothing.
Only the experience matters and the iPhone UX is strictly inferior to the competition. Battery life is worse, camera is worse, screen is worse. So happy I switched and really regret ever trying buying one.
Additionally, Java and Kotlin are quite usable outside Android, instead of flourishing in a single vendor ecosystem.
Swift outside Apple ecosystem is as interesting as using Objective-C with GNUStep.
I do have a good camera but when you're out and about its still too big for my liking. Most importantly, phones now a days come with a roughly 100mm equivalent and thats kind of my favorite lens for street photography (weird, I know, I enjoy taking close up photos of buildings, signs, cars).
Another reason why i like phone photography is how quickly i can share my pictures with the people i care. I don't really care for posting my photos on social media that much I want to send good photos of my travel/life to my friends through chatrooms.
So a good camera on a phone is essential to me. Particularly a good telephoto and a good main camera (so like 30-100mm).
With that in mind my range of possible phones is drastically reduced. Of course, I enjoy side loading apps and so as of now I've been relatively happy with something like the pixel 8 pro that I've had for a while. But I recently compared it to the iphone 16 pro and that one is better when it comes to the casual photography/videography experience by a lot. So I was already wavering and with these changes it feels like the final nail in the coffin to me.
If you want me to buy an iOS clone with no competitive edges, I would rather stick with the real deal. At least Apple has been consistent with their views about what iOS is since day 1.
I will also do everything in my power to halt support for Android in favor of web apps. No sense duplicating work for two separate platforms if one is just a crappy clone of another.
So I never spend much on phones, but I just got a Fairphone 4 running E/OS , which is .... like running android, except it blocks tracking by default, and you're in control. Some fairphones come with e/os pre-installed, but installing it isn't even all too fiddly, you can do it direct from chrome(ium).
And you can take it apart with your fingers and a screwdriver!
There's hope yet!
I've been in IT long enough to recognize this pattern. Every "convenient" lock-in becomes an expensive problem later - something you're definitely experiencing now!
My advice: don't get locked in in the first place yesterday. Or second best, start exploring ways out today. Push back on your bank - odds are they simply haven't had enough complaints yet. Demand alternate authentication methods. Fall back to web banking or even paper banking. Shop around - banks are IT companies like any other these days, and there are definitely banks with better terms.
Fortunately I'm in the Netherlands where web banking still works fine, so that's what I'm doing. Where are you located?
TBQH I'm a bit skeptical of banking apps in general, mind, but if you're not here's a list:
https://community.e.foundation/t/list-banking-apps-on-e-os/3...
For the people too poor to own a phone, they just use cash in most places they can... To put things into perspective even road side beggars/homeless people just show you a QR code on a piece of paper for where to pay them these days..
I was an iPhone user from 2009 to 2019. In 2019, when the iTunes backup from my failed iPhone 4S wouldn't restore to an iPhone SE (it made the phone boot loop) I got frustrated and went Android.
I decided to "sideload" all non-stock software on my Android phone. I never have setup a Google Play account. I kept all the APKs for the software I loaded over the years that I used that phone.
I just got a new Android phone a couple of weeks ago. I was able to just load all the software I use day-to-day from APKs (except for a few that are, apparently, processor-specific). I imported my SMS, contacts, and call logs using a nice FOSS app[0]. It felt remarkably like moving to a new PC does. It was nice.
I am really sad Google is ending this moving forward. Jackasses.
Edit: I hadn't used MiXplorer before. I was able to install an XAPK with it, so that's nice.
I recently joined it as I hated feeling powerless about this change in Android. Becoming one more working on a third option is very freeing. I'd recommend it, plus Ubuntu Touch is surprisingly a nice OS.
I used to be an Android dev, and occasionally dabble.
I use Android as I can put things on it.
If its going to be closed, I may as well get an iPhone, or stick with open and get a Linux phone next.
Look into UBports if you want to join the dev community (either for apps or system).
This is the time to ask what we can do about this, how do we stop it. How do we raise awareness among people, among law makers or people whose opinions matter to make Google take notice.
I'm all for alternatives like linux phones but it's not realistic in the timeframe. It will be a sad day if this comes to pass without least bit of resistance.
But, ideally, it's not that big a deal, because the community (or even newer non-calcified businesses) can fork the last open source branch and continue development.
Unfortunately, with something as complex as an OS, that's incredibly difficult. It does seem regrettably unlikely that, for the foreseeable future, there will be no practically usable open-source phone OSes.
Apple controls ridiculous detail of your application and there are many developers who think that it is necessary for Apple to keep the high quality of iOS.
Actually I was shocked when one of my coworkers told me that it is a very good idea and Google should have done it sooner.
Those users knew in advance what they were buying into, since Apple was honest about the nature of the platform they were offering for sale.
Google's Android customers, in contrast, were lied to -- and it's solely Google's fault that Google lied about Android being both open to running any software you like and open source.
Everyone should have spoken up when they first started moving necessary developer APIs into the Play Store.
They were, but I think for most users this is a sort of technical lie that they don't really care about, like if a restaurant says you can choose one of these four side dishes and when you ask for the onion rings they say they're out. I'm often hair-raisingly stunned at how little concern, or even awareness, people have about issues of privacy and user control.
> Everyone should have spoken up when they first started moving necessary developer APIs into the Play Store.
No, people needed to speak up long before then. They needed to speak up as soon as the iOS/Android duopoly began to emerge, as soon as advertising began to shift to Facebook, as soon as brick-and-mortar video rental stores started to close, and a million other things like that. The issue is that we have allowed a small number of companies to control too much infrastructure that too many people depend on too much. With that power they will find a way to screw us. If it wasn't this it would have been something else, and if there are workarounds or walkbacks on this it will still be something else later. The only way forward is wholesale dismantling of the system that has led to this. Unfortunately a lot of people would rather have convenience.
Android drove the other options out of the market because of Google's fraudulent marketing about giving users the freedom to run anything they liked and being open source.
The fraudulent marketing came first, and truly open Linux based options previously in development were the casualties.
> for most users this is a sort of technical lie that they don't really care about
People have been going on about Android being open and iOS being a closed walled garden for as long as both platforms have existed.
The excuse making about Android becoming a walled garden, so walled gardens are OK now started only after Google altered the bargain.
I don't think Google looks at any of these forks as threats; they just don't care.
Eventually we see a Chat Control esque law outright banning unapproved operating systems or unlocking devices. The authoritarian ratchet turns slowly but steadily, even as you sleep.
And all of the big tech corps support this vision of the future. Apple, Google Microsoft, Meta... They all release locked-down hardware and software, and have so far been on board with the convergence towards unmodifiable trusted computing. This may accelerate as local AI inference becomes commonplace and CorpGov demands unmodifiable safety controls that mediate the use of onboard models.
What's the situation now? Because without those it's unfortunatly useless to me.
You and me don't get a vote on the Google board. The current government is not what I'd call fiercely pro-consumer. People say that money talks, but what's really in this season is tacky golden bribes; not an area where consumer advocates have a comparative advantage.
Raising awareness for a change that Google is already communicating widely and openly, is unlikely to scare Google very much.
If you want to take this seriously, it's going to need something beyond the usual token resistance that consists of angry social media posts.
Some might argue the corporate OS[1] user never had "control of [their] devices"
As in the past, more hassles are to come for Android users, but some might doubt this idea that users currently have control or ever had control
Why the hassles
Because the user has no control over the OS
The corporation might increase or decrease the hassles, making users happy or unhappy (or indifferent), but either way the user never has control
In a non-corporate OS the user can generally edit the OS to her liking
Introducing hassles in a non-corporate would cause users who were annoyed to remove them
In other words, if users choose a non-corporate OS where users have control then there is no need to "raise awareness among people, among law makers or people whose opinions matter to make Google take notice"
1. For example, the ones from Silicon Valley and Redmond
People are aware, they just don't care.
Turn certification off and your... banking apps... and wireless pay... and play store... and online game cheat detectors... stop working? That you... already weren't using apparently because you have no network?
Sorry, I'm having a really the hard time following the use case behind the outrage here.
Everyone is mad because they won't have Android certification on devices that can't benefit from Android certification?
You can't even test stuff you made on your own hardware without getting verified.
I really hope this will be the final straw to break the camel’s back and people will see that native platforms bring nothing but lock in and misery (I’m an Android native developer, don’t bother telling me about “native experience”).
I guess the best option is two android phones, one for Google's locked down junk and another that is allowed to run your own code.
Well, I do not want to just in to one walled garden to another, so, I think, this is the end of portable devices for me. That is the stick, that Google and Apple both using to keep us in their hands, so, I'm going to do my best to say: No thank you, and F*ck off.
I might not ever buy a flagship or high-end smartphone anymore, but get a smaller laptop, and keep an old or cheap Android handy, which will have very little personal data in it. I can easily tether the Laptop with my mobile and do most of the things that are needed.
Yes, for bank applications, and some other applications, that requires app, I will keep the cheap Android handy. But, it not a personal device anymore, the thing that I loved about Android, it's just there, because it has to.
And I am done with a mobile device till a true Linux based mobile become available.
The PlayStore is full of crapware, and I'm using a lot of apps from Fdroid, including basics like keyboard and text.
If you're at Google try to push back on this please.
There is no future for "general purpose computing". The market won't sustain it. The future of computing is a signed, vetted path from boot firmware to application code. Everyone benefits from this, except devs.
Platform vendors benefit because they can collect license fees and exert control over the platform. Control is not necessarily evil; it also allows the hardware vendor to manage their reputation. People tend to blame the vendor when malware, or just poorly written software, makes things go awry; look at the flak Microsoft caught from poorly written third-party drivers causing Windows crashes back in the day.
Content and service providers benefit because the locked down platform provides reasonable assurance against compromise—hacked bank accounts, piracy, etc. which can result in losses.
End users benefit because now their computer or smartphone is as convenient and risk-free as a game console. iPhone is still the #1 brand in the US, despite being almost completely closed. NOBODY in the end user market gives a shit about being able to run arbitrary software. They would rather have safety, and iPhone gives them that.
Governments benefit because if app development requires a paper trail, app and smartphone vendors can be more easily strongarmed for law enforcement and surveillance purposes. Governments are requiring increased tracking by online services, including age verification laws in the US, UK, and elsewhere; "chat control" proposals in Europe, etc. Some governments (e.g., Brazil) are even implementing these requirements on end-user devices and operating systems. We are going to be living in a digital world that's more regulated, transparent to government, and accountable soon.
My advice is: get used to it. The free-wheeling hacker days are over, and they're not coming back. No one is going to listen to a bunch of nerds whinging that their toys have been taken away; those nerds will be told that it's time to grow up.
TheCraiggers•4mo ago
OutOfHere•4mo ago
The obvious alternative is Linux phones. Granted, the tech sets us back by maybe two decades, but at least we're almost at the stage where we can rapidfire develop our own apps or open source apps using LLM assistance.
philipallstar•4mo ago
TheCraiggers•4mo ago
pessimizer•4mo ago
lenerdenator•4mo ago
Android never had the FLOSS ethos of Linux or the GNU project at large.
cosmic_cheese•4mo ago
palata•4mo ago
Kindly disagree. Linux phones are very far behind.
The obvious alternative is an alternative OS based on AOSP. Like GrapheneOS.
OutOfHere•4mo ago
palata•4mo ago
The way I see it, the more support GrapheneOS gets, the higher the likelihood it survives. The goal is to reach a point where Android manufacturers consider that they lose money if they don't reach the requirements of GrapheneOS, because enough people care about them.
EvanAnderson•4mo ago
drnick1•4mo ago
palata•4mo ago
I don't think it will be their own phone, and I hope they don't go down that route.
They are talking with an OEM to help them increase their security to reach the requirements of GrapheneOS, at which point GrapheneOS will be able to support those non-Pixel phones.
> I don't use Google software at all, not even their search engine or email, but I find that buying Google hardware is acceptable since the bootloader is unlocked.
Same here. I've been a user of /e/OS for 4.5 years. I have come to the conclusion that the only Android system worth its while in terms of security is GrapheneOS. If it wasn't for it, I would go with an iPhone. And I do avoid TooBigTech as much as I can (I even self-host some stuff for that). But the hardware situation is the way it is, and the Pixels are simply superior at the moment.
palata•4mo ago
I see it a bit differently: Google will be fine without me. But I can contribute to GrapheneOS. So I may as well have a Pixel and donate to GrapheneOS.
curt15•4mo ago
palata•4mo ago
xandrius•4mo ago
OutOfHere•4mo ago
xandrius•4mo ago
thewebguyd•4mo ago
Anonymity is under attack in general
eddieroger•4mo ago
wiseowise•4mo ago
lenerdenator•4mo ago
This was always the plan. Co-opt FLOSS with services running on FLOSS platforms that are not, themselves, FLOSS. Make it insanely unattractive to run actual FLOSS services on the otherwise FLOSS platform. At that point, it might as well be what Apple does.
There's a reason why rms was insistent upon GPL, but he never did have a real answer to that sort of corporate behavior.
vivzkestrel•4mo ago