Thoughts on this?

    • dan@upvote.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      3 days ago

      You currently have to install F-Droid manually via APK. This change will allow F-Droid to be listed in the Google Play store.

        • dan@upvote.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          3 days ago

          It would increase visibility of F-Droid (people that might have never heard of it might start seeing it in the Play Store) so I think they’ll give in to Google’s requirements even if they oppose them…

          • Turret3857@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            3 days ago

            It would require either every app developer on F-Droid to comply as well, or for F-Droid to implement google play style app signing, both of which ive seen F-Droid maintainers being against.

            • dan@upvote.au
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              3 days ago

              It would require either every app developer on F-Droid to comply as well

              Has this been mentioned anywhere? I haven’t seen it.

              • Turret3857@infosec.pub
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                3 days ago

                I’m in a Matrix room with a couple of F-Droid team members and that is where i’ve gotten the information. I am unsure if it is easily found info. You might be able to ask on the forums if you want to fully fact check my statement.

        • ikidd@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 days ago

          It’s not really Fdroid complying so much as the developers signing the apps having registered with Google. Fdroid itself is unaffected by it except for having to sign their appstore binary. But they definitely are championing the side of the FOSS developer that’s traditionally been their supplier, and it’s how it’s going to affect those devs that they’re (rightly) up in arms on behalf.

          • dan@upvote.au
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            3 days ago

            That’s a separate thing. As far as I know, there’ll be no difference between third-party app stores installed via Google Play vs third-party app stores installed via APK in terms of the apps in the store itself.

            IIRC they’re going to force verification for all apps but have an opt-out that you just need to do once, and wait 24 hours after enabling it.

            • Einskjaldi@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 days ago

              There is real concern if they make it harder in the future but it’s the same as just enabling developer options which is pretty easy. The target audience is phishing scams and people who have no idea what they’re doing.

  • AlteredEgo@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    3 days ago

    So how come epic can sue for stuff like this, but we can’t sue for android to remain open? Is this just a question of having money to fund such a lawsuit?

  • lemmysmash@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    3 days ago

    Unless they completely ditch (or be forced to ditch) the developer notarization crap they’re pushing for, all these talks and “registered appstores” will stay just pure bullshit to distract you from what’s important: https://keepandroidopen.org/

    • floofloof@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      4 days ago

      As far as I can see it doesn’t improve that situation. The Google Play Store may be forced to list alternative app stores, but by default the only apps that will install on Android, no matter which store they are downloaded from, are those whose developer has registered with Google, and where Google has approved both the developer and the app. So Google can still censor any app or developer they (or the US Government) consider inconvenient.

      Google promises a slightly laborious workaround for this, but they don’t say how long the workaround will remain available.

    • ShellMonkey@piefed.socdojo.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      4 days ago

      Just what I was questioning, the push to make users jump through hoops to use apps not approved by big brother is still out there

    • d-RLY?@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      They don’t care, but also they can point to AOSP being around. So “Android” is still “open”, just making it harder and harder for it to be used without the Google Services (in addition to drivers needed for the crucial hardware bits OEMs use which are their own problems).

      Conspiracy theory kind of rant/headspace. I am kind of shocked that the Pixel devices still have easy boot loader unlocking and drivers to install AOSP or Linux based ROMs. Guessing they will lock those down like the OEMs at some point, and make “must have” features for the hardware not work if an “unverified” ROM is installed. Could also see them selling “dev unlocked” versions of the devices that are more expensive, and require the people buying them to get verified for apps at time of purchase (even if the person isn’t planning on actually making apps).

      • Einskjaldi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 days ago

        Samsung just did that with the tablets recently which are now garbage with 0 options for the bootloader.

    • Whostosay@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      For this, you can search “how to upload an article to an archiving website, and repost its link”