It doesn’t sound any different from what Apple is currently doing in the EU, and that seems to have gotten some measure of grudging acceptance. Though the EU has been known to “creatively interpret” the DMA when it suits them, so who knows.I know the EU Competition team can move very slowly sometimes, however I will make sure to let them know about this.
The Play Store is an almost unusable mess of sponsored search results and suggested apps, most of which are little more than in-app purchase factories that deliver Google billions of dollars every year.

You could always go for a Pixel 9 series. Full GrapheneOS support, 6 remaining years of security/OS updates, and relatively minor hardware differences from the 10 series. Cheaper, too, especially used.Google can fuck right off. Most of the things that drove me towards Android are moot now.
I'm currently waiting for Graphene OS to either announce Pixel 10 support (yes, I'm aware of the irony in buying a Google-made phone to ditch Google) or an OEM phone.
If that doesn't pan out I might look into Sailfish or even switch to an iPhone.
Considering how much time the phone steals by being enticingly always there, what I really want is a fairly dumb phone that can run all the essential apps (transportation, banking, music) and then a Linux tablet for reading, gaming and videos. Maybe Sailfish is actually that...
The EU has had plenty of time to complain about Apple's app notarization, and they have complained about plenty of other things, so at this point we can conclude that they accept it as an appropriate security measure. Something explicitly permitted in the DMA with no creative interpretation necessary.It doesn’t sound any different from what Apple is currently doing in the EU, and that seems to have gotten some measure of grudging acceptance. Though the EU has been known to “creatively interpret” the DMA when it suits them, so who knows.
Apple also still retains the ability to decide which apps to approve or block in the EU, even for third party app stores. If push comes to shove, I suspect the EU government will be making similar “requests” of Apple as well.
Such a piece of shit move. Honestly if not being more open what does android actually offer that’s better rather than just using Apple? It’s literally their only pro.
Apple is better is basically every way and the ecosystem is a million times better, basically every single thing in it works really well with everything in it.
Where are we in terms of maturity on the respective Android forks, Linux adaptations, etc? I was excited for the Ubuntu Phone back in the day, but that of course never happened, and this was the first time I've seen Sailfish mentioned in years.This is madness. Every single day I wish godspeed upon linux phone devs. Time to start throwing some money at Pine/postmarket/sailfish etc because the two mobile actors are twats
You appear to be a "hobbyist" and they have a (TBD) policy for you, which appears to be free.I'd like to know too. I'm currently learning Android Studio for work. I'd like to make an app to track bins and take pictures of packaged boxes, have it on numerous tablets for employees to use. I've experimented a bit with loading some test programs on my phone to see how it works. How is this going to affect me and my work. I'll only be able to install it via USB like what, 20 times, 50 times, 3 devices?
Ack.. Makes me want to abort this idea right now and just stick with creating Windows apps or web only apps.
Confirming app verification status will be the job of a new system component called the Android Developer Verifier, which will be rolled out to devices in the next major release of Android 16.
Yes. Adb installing locally developed apps is not affected. How else would you develop otherwise?I'm trying to figure out what this means to me. I wrote an app for myself and so far, only for myself. It uses BLE to open my garage door. No internet. No frills. I wrote it on my laptop and debugged and loaded it via USB. Will this still be possible in this future world with registered apps?
Primary function that EU loves about this is censorship and control over what apps are available. With this they can easily block all apps that have actual security (see chat control proposal among others).The EU has had plenty of time to complain about Apple's app notarization, and they have complained about plenty of other things, so at this point we can conclude that they accept it as an appropriate security measure. Something explicitly permitted in the DMA with no creative interpretation necessary.
The EU really doesn't want a sudden rise in malware making the DMA look bad to their own citizens. Giving either Apple or Google a further excuse to blame them for such an outcome (which lets be honest is a very likely outcome) would be political suicide.
The EU will complain about their new shit. Even if the US doesn't.I imagine since Google "lost" the Chrome monopoly case, received no penalties, and effectively won, we'll be seeing a lot more abuse of their various monopoly positions in the immediate future. This is just a start.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_They_CameAs far as I understand this, I'll still be able to use FDroid and I'll still be able to install apps via ADB. So this shouldn't be too bad.
I stopped using custom ROMs back then with my Pixel 3a and I don't think I will need to do this again. But if worst comes to worst, I'll still be able to unlock the bootloader and do whatever I want. I don't think Google will remove this feature, because Pixel phones still need to be developer-friendly. At least I hope so.
You mean buy a Google device in order to show our disapproval of what Google is doing?Why not just go with GrapheneOS?
Apple isn't any better.You mean buy a Google device in order to show our disapproval of what Google is doing?![]()
Apple is better is basically every way and the ecosystem is a million times better, basically every single thing in it works really well with everything in it.
No:Does this mean that the new rules/tech will only affect current phones, and if you have a much older one, the rules won't be enforced?
The changes will be backported to older versions of Android through Google Play Protect, though Google says there may be some slight differences because this method leverages an existing app rather than the new, native verifier service built into the OS.
I can't stand Phosh and the default apps, so I installed PostmarketOS with plasma-mobile. The shell itself is a lot snappier!Two years daily-driving a Librem 5.
Bank app works on Waydroid.
If you are not doing multiple hours of YouTube per day or tons of Instabooking, it works just fine.
And other options out there may even be better than the Librem5-PureOS combo.
Steady - you're starting to sound British!Primary function that EU loves about this is censorship and control over what apps are available. With this they can easily block all apps that have actual security (see chat control proposal among others).
Population here has been voting wrong lately so EU has been busy making sure that we peasants can't do that anymore.
EU is too busy trying to get ChatControl passedAs a resident of the EU, I share the concern about the lack of any response from the Commission. This issue affects hundreds of millions of devices used by EU citizens every day. It also seems like a clear violation of Article 6 of the DMA. And yet... crickets. Ultimately there may be push back but the lack of any public statement thus far afaik is confusing.
So now I have to decide between maintaining security by allowing this upgrade or maintaining access to F-Droid by denying it. Of course, that depends on whether this crap ends up killing F-Droid outright.will be rolled out to devices in the next major release of Android 16
Ha ha! Unless your representative is a Repugnican and you include a huge "campaign contribution", that will go nowhere.man, this is just the worst possible time to be losing the last free mobile platform.
on top of that they've stopped publishing to AOSP, and they've stopped publishing the device trees for Pixel devices. all of this meaning ROMs are going to get more out of date and less secure making them less of a viable option.
I think they knew ROMs would be the last resort to escape their tightening control, so they choose to kill them at the same time.
Contact your representatives!
Info on Sailfish seems pretty sparse and their website is far from helpful.Read FDroid's post on this.
We shouldn't give up this freedom to actually own our devices without at least a fight.
also look at alternatives, it's not mature enough yet, but Sailfish OS is a possible option.
Can someone explain to me how this is different than Google becoming a certificate authority and requiring code signing with an issued developer certificate before an app can be run (unless it is ad hoc signed with a device-specific key via ADB install)?Apple isn't any better.
Internet and PWAs? Not on Chrome then because they are trying hard to kill those too.Dear Sundar,
Thank you for all of the surveillance data you have been giving us. We really like this "no warrant, no subpoena necessary" deal that we have going since January.. Chefs kiss! It's much better than that gold thing that Tim apple gave us.
It has come to our attention that the radical left likes to side load.
This makes us sad because our ICE agents and now--stripped-down facade of an FBI agency can't police all of possible "wrongdoings" or pro democratic activities... Did I say pro democratic..? That sounds too American and relatable. I meant to say the radical left, antifa activities that could possibly happen due to this radical side loading...
Whatever you do Sundar, don't tell anyone about the internet or PWAs.. They might want to use them instead.
Thank you for the attention in this manner.
Love as always,
Don-Don
I don't care what the policy is, because (1) they can change it, and (2) any policy that's not "it's your computer, run whatever software you want, you don't need our permission" is f@#$ing unacceptable.The Play Store's harmful app policy is well-established, though. It details all the types of nefarious apps that Google considers malware
Be ready to wait a long time then. Relatives of mine are using very, very old Android phones.So, basically they're trying to be like Apple now, except with less privacy. Looks like when my Pixel 7a dies I'll be getting an iPhone.
Why? They are not verifying the app, they are only verifying that a known developer signed the app. If you want to sign up for hobbyist verification then build and sign some random GitHub repo and side load it. The impact of that is still on you. They are just limiting the blast radius of an unknown developer distributing something malicious. Now "hopefully" the identity of a bad actor is known or their impact is contained by the limited number of installs available to students and hobbyist. I imagine bad actors will just commit identity theft before signing up for verification.As part of this so-called improved verification, Google should also be held liable for any damages caused by malicious applications.
The difference is that under the android method rather than the iOS scheme the app could be distributed for side loading in open source form where each individual user could sign it with a hobbiest credential. Alternatively, register a bunch of throw away emails and setup a site that signs the app with a different certificate every few downloads.This feels a bit passively worded. The Trump administration successfully had Apple voluntarily pull it from the Apple App Store.
Feels like this comparison should have been discussed a bit more, because Google putting themselves in this place as gatekeeper is exactly the kind of controlling bottleneck that allowed Apple to decide that its users aren't allowed to run an app like ICEBlock.