It's no surprise that Google will start mirroring Apple more if closed ecosystems cannot be monopolies.
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.
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.
It seems like we're going from a reasonably acceptable option (GrapheneOS), to nothing.
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.
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.)
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.
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.
TheCraiggers•1h ago
OutOfHere•1h 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•1h ago
TheCraiggers•47m ago
pessimizer•18m ago
thewebguyd•1h ago
Anonymity is under attack in general
eddieroger•4m ago