Google's long term strategy with Android is baffling to me. Apple has had better mobile hardware for years. Apple has higher consumer trust. Apple has better app selection (for most people). Apple has been increasingly implementing the core features that differentiate Android devices, like USB-C and RCS. Every Android user lost to the increasing iOS market share is another customer Google has to pay exorbitant fees to a competitor to access.
And Google's strategy is to continue removing differentiating features from Android that also help them mitigate the threat of antitrust? Surely the marginal revenue from the inconsequential number of sideloading users isn't attractive enough to justify that kind of strategic blunder.
I don't see any iOS advantage with the apps anymore. That was maybe true in the very beginning, during the gold rush time of the app store. But not since then. In which category are there better iOS apps? Browsers? No, strictly worse. Youtube app? No, worse. Texting? Worse or equal (Whatsapp). Podcast client? I assume worse, since there is no Antenna Pod. Social media apps? The iOS variants of those apps are afaik in no way better. What else is there, where is the advantage?
Also, while the Play store is an equally ad-riddled and unsearchable hellhole, at least Android does have with F-Droid a high quality alternative. iOS has nothing.
But sure, removing the F-Droid advantage can only hurt Android, the direction of your comment still stands.
> The IOS versions of social media apps extract way less data from the device than on android, and is thus more privacy friendly.
I seriously doubt this. I agree that this is the perception but anyone working in the mobile space on both platforms for the past ~2 years will know Google is a lot more hard nosed in reviewing apps for privacy concerns than Apple these days (I say this negatively, there is a middle ground and Apple is much closer to it - Google is just friction seemingly in an attempt to lose their bad reputation).
Unless you're running Graphene or a similar security minded distro the sandboxing isn't very good. Okay let's be honest it's fairly abysmal at preventing fingerprinting. It could almost be accused of not even bothering to try.
You'd think this would be more known! I feel like general sentiment says the opposite is the case.. What can one point to in the future to show what you are saying here?
Almost all of the prosumer apps on iOS offer a consistently better experience. This is maybe less relevant on phones than on tablets, but music production, video editing, digital painting and drafting, etc...
Everything else I agree with, but the Android camera APIs do not allow developers to build good device independent camera apps the way they are available on iOS.
I'm only familiar with this as a user and not a developer, but I've had multiple Android phone where not all camera features available in the Camera app were available to other apps via the APIs:
>I don't see any iOS advantage with the apps anymore. That was maybe true in the very beginning, during the gold rush time of the app store. But not since then. In which category are there better iOS apps?
I researched iOS vs Android last year so some of my info may be out of date but this is what I collected.
Apple iOS exclusives (or earlier app versions because devs prioritized iOS):
ChatGPT iOS app -2 months before Android
Sora -2 months before 2025-11 Android
Bluesky iOS app -2 months before Android (February 2023 iOS invitation-only beta; April 2023, it was released for Android)
Blackmagic Design camera 2023-09-15 -9 months before Android 2024-06-24
Halide camera app https://old.reddit.com/r/ios/comments/17klq40/what_are_some_good_examples_of_iphoneexclusive/k7efznt/
Zoom F6 https://zoomcorp.com/en/us/software-product-page/software-sub-cat/F6-control-app/ https://apps.apple.com/us/app/f6-control/id1464118916
Godox Light https://www.diyphotography.net/godox-finally-launches-android-app-for-the-a1-but-only-for-some-phones/
ForeFlight Mobile https://support.foreflight.com/hc/en-us/articles/115004919307-Does-ForeFlight-Mobile-work-on-Android-devices https://old.reddit.com/r/flying/comments/1883eya/the_authoritative_answer_to_why_isnt_foreflight/
Adobe Fresco
Procreate
FlexRadio SmartSDR SSDR 2023-10-27T13:15:09+00:00 https://community.flexradio.com/discussion/8029186/smartsdr-for-android-device
Google Android app exclusives
TouchDRO for milling
Kodi media player
There really aren't many Android-only apps that's intended for direct consumer download from the Google Play Store. Instead, Android dominates in OEM use as "turnkey" and "embedded" base os as the GUI for their customized hardware devices:
Amazon Fire Stick, car infotainment, music workstations, sewing machine GUI, geology soil tester, etc
If it's a typical mainstream user (browser + Youtube/Tiktok + WhatsApp etc), they won't see any iOS ecosystem advantages over Android.
>Also Android has a bigger market share in the world than iOS, by a lot.
The tone of that seems like you thought I was taking the discussion into fanboy evangelism and therefore Android needed to be defended. That wasn't the intent and I already tried to downplay my comment by stating the iOS ecosystem specifics do not matter to 99% of mainstream users. Yes, everybody on HN already knows Android has a much bigger market share.
The point was simply to inform the gp asking the question about iOS that there are apps and niches he may not be aware of. Nobody's trying to convince any reader of switching to iOS or that "iOS is superior" ... or vice versa!
For one, I can actually use gesture controls without constantly triggering backswipes. Even something as droll and first party as Google Photos suffers this problem, where, say, cropping a photo and pulling too close from the screen edge will result in a backswipe detection instead.
Another example is Sonos, where the iOS app contains TruePlay to tune your speakers. They can do this because there is relatively few iPhone models (microphones). But this is a general, noticeable trend, where developers will add more / better / polished features to the iOS app.
The iOS YouTube app is not worse than the one in Android. Texting in iOS is arguably better or, at the very least, there is one more app to choose (Messages). And I’m curious to know what makes Antenna Pod so much better than the thousands of other podcast apps out there.
Social media apps have historically been worse in Android, because of lax app and privacy controls.
> What else is there, where is the advantage?
Personally, I’d rather not have Google buried deep inside all aspects of my phone.
> Texting in iOS is arguably better or, at the very least
Since some updates ago, my keyboard is still broken if I type too fast, and autocorrect been essentially broken for the same amount of time. Must be happening for ~years now, still waiting for a new update to finally fix it.
At least on Android you can change the keyboard to something else if you'd like, instead of being stuck with what your OS developer forces on you. Wish I had that option now.
The iOS version of most social media apps is better. IOS simply has better API integration to it's hardware, where with android, many OEMs (hell this was even the case to a certain extent with older pixel phones), do a number of things that make the hardware not as easily accessible as quickly from the OS API for said feature.
This is especially relevant for the camera, but also various other sensors and hardware modules that exist inside these phones.
That said, in recent years there are just a number of other areas that android is much better at such as deeper AI integration, which goes back to even prior to the current LLM craze.
iOS has less device models to target for. This makes it easier to support and deliver a more consistent experience, especially for gaming. I have also heard a few other points back in the day, but I am not sure how true they are now. One is that some social media apps might offer better quality in app camera experience. Another is that iOS userbase is more willing to spend money so devs are more likely to target iOS.
This is a really ideology driven push. I don't think you really think the iOS browsers are worse, there's just less choice, because they all fundamentally use WebKit. Having to use Chromium is a worse experience, and not being able to use Gecko under Firefox is not a clear upgrade - particularly as WebKit is so tightly integrated with the hardware, leading to less battery use. If you really don't like WebKit for whatever reason, I get it. But that's not worse.
Whenever there is an app with full feature parity (WhatsApp) you assume at best it can be equal, based on nothing. You have specific apps that work for you, and that's great, but my practical experience is much different: whenever I haven't had a choice in an app (think banking apps, carrier apps, local library apps, the Covid apps) the experience has been much better on Apple. Whenever there is a choice in apps, they're often cross-written in something that allows easy porting, and very similar, or the native Apple solution is much smoother. It's rare that an app just feels better on Android, and usually limited to cases where a specific app is only available on Android or, you know, Google.
As an Android power user (I’ve ran Lineage, Graphene, rooted with Magisk and passed safetynet) that’s moved to IOS this last month. My subjective opinion: app quality is the same.
Honestly, you’re so wrong about the app situation that it’s almost staggering. iOS apps tend to be more stable, better polished, have better integration with system features (like the Dynamic Island), and even often have more features. This isn’t even an unfounded opinion, it’s a material problem for Google and led them to vastly investing in automated testing and quality efforts
App addressable user base is another problem for Google, one that they have mentioned in developer conferences. It’s a big part of why they’ve been trying to ship a tablet and unify android and Chromebook. If Google isn’t careful they could find themselves in a downward spiral situation, stuck between apple on one side, and android forks on the other.
And the last answer is, as always, money
- browser is deemphasized on iOS, and so it’s weaker feature set matters less
- iOS is generally easier to develop for because of less device differentiation
- on average iOS has significantly wealthier users who tend to be higher return or paying customers (seriously, look it up). This in turn leads companies to invest more heavily in iOS.
- easier integration due to a narrow system services ecosystem (no Google vs Samsung slapfights)
- unified platform advantage (apps written for iOS easily port to the watch and tablet, unlocking larger markets, and justifying greater spend in developing apps)
- apples review process is significantly stricter (for better or for worse)
Yes, Apple doesn’t have something like fdroid, and that’s really disappointing and honestly a legitimate dealbreaker for a lot of people
> iOS apps tend to be more stable, better polished
It's been a while since I was last using Android, but first-party Apple apps no longer meet my standards for "polished".
e.g. type this sequence into the calculator:
[2] [-] [4] [=] [x²] [=]
The answer should not be negative, but the app says "-4".
The desktop Contacts app has been putting invisible LTR and RTL codes around phone numbers for years now, breaking web forms when auto-entered. The mobile version refreshes specific contacts several times in a row to add no new content, preventing copy from working while it does so.
The MacOS Safari translation button appears on the left of the omni-bar, until you click it, at which point it instantly moves to the right and your click turns out to have been on the button that the left-side translation button had hidden. Deleting a selection of items from browsing history is limited to about 5 items per second, as it deletes one then rebuilds the entire list before deleting the next.
If I'm listening to a podcast on headpones and an alarm goes off, it doesn't play the alarm through my headphones, it plays on device speakers only.
Podcast app's "Up Next" is a magical mystery list that can't be disabled or guided.
The "Do Not Disturb" mode can be activated unexpectedly, leading to missed calls, and cannot be deleted.
Localisation is inconsistent at every level, including system share sheet and behaviour of decimal separators.
I could go on, but you get the point. Apple's quality control just isn't visible in the software at this point.
> browser is deemphasized on iOS, and so it’s weaker feature set matters less
That's precisely the OP's point. They gimped their browser so there's bigger incentive to use their proprietary system frameworks.
> iOS is generally easier to develop for because of less device differentiation
That's nonsense. What year are you from? I've heard this like 10 years ago when there only 1 or 2 current iPhone models in circulation.
> on average iOS has significantly wealthier users who tend to be higher return or paying customers (seriously, look it up). This in turn leads companies to invest more heavily in iOS.
If you offer subscription service, like Netflix/HBO/Nest or whatever, your main goal is volume, not how wealthy your demographic is.
> easier integration due to a narrow system services ecosystem (no Google vs Samsung slapfights)
Easier integration with what?
> unified platform advantage (apps written for iOS easily port to the watch and tablet, unlocking larger markets, and justifying greater spend in developing apps)
That's like Android's moat from the start, not bolted on during some 10+ major versions like on iOS. And it works much better, Android apps are truly the same apps. Not gimped, cut off things like Instagram on iOS (is it even fixed now?).
> apples review process is significantly stricter (for better or for worse)
Both are shit these days due to volume of shovelware produced.
Re: iOS apps being easier to develop: device sizes are the minuscule of the problem.
The real problem is that Android vendors mess up with the OS in weird ways by adding custom ultra battery savers, removing APIs etc. which is much less predictable than dealing with a few Apple devices, that are more homogenous.
Then many vendors ship their own apps which are buggy and you need to know that vendor's Z Calendar app has a weird bug to account for.
FWIW, starting a sentence with "Honestly ..." always makes me think the rest of what this person has to say is dishonest.
Your BIO on HN is:
> I HAVEN'T SHOWERED AT ALL! THAT'S WHY I REEK! WORKING IN FINTECH! AIN'T SHAVED IN WEEKS! POUR CRUMBS FROM MY KEYBOARD! THAT'S WHAT I EAT! WROTE A CURRENCY LIBRARY! 3RD TIME THIS WEEK! LURKING HN! I PREFER /b/! IN MOM'S BASEMENT! I'M THIRTY THREE! IT'S 3'O'CLOCK AM! THAT'S WHEN I SLEEP! AH!!!! COME ON FUCK A GUY!!!!
"Honestly" is a colloquialism used to indicate disbelief with the previous statement or to preface candidness. Choosing to interpret the colloquial use of "honestly" as an indication that everything else that person says is dishonest is a very weird trait I've only seen show up in grammarian literalists and pedants that only makes yourself seem like a disingenuous person.
For context, I'm a long-time iPhone user, who switched to a Pixel 8a about 18 months ago.
> Apple has had better mobile hardware for years.
I can't say I noticed a difference in quality when switching. Maybe some people can, but for me it was just a different, but still well-made phone.
> Apple has higher consumer trust.
I can't speak for consumers in general, but this is certainly no longer the case for me.
I also used MacOS for 20 years, and switched to Linux about a year ago because I didn't like the direction Apple was headed. It may be my choice of reading material (HN), but I receive almost daily confirmation that this was a sound decision.
> Apple has better app selection (for most people).
Not selection, necessarily, but certainly quality.
As a side note, my iPad (my sole remaining Apple device) quietly updated to iOS 26 a few days ago. Despite having spent months reading about how bad it is, I was still genuinely shocked.
Again, I can't speak for "consumers", but for me Apple now has a far worse user experience.
""Apple has better app selection (for most people). Apple has been increasingly implementing the core features that differentiate Android devices, like USB-C and RCS.""
You mean Apple has been forced by regulators to implement core features like USB-C and RCS?
Sure, but uninformed consumers won't see it that way. Maybe in their circles it just sounds like a great idea and they thank Apple for implementing it.
Saying they were forced to implement USB-C is really overstating things. Apple loooved USB-C - so much so that their ill-fated butterfly switch laptops went all-in on it. They also helped design it. It's highly likely they were planning a move to USB-C anyway and the EU just pushed it forward a year.
Why the surprise, they do the same with search, they do the same with their Google workspace (the degree to which they are pushing AI is really hurting the product).
Google stopped being aware of their customer's needs a really long time ago, they are so arrogant they think the audience is now fully captive.
Which is still a valid argument, the number is just lower. And the UX on these sub 600 devices have definitely gotten worse over the last 5 years too... Likely because Google isn't really targeting that price point anymore, so Android isn't getting enough optimization to be viable on underpowered devices.
This market still exists and is pretty strong, especially outside of US. It's all on Android so Google doesn't need to try to compete here.
This is why with Pixel they're focusing on competing with the iPhone, they want people to use Android so there is no point in competing with other Android manufacturer.
The chinese are mostly adding skins on top, not developing the core of the operating system.
There is however a chinese fork of android (state sponsored), but it has not gotten wide market adoption in china either to my knowledge, but i dont live in china so i'm open to be corrected.
Finally, even if that OS has gotten widely adopted in china - it IS a fork. the changes are not being upstreamed to android, hence irrelevant to the discussion on this forum.
I'm talking about the Google services which is where Google profits. Chinese phones ship without them. When I said "Google's Android", I meant Android+Google Services. The people buying cheap Android phones are most likely not buying Pixels. Even Samsungs aren't exactly cheap anymore. I'm not talking about Android forks. I'm talking about customized Android without Google services.
The biggest Android market (internationally) are Chinese phones. If Google suddenly decided Play Store should be the only way to install apps, that doesn't affect Huawei and Xiaomi phones at all, they don't ship with Play Store and Play Services in the first place.
That's false. The ones you can get here in Slovenia don't have them. I've personally helped quite a few friends sideload them. I also remember how shocked people were to find out there's no YouTube or Play Store after buying a Huawei or Xiaomi phone when that first came into effect.
the audience is captive. Do you have a choice to move from android, if you didnt want to have an apple device? Do you want to use a different search engine other than google? Is there another email provider than gmail (for the non-technical person - i know you can run your own). Is there another browser other than chrome (and dont say firefox or edge - because both don't compete)?
Google behave in ways that they think makes them more profit. When users cannot migrate (nor even threaten to), then it simply means they can do this.
Why are saying that Firefox or even Chrome reskin can't compete with Chrome? I haven't been using Chrome for maybe 10 years or more, so I'm genuinely interested. Even if you hate Firefox, something like Brave is felt the same way but without google's garbage. I heard there are new guys in town like Helium and other Chromium based browser which choose to remove telemetry, support manifest v2, adblocks and so on.
The browsing experience without constant upselling some trash and proper adblockers are magnitudes better.
I'd agree if you picked Google Docs or something like that, but Gmail? Chrome?? Come on! Edge is just Chrome with extra features, plenty of people use Bing without even noticing and many even non-techy people are fine with DuckDuckGo, good free email providers are everywhere (yahoo, hotmail, proton...).
> Do you have a choice to move from android, if you didnt want to have an apple device?
Not wanting and not having a choice are two different things.
> Do you want to use a different search engine other than google? Is there another email provider than gmail (for the non-technical person - i know you can run your own)
My wife uses ddg and outlook, she's non-technical. I convinced her to use ddg but she's always used outlook/hotmail.
> Not wanting and not having a choice are two different things.
As a general statement, sure. But if we are talking about mobile phones this is a very privileged and unrealistic point of view.
According to chatgpt, 70-80% of mobile phone sold worldwide every year cost less than the cheaper iPhone.
Some people could probably stretch their budget and get the cheapest iPhone, but otherwise it seems safe to conclude that more than 50% of people simply have no choice.
the move don't have to be permanent, there are alternatives and as we increase our usage and give active feedback and commit to invest even little money in them, they will improve too. I've seen this pattern a thousand times the monopoly gets worst and worst until a revolutionary new tech will rise it applies to social concepts, business sectors, companies, mother-in-laws, etc.
In Chrome on Android (and yeah, on desktop too) you just go into "Settings" and change your default search engine. I can choose between Google, Yahoo!, Bing, Yandex, or DuckDuckGo.
There are also custom searches through Wikipedia and other resources. You can use little shortcuts to get to almost any custom search you set up in advance.
This has been configurable by the user for a long, long, long time. This is not a surprise or a concession. This is built-in stuff by Google for Chrome. (Edge too, of course.)
Changing your browser, you can do, but it won't be comfortable. I have Edge installed on my Android, but it is not possible to run natively on Chromebook and the Android emulation is bad. I will not set Edge to my Default Browser because it messes things up. It is not a great experience to change your Default Browser on Android. I just go with Chrome and use Edge for specific tasks and topics.
You can set up all kinds of email services in the Gmail app, or you can install a native app. I use Outlook in both of those ways, and it's fine.
There are lots of non-technical users who navigate purely by doing a "google search" on whatever domain they're aiming for, too. Nobody said they were efficient about it.
> Do you want to use a different search engine other than google?
I've been on Kimi now for 3 months. I rarely used Google in that time. Kimi is largely free though sometimes when I run of the free quota I fallback to DeepSeek/Perplexity. I have no idea where they are getting their index from though.
> Is there another email provider than gmail (for the non-technical person - i know you can run your own).
There is microsoft/apple/yahoo mailboxes. However, I think most people should pay for their email especially that it's cheap and also critical (2FA).
> Is there another browser other than chrome (and dont say firefox or edge - because both don't compete)?
Firefox is a solid fallback and also webkit (Apple) is now basically a different browser (ported to Linux on GNOME Web). Not the best situation though it could be worse (given Firefox situation).
For me personally, the only two things I still use Google for are chromium and maps. I am unlikely to move from Chromium anytime soon but might consider alternative for maps (though might still need maps for reviews/photos/street view).
I am the most bullish I've ever been on Google losing its monopoly especially after they botched AI and hyper-scaling.
Once an alternative to one of their things, like immich, becomes viable, people run as fast as they can.
The strategy of doing everything you can to make sure your customers truly and utterly despise you and want to spit in your face is probably not productive.
Google's AI in their docs suite is so bafflingly bad. I wanted their AI to automate a sheet for me and it just choked. I switched to Claude for making a sheet that I ended up hosting in my local NAS using Microsoft Excel format.
Embedded AIs always suck. It's a dead end, long-term. By its nature, AI subsumed software products, reducing them to tool calls for general-purpose AI runtime.
> Google stopped being aware of their customer's needs a really long time ago
Google's customers are advertisers. They cater to that segment very well. They only need to attract users with "free" and cheap services so that advertisers think their campaigns are reaching enough eyeballs. Whether or not that's the case, and whether or not the end user has a good experience, is hardly relevant.
Apple only implemented USB-C due to pressure from the EU.
One area Android has a clear advantage is Android TV devices verified by Google, because there is a much wider array of streaming apps of all kinds available. However google doesn’t seem to focus on this very much, and if you look for forum recommendations for google android streaming devices it’s very often the NVIDIA shield pro from 2019. Hopefully that device will I’ll be supported for a few more years because there seems to not be good easily available alternatives.
> Surely the marginal revenue from the inconsequential number of sideloading users isn't attractive enough to justify that kind of strategic blunder.
If the rumors are true that the whole anti-sideloading thing is mostly because some governments complained, it might not have to do with a business strategy at all.
Why not limit these restrictions to these specific locations? Surely there's already lots of location-specific and carrier-specific customizations like shutter sound in Japan, different radio frequencies and many more. It still sucks for those who live in these countries, but at least they know who to point their finger at.
I'm similarly baffled for the reasons you state but your breakdown of the market differentiations is a little hyperbolic.
> Apple has had better mobile hardware for years
Apple has never had better hardware (on mobile). Apple has had better software support & integration for their hardware that has lead to e.g. strong camera quality advantages (iOS camera app has been able to use the hardware better to produce photos people want despite some Android OEMs having objectively better camera modules since those OEMs have to work through a lot of Google contracts & software extraction).
The hardware has never been better - their holistic ecosystem has just made integrations with it smoother.
> Apple has better app selection (for most people)
This has been true but it's always been marginal, & the "for most people" qualifier has contracted significantly in recent years. Both Google's & Apple's 1P offerings have declined in quality & popularity, but Google have increased lock-in & reliance on theirs in ways Apple can't, while the 3P offerings on Android have improved significantly relative to iOS. Gone are the days of companies releasing exclusively on iOS, or the Android version being an afterthought with missing features - if anything it's swung in the other direction.
To be clear, I think your points still stand: Google's recent strategy doesn't make sense for Google. I just don't think it's as glaringly clear cut as you make out.
One aspect that's worth keeping in mind is the non-US market. Apple has a 58% market share in the US but it's 28% worldwide. Outside of the US market the impact of that "every Android user lost to the increasing iOS market share" is significantly diluted (tbh I'm not sure it's even increasing outside of the US at all) & emerging markets are growth areas.
This is just straight up false. Qualcomm's current top of the line processors are about 3 years behind what you can get in Apple's cheapest product (that being the 16e), and the budget phones (and by "budget" I mean "the 600 dollar ones") are another 3 years behind that.
iPhones don't generally become too slow to realistically use until their support lifetime expires. Androids are like that out of the box unless you spend over a thousand dollars, and those only last for about half the time (a combination of inferior hardware and inferior software). It doesn't matter if you have a 120Hz screen if the UI only updates at 20.
This is why the only killer feature for Android (outside the cameras) is adblocking- which, of course, is what Google wants to prevent. They don't want you to run real Firefox (with the only effective adblock remaining), and they want you to pay for YouTube Premium rather than using NewPipe (or some other ReVanced successor) so you can't get out of paying 10 bucks to listen to a video with the screen off.
Because antitrust laws are strong in a few countries. While most of the 2nd or 3rd world antitrust laws are non existent. Google's strategy is to squeeze those markets. They have higher population too and hence many more advertising to sell and much more control of the "online experience" in those countries.
It’s incredibly sad to watch Google abandon the values that inspired so much trust and belief that there is a better way to build a company.
Long time Pixel user here who has always believed the story that Apple has the closed, but refined, higher quality experience and Google has the slightly freer, but coarser UX.
I was convinced to make the switch this year and the Apple iPhone 17 Pro + whatever iOS version is, by far the worst phone I’ve ever owned.
Photos are worse, low light is worse, macros are worse, the UI is laggy, buggy and crashes.
The keyboard and autosuggest is shockingly bad.
Incredibly popular apps on iOS (YT, X, etc) are just as bad and often worse.
iMessage is a psyop. The absolute worst messaging app in history with zero desktop access for non-Mac users?!
If you’re on Android, and especially pixel, please know that Apple has completely given up and no longer executes at the level you remember from 10-15 years ago.
The whole software world is shit now. The foundations were stable decades ago. Like Windows kernel, WinAPI, .NET, WPF, Linux kernel. But end user software is so terrible. Windows 11 with ads and unhelpful AI. macOS which is a bit less terrible, but still too bloated. Linux with its eternal changes between X, Wayland, Alsa, Pipewire, Pulseaudio, sysvinit, systemd, and endless choices. Both iOS and Android are terrible. iOS was perfect 10 years ago, it's absolute clownfest now. I would blame AI vibe coders, but it started before. I don't know who to blame. Why can't we just build solid minimal non-bloated OS that will last for decades without major rewrites. We've got so good foundations but so terrible end product.
Well you misunderstand enshittification. It will never get better again. Both Google and Apple have enshittified their phones. You can verify this on the App Store, on the Play Store, both of which have now more than 50% of search result screen space dedicated to ads, more when it comes to scams [1]. AND you can verify this in the financial statements of Apple and Google, where you see what we've always seen in Google: steadily increasing at a fixed rate profits from ads on the play store in Google's case, and steadily increasing at a fixed rate profits from "Services", which is App Store ads.
In Apple's case this has been the only Apple business to grow at all in several of the recent years. In fact there's quite a few Apple businesses that look like they are "revenue neutral", most famously iPads. Google is better, but not by much. Cloud is growing fast ("but why?" is a question that's unanswered. I mean, "because of AI", of course, but ... seriously?)
So not only are they enshittified, and you see them getting worse and worse over time, but the financial statements show: if you're expecting this to get any better either in the Apple or Google case, you're insane. Because clearly ads for scams are worth it for advertisers, and most other types of ads are not worth it. The situation evolves more and more towards the cable channel situation of 20 years back.
You could also reverse the view. The simple question: "are people willing to compromise on hardware quality to get less ads?" has a very clear NO answer. "Are governments/institutions that are totally dependent on these systems willing to pay to either improve phones or make an alternative available?", again has boatloads of evidence that the answer is NO, in all caps.
[1] Search for "credit card" or "lose weight" and judge for yourself. Top results are promoting Apple or Google themselves, everything else are ads, and very bad deals that trivially will neither accomplish the promised financial independence nor weight loss. Or should I put it like this: the credit card deals advertised are so bad they might achieve weight loss. By the way ads designed to mislead, which the top ads for either search obviously are, are what both Google and Apple promised time and again never to do.
I have a feeling, despite Google's communications, this is all an attempt to thwart the numerous ad-free YouTube apps.
Another reason it should have been broken apart years ago. It's laughable that the biggest ad company in the world owns the largest video site in the world, largest browser in the world, largest search engine in the world, and largest mobile OS in the world.
NewPipe (FOSS available on F-Droid) is nice alternative to ads-infested YouTube. I disabled YouTube and YouTube Music apps on my mobile, and I use NewPipe instead. You can even download YT videos or audio from YT videos using it.
I will be downvoted, but I'm not fooling myself. I don't care. As long as uBlock and yt-dlp still work, I'll use them. If Google breaks them, I'll resort to some automated screengrabbing + maybe some AI automation to click "skip" in a virtual machine or something.
People will use all sorts of excuses, like the ads are about gambling, or contain viruses, or are detrimental to mental health, or whatever. No, don't use these excuses. You just don't want ads, and it is still possible to not see them. That's respectable.
Google pays content creators so little they have all started including ads in their videos. Si technically as long as you are counted they get paid. Meanwhile, Google is more and more aggressive with their own ads interrupting videos and pushing you to subscribe to their expensive offer.
Some people, like me, have just stopped watching YouTube. Other are turning to blocking ads.
It's the usual tug of war between revenues and UX but I don't think consumers have to feel bad about not playing by Google's rules.
What's going on with NewPipe? Their F-droid repository is down. Their domain is down. Their github repository is up, but it links to their domain, which isn't. Are they dying?
That website will have an IP address and a registered owner. Taking down piracy websites is routine for governments, server providers, and domain registrars now, and they don't care whether the site is actually illegal. You can only get away with this long-term if the site is hosted in Russia, but Russia is sanctioned so how will you pay them?
Eh, somehow The Pirate Bay, Fitgirl Repacks, Anna's Archive, Sci-Hub etc seem to manage it.
The real challenge is delivering good enough performance that your site is better than waiting through 30 seconds of ads; and making it worth your time to run the site: there's hassle, legal risk, and it's not like you can run ads to make some cash.
Their strategy is growing markets, especially in india, and africa, and of course China. It's where the chinese oem dominate. Beside chinese OEM, i think the only other player is Samsung. So google strategy seems to be to circumvent people from misusing their OS by blocking certain services (mainly ads). This is done via apps from fdroid, and rooting and what not. If google can control how people uses their devices (block vpn based adblocking, or rooting all together), they have better grip on the market. At the end of the day, Android is front for an ad platform.
> [Google's] strategy is growing markets, especially in india, and africa, and of course China.
Really? China? Where Google services are banned and Android phones come with local OS versions that cut them out? "High-friction sideloading" won't affect anyone in China. It won't be part of their experience at all.
I think OP is suggesting that the ability to sideload is what is preventing their phones being distributed in China.
If you can present a "locked down" phone to regulators, you might be more likely to get permission to sell large volumes of them - like iPhones in China.
But there still won't be Google Services so what extra money is Google to make there? The markup on hardware. But they have to compete with local manufacturers with the very same OS. At least Apple is the only manufacturer selling phones with iOS.
Except only a few countries in the world have wages where their citizens can afford Apple.
While I can afford Apple, out of principle I am not buying anything above 300 euros, that requires me to also buy another computer for hobby coding, and a dev license.
All my use of Apple hardware is via projects where pool devices are assigned to the delivery team.
Mobile providers usually offer loans ("service contracts") where people get phones outside their financial standing (I regularly see high end iPhones and foldable phones of €1-2k run by people in a country where average monthly salary is less than €1k): if a highly visible device like your phone can be had for 10% of your monthly salary, people will, unfortunately, opt for it.
I tend to not use Apple not due to cost (I honestly believe it's OK to pay a premium for quality; I might disagree they offer it today though, as I do use a couple of their devices at work), but because of how closed their ecosystem is (and yes, all my personal devices are running some sort of Linux, and Android phones are rooted and with bootloader unlocked).
In my country, for example, buying phones from carriers as part of your plan just isn't a thing. As in, you couldn't do it even if you wanted to. Same for postpaid plans and contracts.
As a result, quite a lot of people use the "I can't believe they could make and sell an entire phone at this price" Xiaomi and similar phones.
Well no, Chinese phones are above Apple material-wise (better battery, better cameras, better cooling) and on par SoC-wise since last year. That's what makes Google's strategy so baffling.
> Apple has better app selection (for most people).
It's entirely the same. I have gone back and forth regularly for the past 10 years. Android is completely on par app-wise. Apple has the iMessage lock-in in the US obviously but not in the rest of the world. Apple might have a slight advantage on the pro segment with the iPad but I don't think it has a huge impact on phones.
The really baffling thing to me is that while they lock down Android, they pay to put Gemini on iOS. Google has a real competitive advantage with IA and they just gave it to Apple.
It's clear to me that they are two companies fighting each other inside Google: the ex-Motorola who wants to be Apple and the service side who wants to be Microsoft.
I personally fear that they are making the bed of the regulators who will probably come for Play Protect at some point to open the door for alternative OS providers at least in Europe. But maybe they think it's coming anyway and are strengthening their position and trying to milk what they can in the meantime.
Both Qualcomm and Mediatek have caught up on the phone SoC market.
The Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 has a better CPU than the A19 Pro but a slightly worse GPU. Apple has a very slight advantage in watt usage but that's more than offset by the battery gap. Same thing with the Dimensity 9500.
Are you joking? Look at the latest Xiaomi, Oppo and other Chinese manufacturers, Apple would love to have the hardware they are shipping right now. From batteries to cameras and screens, apple is way behind on hardware tech. Yeah they are better than Samsung - but Samsung has also massively fallen behind what's the state of the art.
>>is another customer Google has to pay exorbitant fees to a competitor to access.
Last time I checked, it's apple paying Google, billions of dollars a year? And it will be even more now that Apple announced they are going to use Gemini as their AI base model.
> Last time I checked, it's apple paying Google, billions of dollars a year?
You checked wrong. Google pays Apple on the order of $20 billion to be the default search on iOS - this is so significant it accounts for ~5% of Apple's annual revenue
> Look at the latest Xiaomi, Oppo and other Chinese manufacturers, Apple would love to have the hardware they are shipping right now.
If any of these manufacturers decide to include an EMR pen in the body of the phone, like Samsung's S-Pen, they'll have me as a customer. The S-Pen so completely changes the experience that I am unwilling to go back.
> Look at the latest Xiaomi, Oppo and other Chinese manufacturers, Apple would love to have the hardware they are shipping right now.
This is true, but their phones don't ship with Google services out of box (at least the last time I checked). So in reality, "Google's Android" is really mostly Samsungs and Pixels.
They don't in the EU. Not in Slovenia, so not the entire EU. I've seen it first hand. It's also not some special law that we'd have invented here so I'm pretty sure there are other EU countries where it's the same.
Thinking Apple hardware is better is utterly laughable when you look at non-US Android devices.
Much better camera sensors, much better silicon carbon batteries etc in Oppo, Vivo, Honor and Xiaomi devices than anything Apple produces. Form factors Apple still hasn't figured out, such as 7th gen Foldables, Flip foldable phones etc, Camera zoom lenses that can be attached...
I take the opportunity to let people know that there are alternatives to Google/Apple duopoly on mobile. Link: https://www.ubuntu-touch.io/
Sure, GrapheneOS is often suggested but Ubuntu Touch is a really interesting alternative, their own store and ecosystem.
The community is amazing and welcoming. If there are Android apps which you can't do without, they can be emulated and used anyway. Imagine switching to Linux and then using Wine for the apps you really still need.
Yes, it's not perfect but Linux isn't either. If you think you're sufficiently tech savvy and want to make a change, give Ubuntu Touch a try. Find a cheap second hand supported device and play around, make some fun apps. (devices currently supported: https://devices.ubuntu-touch.io/ )
To me it's like being back when there was only Windows and Macs as viable home computer OS, and people were getting their feet wet with Linux and all its flavours. Now, it's the same but for mobile.
Ubuntu Touch has amazing UX, IMO. Sadly it's been non-viable for practically forever, and is non-viable today unless you want to use a 7-year-old out-of-production device. It's practically abandonware with a few hobby maintainers at this point, as much as it had potential compared to other alternatives.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I suppose emulating Android apps on a non-Android system will have the same problem as trying to run them in an Android without Google Services or in a rooted phone, i.e., banking (and similar) apps detecting it and refusing to run?
Were it not for that, I would never have stopped using Huawei, IMO the best phone brand by a mile. But I'm too busy a person to depend on hacks and having to regularly find new workarounds to access my banks.
I think you're right about certain apps refusing to run in an emulated environment.
I'm beginning to think we need to consider such apps, and the hardware they run on, as the outsiders. Keep a cheap "normal" Android phone for those apps, and those apps alone. Then keep a "real" second device for everything else. Up to you which one gets the SIM card and provides connectivity for the other (and ordinary phone services).
I'd rather go back to old-fashioned hardware dongles from banks – but hey, lacking that, maybe I'll just think of the first of those two devices as a clunky, overly expensive one of those.
Ubuntu Touch so far has the best hardware compatibility for things like camera and battery life. But it also insists on doing a lot of its own thing like using Mir instead of X and click packages. Running programs inside Libertine often crashes for me and is cumbersome. It makes developing for it harder. clickable needs Docker installed just so you can build and run your own apps on the device! Instead of letting you launch things quickly from terminal.
It make some things that should be easy on Linux harder. I.e., there's no Firefox + mobile tweaks like other linux mobile OSes, in part because it wants you to use Morphic.
But other linux mobile OSes dropped support for Halium/libhybris and even the very few that still have it don't seem to match Ubuntu Touch's level of hardware support.
Thank you for the much needed hopeful note. Maybe I'll try doing exactly that, sounds like a fun hobby. My biggest worry about Linux on mobile is that banking apps will stubbornly refuse to offer support to these platforms, basically forever.
I would like to see a high friction flow for installing all the crap from the Play Store to "protect and educate users". "Are you sure you want to install this app? It's only got a score of 2.8 and only 7 reviews, and will ask for all of these permissions?"
I want even worse restrictions on my parent phone so they dont install spyware. I want "install ONLY from fdroid". I trust their one server in a basement more than Google at this point.
Even if it has 4.8 and 7000 reviews it's often fake 4.8 because the reviews are botted / paid / dark patterned (e.g. when you pop up star rating on your users and beg them "rate the app plz" and when the users tap anything but 5 stars you say "k, ty" and keep those "bad" reviews for yourself)
That was just an example to communicate my idea: a better way to validate authenticity of the app could and should be used.
But to your point specifically, Play store and App Store have APIs to rate from within the app: when the pop up shows, app author does not have an option to avoid getting a 1-star rating (they are also time-restricted, eg. at most once every 180 days for Apple IIRC).
What devs do though, is to preempt it with "Are you enjoying our app?", and only giving you a formal rating pop-up if you answer "Yes".
The hilarious part in all of this is watching Epic Games sue Google over how bad the "high friction" flow was for them to sideload their hefty bundle of Google Play violations and win the rights to be back in the Play Store.
It's OK now that Epic can have a one-click download for Fortnite to shove all the friction back into the sideloading experience.
It looks like there is an astroturf brigade to parrot a blog post from F-Droid last October. Everyone is jumping on this bandwagon now, to pooh-pooh a perfectly cromulent term of art.
Because when you install software that isn't from the app store, it's unvetted and untrusted.
There is a whole different structure of trust when you download and install an app from your provider's app store.
No, it's not perfect. No, it won't prevent malware or scams. But there is trust, and there is a vetting process, and there are automatic updates and in-app purchases and the other perks that you get with an integrated app store.
Sideloading, or "simply installing" from an APK, is a different procedure that involves mostly disabling the trust and certification features that your app store was providing. I have never needed to do this for any app on any Android device, and I've owned them since KitKat.
In fact, I will probably enable S-mode on my next Windows machine, because it's that easy to just avoid 3rd party apps and crapware.
So I don't know why people want to muddy the waters. You literally want to stamp out a differentiating term "because it's scary". Is that not censorship? Are you opposing freedom of speech now? Don't users and vendors have a right to call a thing what it is, or use different terms for different procedures?
It seems absolutely nuts to try and censor this word, because y'all believe it was foisted on you by "lawmakers". That's nuts.
You're infantilising the users. It's untrusted by Google, but it's trusted by myself. I actually trust the Termux and Kodi devs way more than Google, yet they Google has been blocking their updates.
Note that the term sideloading is exclusively used by mobile OSes. On Windows MacOS and Linux you can install anything.
What I'm talking about is actual trust. Like, there are cryptographic measures taken, certificates involved, code signing, that kind of thing.
You claim that you "can install anything" on Windows, but that is simply false. The system's Driver Signature Enforcement will prohibit the install of unsigned or invalid signatures on device drivers. Windows SmartScreen will also give you trouble by blocking unsigned apps.
So yeah, you can bypass these protective measures and "install whatever you want" ultimately, but it is basically the same process as sideloading on Android, isn't it? Disabling a bunch of protections that are there for your safety?
Your trust, honestly, doesn't mean jack shit. There is cryptographic signing, and certificate authorities, and processes to approve the certificates that authorized developers use. You don't got jack shit with your "trust" of Termux and Kodi. It means nothing to the end-user.
We do not work in "trust me bro" territory when it comes to signing software, anymore. I am sorry/not-sorry to say. It is very important to have a chain of trust that goes up somewhere above "goldenarm @ HN".
Cryptographic trust is a different thing than actual trust. The latter is what makes the world work, the former is a tool people occasionally confuse for the real thing, but actually is mostly opposite to it.
Look we are talking about computers here. Computers don't understand or exercise actual trust as you describe it. Actual trust doesn't make computers work at all, because it doesn't exist in their world. So you need a proxy for it.
The security vetting, the authentication, the scans that are done, whether by Google Play or by F-Droid, are a process that tries to eliminate egregious abuses and basically curate the collection so that the users have something to actually trust. Now you understand that actual trust comes in degrees, right? I don't trust everything on Play equally. There are plenty of different types of trust relationships between me and the Play Store and the devs who put their apps on it.
But cryptographically, cybersecurity-wise, we need that CIA triad, and we need to authenticate that developers are who they say they are. And that authentication is the crux of cryptographic code signing. That we can trust that updates came from the source, and not a 3rd party injection or supply-chain attack. If Google or F-Droid countersigns it, then it's been through their vetting process as well. That's how cryptographic signing establishes trust relationships for computers.
If your computer doesn't trust an app or a driver, it won't download, install or run it. Since you cannot teach a computer "actual trust" there must be an analogue to this. And it's working fine. I don't know what you're on about "opposite to actual trust". If you don't trust Google Play, that's a you problem.
The inconvenient fact that bursts this bubble is that installing already is the default term, and it's the emergence of "side loading" which is the anachronistic attempt to redefine the term.
The idea that a precondition for something to count is installing is that it's vetted by a big company is the abberation, and the notion that it's trustworthy is belied by the avalanche of unsafe and privacy violating apps that find their way into the store. F-Droid apps are actually more carefully vetted than Play Store apps, so there goes the trust rationale.
So, in terms of "trustworthiness" and "vetted by a big company"... oooOOOoooOOooo F-Droid isn't so big, but they are still needed to vet the apps that you get there?
F-Droid has their own vetting process, and their own assurance against malware, and a "stringent auditing process", so basically, they seem to be doing all the things that the Play Store does, but more strictly, and perhaps safer for people, and a panacea of open-source for everything.
So using F-Droid is not actually "sideloading" even though you got to bootstrap it a bit that way. In fact, the word "sideload" is not even found in its Wikipedia article.
It is, simply, an alternative app store. So if you trust F-Droid more than Play, that's fine, but don't pretend that there is no code signing, no vetting, or that you can "install whatever the hell you want" with F-Droid, because you can't: they won't let you, either.
So it seems that you are muddying the waters and obscuring how F-Droid actually works. Isn't that quite precious of you.
Look at everyone becoming a prescriptive grammarian all of a sudden! Yes, my friends: this is what censorship looks like.
Like, I have no idea why "sideloading" is supposed to be scary. It's not a scary term to me. Because it simply means data transfer. It's no more scary than "uploading" or "downloading" really. I mean perhaps "torrenting" is a little scarier? I don't know. I am not a torrenter.
But really it should imply some friction and some barriers. Because it involves breaking the trust model. You're not jailbreaking your phone but you're setting up something that's inherently less than secure. People should be aware of that.
It is not infantilising users; it is educating and empowering them to know the difference. Is user awareness and preparedness a problem for y'all?
The uneducated one here is the one who appears unaware that "installing software" was a thing long before app stores. Security is irrelevant to the meaning of the word, so continuing to go on about it only further devalues your point and does nothing to counter the OP's point.
So if you want to have a conversation about trusting curl and bash and random gists...
Like I said, I installed software in many ways back in the day. I typed it in; I loaded off cassette tape; I loaded off disk. One common denominator was loading from trusted sources. My Atari cartridges were store-bought and not homebrew. I went to B.Dalton mostly for the software, and got it shrinkwrapped from the publisher.
I had a number of classmates and colleagues who caught viruses and malware from loading and installing cracked software or untrusted programs... or even alleged porn, from shady sources. This is still a good way to get infected.
When I get on a friend's computer, I often have occasion to congratulate them for being uninfected, and it's nearly always because they "practiced good hygiene" in terms of loading only trusted software from trusted sources.
So you're correct, in that really nothing has changed. Back in 1983 you could certainly "sideload" crap from a pirate BBS and then suffer the consequences. And we all had choice words for people like that.
If the make sideloading high-friction, either via account-bound or apk upload or permissions from MNO/ISP, I will leave android. I have a bunch of my own apps that only I use, not released to the public, if I cannot use them, I have zero reason to stay on android.
I think one of the reasons they want to lockdown the system is to prevent guys like me from locking THEM out of my home/ecosystems, as and example, I build my own launchers, specifically for TCL TV's, which runs Android TV and has Developer Mode + adb. Which means I remove all the bloat & ad garbage, which they want to prevent.
We will get to the point where google will remove your ability to set custom dns servers and only use theirs.. just wait & see friends.
Anywhoo, when this side loading fence materializes, I will jump ship to apple.
Why jump to another abuser when you could seriously start looking into alternatives? Ubuntu Touch has a really active community and it's very stable, you can even emulate android apps which you might absolutely need.
I don't see Apple as the obvious next step; the obvious step, when one is pissed off with abuse of power is open source, not Apple.
Saying 'don't use those things' is not a viable solution. It's like when I was trying to move to linux a couple years ago I asked for help getting HiDPI/scaling to work and there were many responses saying 'who needs that?'
There are five options in my country, 3 of which require app push based 2FA to log into the web interface and 2 of which only have an app interfere.
Maybe I could get a EU bank from another EU country but my employer will not accept an out of country account for salary deposits because it makes their tax life difficult and my mortgage provider doesn't trust foreign accounts either.
> It's called a debit/credit card
Since about two years ago, activating a card requires the app.
> Maybe I could get a EU bank from another EU country but my employer will not accept an out of country account for salary deposits because it makes their tax life difficult and my mortgage provider doesn't trust foreign accounts either.
I do not doubt this is happening, but it is forbidden under SEPA. All IBANs, no matter from which member country, must be treated equally. Unfortunately, "IBAN discrimination" happens quite frequently still. The European commission recommends filing a complaint with your national governing body.
so Eire has 5 significant banks, and 15 'less significant'. There are also 276 Credit Unions, I don't know if they are useful. (I had a Credit Union account in the past, could send/receive online but no payment card)
(I don't know their suitability, but there are more than 5 options in your country)
Of the "significant banks" listed, only AIB and Bank of Ireland do consumer bank accounts. I suspect the presence of the others is more to do with wanting an EU entity for targeting larger EU markets than the Irish domestic market. For example, Citibank only expanded from "large tech multinationals" to also "mid sized businesses that are planning to scale internationally" in 2023 [1]
Also on that Wikipedia page are Dell's private bank, Danske Bank (closed their Irish retail business in 2013), Klarna (sort of banking-adjacent, but they're not giving you a current account), etc.
The 5 banks offering retail consumer accounts nationwide are AIB, permanent TSB, Bank of Ireland, Revolut and N26. The first 3 are the surviving brick and mortar banks and the latter 2 are recent-ish neobank entries.
Credit unions are limited to serving customers in their local area. The one credit union who's catchment area I'm in also requires app based 2FA.
(Side note: The name of the country in English is Ireland, the name in Irish is Éire - using the accent-less Irish name in English was promoted by the UK government and BBC because they didn't want to recognise the name of the country prior to the GFA in 1998. Most people will also accept Republic of Ireland if you need to distinguish from Northern Ireland, even though that's technically not the name)
> Matthew Forsyth, Director of Product Management, Google Play Developer Experience & Chief Product Explainer, said the system isn’t a sideloading restriction, but an “Accountability Layer.”
And... What about accountability for hosting distributing spyware, malware loaded apps from Google Playstore and hundreds of copy cat, misleading apps?
Why can't they pose a question when the phone is setup?
- Yes, I want to sideload
- No I dont want
If the user says NO then to later enable it to allow sideload Yes, the user needs to factory reset phone. Done.
>And... What about accountability for hosting distributing spyware, malware loaded apps from Google Playstore and hundreds of copy cat, misleading apps?
The rules don't apply to billion dollar corporations. Meta is showing 15 billion scam ads per day.
A somewhat unrelated thing, is I got bombarded with ads for a 'mental health mindfulness' service on one of the major international news websites.
I decided to Google the company after a few days. I was immediately confronted by thousands of reports by angry users, complaining about how after they tried the app, they got locked into a yearly subscription at exorbitant prices and it was impossible to cancel. The company itself is registered in some offshore tax haven.
They used to scare us, that if we went to those shady pirate websites, somebody would steal our credit cards and steal our money. Well...
This right here exposes the bullshittery about the reasons behind preventing sideloading on Android phones.
For Google everything is about protecting revenue, even when doing so exposes their users to real harm, and that's why they will not address the issue of copycat apps, poor practices on play store security or anything else that lowers the number of downloads on apps on play store. But, heaven forbid, I want to download an app that doesn't create revenue for them onto a phone I OWN, Google spends money lavishly.
The Internet cranks are right. Google is run by bean counters and all the invective the cranks heap on the Google leadership is entirely earned.
When this whole thing got announced, I purchased a new Pixel 9 and flashed it with GrapheneOS.
I am hoping that in about 6-8 years (when I realistically need to update) the landscape might be a bit better. Or who knows, maybe I'll just continue using GrapheneOS.
So far I have not had a single issues with it. Apps the rely on attestation do not work, but honestly it's only two applications out of hundreds so I can live with it.
I also financially support GrapheneOS on a monthly basis (15$). This is just too important of an project not to.
GrapheneOS can choose to simply not apply the same restrictions but now that they're partnering with another vendor to get security updates earlier, I'm not sure what the future holds in this aspect.
This is only an issue for Google compliant Android so projects like LineageOS will be fine. Depending on their implementation, this may even just be restricted to AOSP with Samsung and others just ignoring the extra restrictions.
But, if they make compliance a requirement for being part of their parent programme, GrapheneOS will be in a tough spot.
Graphene OS spends its social capital on hallucinating attacks from other projects and bullying other projects by sending their followers against them, based on those hallucinated attacks. It also has a completely intransparent project structure based around a supposedly retired mean developer, who then just did not (and still does almost all commits). That's not a project where the EU can invest money in, and the confidence users on HN tend to put into that project is baffling.
The EU should pile money into /e/OS. It's maintained by an EU company (Murena) and has European hardware options - Fairphone (NL), SHIFTphone (Germany), and Volla (Germany). Yes, I know some of them use US Qualcomm chips, but you have to start somewhere.
Europe is a continent, with many disparate nations and cultures. This continent is not hostile towards Graphene users.
In Europe there is the European Union (EU), which also is comprised of many disparate nations and cultures but a subset of those comprising Europe.
I say the following as a staunch supporter of European integration and cooperation:
The EU is actively hostile towards any software with the stated goal of safeguarding users right to privacy and security. That means GrapheneOS but also Signal, Matrix and more.
My next phone will be on GrapheneOS or EOS as well, the last straw was Samsung removing the bootloader unlock with an update (not even sure what they've done is legal)
So I was actually planning on upgrading from a Pixel 7 Pro to a Pixel 10 around the time this announcement came out last year, but have put it on hold as I wait to see what form these changes take.
Like if it was "you need to do the developer 7-tap of the version label in settings", it'd be like "whatever". But given how long this process has taken, I suspect that is not what they've planned - it wouldn't take this long to develop, it certainly wouldn't take this long to explain.
So I suspect that we're actually in the "Maybe Later" phase of "Google wants to control which apps you install: [ ] Yes [ ] Maybe Later". And I mean, if their proposed solution turns out to be "Me and 25 of my closest friends can install apps I make by phoning home to Google servers", then like, I can do that on iOS too. And if I'm not going to have meaningfully more control of my Android device, I may as well just go to iOS where Apple at least have a better privacy record and don't seem to have have an all-encompassing goal of "where can we put AI features to drive AI usage metrics up the most?"
Honestly just install grapheneos on your Pixel, that is what I did and bought a Pixel for that reason alone. I use all Google play services and it works great, only payment with phone doesn't work.
The frog had to be pretty well lobotomized to keep it from jumping out. One can recreate the ”experiment” with a lobotomized frog and mostly get the result described though
The image at the top of the article is actually what already happens in Android and has done for years. At first, I thought that this meant that the article was very outdated, but no, this is from January 2026.
I imagine the text of the article is fine, but I'm a little bit disappointed that Android Authority chose to lead with that image and caption and make it seem that this is what the future flow would look like. You'd think they'd know better.
I was never an iOS user, or developer - exactly because Android was more "open", exerted less control over a user of the device.
The same reason I use Linux for 25 years (not ideological, but it just makes most sense by far). In time where this view (win11 vs. Linux) is starting to make sense to more and more people, few rare config nuances are getting easier to solve due to LLM-s, going into the opposite direction with a mobile OS calls for users to also start seriously considering more open alternatives and making a path for users of our app to do the same.
The highest risk is the play store itself. Gambling and addiction.
So, when does Google add "high friction" there, instead of encouraging it?
Ah, well, it's the money! Than stop bending the truth.
As TFA does not mention it, and I don't see any top-level comments discussing it, this is a continued rollout of a "feature" first piloted in Brazil, Indonesia, Singapore, and Thailand. See:
Of course, HN reaction has always been skeptical about this including in earlier news. But the reporting on it, and the countries in which it is piloted in, seems to me to involve government/banking industry cooperation with or pressure on Google to combat cyber fraud. These polities are prime targets for Android cyber fraud of this sort due to Android penetration, and seemingly (to me) also cultural proximity to scam operators, and tech-illiteracy among the vulnerable demographic. (And anticipating a reply I got from a previous article on my comment on this feature---no, it's just not feasible to comprehensively educate retirees against evolving tactics by scam operators and expect that to be a sufficient sole countermeasure.)
These measures are indeed the result of governments blaming their citizens getting scammed on phone manufacturers. There's not a lot Google can do here.
However, Google is choosing to extend these changes worldwide. That's where the problem really starts. People in Asia and Brazil may vote for idiots who will shift the blame for their citizens' lack of basic digital education onto others, but that doesn't mean that countries where this type of fraud barely exists should also be subject to these extreme measures.
I know in some people's eyes saying this will make me a Google shill but this reminds me of the manifest v3 thing. What makes it to the top of HN is mostly clickbait a las "Google is cracking down on ad blockers" or in this case "Google is preventing side loading". These articles don't link to primary sources (Google) and they (intentionally?) miss all nuance.
There is no doubt that sideloading by uninformed users can be used as a backdoor.
It's also not a surprise that banks/industry that's accountable to recover the losses for tricked customers is looking to someone else to solve it for them.
However, if this was "piloted", do we have the numbers of how much has it decreased the number of scams or their impact?
I wouldn't go as far as to say that it is impossible to "educate the public", but it is indeed extremely hard. But click-through pop-ups have succeeded when?
Yeah for every HN user complaining about it there are hundreds of people sideloading apps (not realizing what they're doing - under promise of loans or other advantages) and then getting their phone ransomed
Some manufacturers like Xiaomi already have a very annoying flow for enabling developer options and using ADB. You need to have a SIM card inserted, need to create a Xiaomi account and there's several popups with timers you have to wait through.
I'm sure I'm missing something but wasn't this already the case where the first time you try to install an APK, you had to go into Settings and mark the relevant application as a trusted source for installing APKs from?
Some friction is probably wise. I remember them introducing the requirement to individually allow each app you're installing things from. The question is, how much more friction will they add? I suspect they will add prompts per install, too.
If auto-updating apps stops working on fdroid, I'll be installing Graphene, Lineage or taking a shot at something like postmarket/ubuntu touch/plasma mobile. I've used Lineage as a daily driver before for a while, so I'll probably just go back to that and tell developers to support the platform I'm using. It doesn't rent seek on developers or users.
Those of us who use Android phones now - and install FOSS apps form F-Droid or just any apps from elsewhere other than the church of Google - might be thinking: "Oh, I need to work out how I'll have decent app access after this happens."
But what we should really be thinking is: "Oh, I need to _donate_ to projects which aim to patch Android-based phones to remove these restrictions; or to projects which aim to replace (most/all of) Android completely".
We need to speak with our wallets in addition to just ranting about Google.
I am not very well educated when it comes to alternative stores landscape.
But I do know that in Russia there's now Rustore: https://www.rustore.ru/en
which functions by automatically downloading and updating APKs for you.
During the APK install, however, you do see the ugly Android prompt about how this app may be dangerous.
Rustore has its own app payment system, which obviously circumvents Google Play fees.
This works on regular Android phones.
Are there other examples of such stores? Perhaps it's Google's answer to that.
I was expecting Google has stopped doing most of the business in Russia due to sanctions. Do you still see Russian-company ads in Google Search results or Youtube? Similarly, I thought they were not selling apps or ads in Google Play store in Russia either (they might be showing ads from non-Russian companies because, well, that just increases the show-count and absolute number of clicks).
I no longer reside in Russia, so I am not being targeted by these.
But I think that it mostly comes down to companies being able to pay for these ads. Mastercard / Visa payments no longer work in Russia. If a company has a way to pay (by having another business entity in another country), then it probably works.
Unfortunately both Russia and Ukraine are slacking in losing the war so it doesn't seem that making payments to Russia will be easy soon. Now of course if they were Uzbeki or Kazakhstani stores it would be completely different.
Exactly. For most people not having a bank app, probably no digital payments due to that, and no government-issued digital ID is too much friction to even consider any alternative.
How does this relate to the announcement from a while back about introducing signatures that tie back to Google? (IE trusted developer program or whatever they're calling that horse shit.)
I agree with high friction sideloading. it is the best of both worlds. no friction sideloading is too easily exploited by scammers. having a member of my family exposed to this kind of thing in the past taught me some things.
"Installing" has the connotation of doing it directly from the Play Store. This is also known as "Downloading" (because the data is on a server, in the cloud, and you're fetching it "downstream" to a local device.)
"Sideloading" doesn't refer to the installation process, but to the file transfer process. You're sideloading when you transfer, e.g. APKs from your notebook to your Android. Or, from a USB stick into your phone or something.
In general, though, "sideloading" also refers to any "non-app-store" installation. It's a kind of colloquial shorthand. It's not really a technical term. But it's adequate for getting the point across.
If you just called it "installing" without qualifying it, how would anyone know that it's a different process, or that it's accomplished not by navigating to the app store? It seems that you would invite ambiguity here!
The point is that before walled-garden app stores, that was how pretty much every normal person installed software on their PC's. Using the term "sideloading" for that is a clever invention to try and retroactively rebrand what is actually super-normal as something scary.
"Sideloading" refers to data transfer between two local, peer devices. Really, that is it. It is not "something scary" or something forbidden. It is not even really installing. It's data transfer.
So "before walled-gardens" people would install software in many many ways. I originally typed it in from scratch, or from a magazine. I loaded it from tape. Or diskette. That's not really "sideloading" if you think about it, because it's just "loading" from peripheral storage.
Later, when people dialed up on a PC, they could "download" software and then install it or do whatever with other data or media. They could also upload it. They could transfer it among devices locally. This was not, at the time, called "sideloading" but just transfer, or "null modem", or "sneakernet", or "a station wagon full of backup tapes".
If we're going to use "sideloading" in the strictest sense, then we cannot actually refer to the process of downloading APK files separately and then installing them, because that's literally downloading. But that is the colloquial meaning now.
Hey, if you want to coin a new term or neologism for it, by all means do so. But it seems absurd to downplay "sideloading" as having "scary" or "negative" connotations, when it really doesn't. You've got to look past the hype and F.U.D.
Remember, there was a time when people considered FTP and torrenting to be dangerous or subversive. Perhaps they still do.
Given that you've agreed that "sideloading" is not an accurate descriptor of installing apps directly from the web browser, I'd think you could see how using "sideloading" incorrectly like this is a marketing gimmick designed to scare users (and politicians!) into backing the official platform app store monopolies...
As someone from Germany, I don't want Google to nanny family members computing devices. They don't want it either.
It is completely absurd for an ad company in a surveillance state an ocean away to play IT services for everyone. This has already gone to far.
Rather, there should be tools for value-aligned IT services and technically minded family members to help.
I absolutely HATED the first time I had to deal with it... at least now it works a little better.. but the first version didn't actually tell you that you needed to go into security settings right after to enable the install.
Still not a big fan of it... though admittedly mostly just install stuff via brew/cask more than direct downloads as a result.
...which is so much of a complicated nuisance that most people simply give up. If this will go the way I think it will prepare to have to skip 10 things, write 3 ADB commands and submit a video of you spinning around for 30 seconds just to install your pirated game.
Just to install a proper call recorder or a better Work Profile manager.
Turning a possibility to install software outside of the app store should be about as normal as the fact you're using a laptop or desktop to install your pirated games.
Yeah, you.
If someone having access to "side load" an app has it to install a pirated game, then you have your OS, where you are not limited only to Apple/Amazon/Google store, simply for installing pirated software.
You want to talk about confusing Grandma? Why isn't Lastpass the first entry on the App Store when you search for it verbatim? At the going rate, installing signed software is more deceptive than searching for the official installer online.
That's true but does not detract from the GPs main point: if you are curating your app store then you should do a proper job of it or you lose the curation argument.
A single scary warning per source (ie per new certificate that you choose to trust) would be fine. If I had to jump through a few hoops to install f-droid on a stock device that would be fine. But once I've authorized f-droid the OS needs to shut up and stay out of the way for good. No "are you sure you want f-droid installing this other thing" nonsense.
Google's long term strategy with Android is baffling to me. Apple has had better mobile hardware for years. Apple has higher consumer trust. Apple has better app selection (for most people). Apple has been increasingly implementing the core features that differentiate Android devices, like USB-C and RCS. Every Android user lost to the increasing iOS market share is another customer Google has to pay exorbitant fees to a competitor to access.
And Google's strategy is to continue removing differentiating features from Android that also help them mitigate the threat of antitrust? Surely the marginal revenue from the inconsequential number of sideloading users isn't attractive enough to justify that kind of strategic blunder.
I don't see any iOS advantage with the apps anymore. That was maybe true in the very beginning, during the gold rush time of the app store. But not since then. In which category are there better iOS apps? Browsers? No, strictly worse. Youtube app? No, worse. Texting? Worse or equal (Whatsapp). Podcast client? I assume worse, since there is no Antenna Pod. Social media apps? The iOS variants of those apps are afaik in no way better. What else is there, where is the advantage?
Also, while the Play store is an equally ad-riddled and unsearchable hellhole, at least Android does have with F-Droid a high quality alternative. iOS has nothing.
But sure, removing the F-Droid advantage can only hurt Android, the direction of your comment still stands.
> Social media apps? The iOS variants of those apps are afaik in no way better. What else is there, where is the advantage?
This is incorrect. The IOS versions of social media apps extract way less data from the device than on android, and is thus more privacy friendly.
Sure the best way would be for people not to use them, but if you "have" to, then it's better to use those on IOS.
I agree with the thrust of the GP comment but:
> The IOS versions of social media apps extract way less data from the device than on android, and is thus more privacy friendly.
I seriously doubt this. I agree that this is the perception but anyone working in the mobile space on both platforms for the past ~2 years will know Google is a lot more hard nosed in reviewing apps for privacy concerns than Apple these days (I say this negatively, there is a middle ground and Apple is much closer to it - Google is just friction seemingly in an attempt to lose their bad reputation).
In what manner do they extract less data
Unless you're running Graphene or a similar security minded distro the sandboxing isn't very good. Okay let's be honest it's fairly abysmal at preventing fingerprinting. It could almost be accused of not even bothering to try.
But one example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43518866
You'd think this would be more known! I feel like general sentiment says the opposite is the case.. What can one point to in the future to show what you are saying here?
> In which category are there better iOS apps?
Almost all of the prosumer apps on iOS offer a consistently better experience. This is maybe less relevant on phones than on tablets, but music production, video editing, digital painting and drafting, etc...
Camera apps.
Everything else I agree with, but the Android camera APIs do not allow developers to build good device independent camera apps the way they are available on iOS.
To be fair to Android, iOS isn't offering "good device independent camera apps" either, you only have ~one choice of device with iOS.
first time hear this, any more specifics? i used android to develop video conference software and don't recall camera limits
I'm only familiar with this as a user and not a developer, but I've had multiple Android phone where not all camera features available in the Camera app were available to other apps via the APIs:
* not all cameras being available
* stabilisation not working
* 60 FPS unavailable
>I don't see any iOS advantage with the apps anymore. That was maybe true in the very beginning, during the gold rush time of the app store. But not since then. In which category are there better iOS apps?
I researched iOS vs Android last year so some of my info may be out of date but this is what I collected.
Apple iOS exclusives (or earlier app versions because devs prioritized iOS):
Google Android app exclusives There really aren't many Android-only apps that's intended for direct consumer download from the Google Play Store. Instead, Android dominates in OEM use as "turnkey" and "embedded" base os as the GUI for their customized hardware devices: If it's a typical mainstream user (browser + Youtube/Tiktok + WhatsApp etc), they won't see any iOS ecosystem advantages over Android.It seems like a pretty arbitrary list to me...
Also Android has a bigger market share in the world than iOS, by a lot.
>Also Android has a bigger market share in the world than iOS, by a lot.
The tone of that seems like you thought I was taking the discussion into fanboy evangelism and therefore Android needed to be defended. That wasn't the intent and I already tried to downplay my comment by stating the iOS ecosystem specifics do not matter to 99% of mainstream users. Yes, everybody on HN already knows Android has a much bigger market share.
The point was simply to inform the gp asking the question about iOS that there are apps and niches he may not be aware of. Nobody's trying to convince any reader of switching to iOS or that "iOS is superior" ... or vice versa!
For one, I can actually use gesture controls without constantly triggering backswipes. Even something as droll and first party as Google Photos suffers this problem, where, say, cropping a photo and pulling too close from the screen edge will result in a backswipe detection instead.
Another example is Sonos, where the iOS app contains TruePlay to tune your speakers. They can do this because there is relatively few iPhone models (microphones). But this is a general, noticeable trend, where developers will add more / better / polished features to the iOS app.
The iOS YouTube app is not worse than the one in Android. Texting in iOS is arguably better or, at the very least, there is one more app to choose (Messages). And I’m curious to know what makes Antenna Pod so much better than the thousands of other podcast apps out there.
Social media apps have historically been worse in Android, because of lax app and privacy controls.
> What else is there, where is the advantage?
Personally, I’d rather not have Google buried deep inside all aspects of my phone.
> Texting in iOS is arguably better or, at the very least
Since some updates ago, my keyboard is still broken if I type too fast, and autocorrect been essentially broken for the same amount of time. Must be happening for ~years now, still waiting for a new update to finally fix it.
At least on Android you can change the keyboard to something else if you'd like, instead of being stuck with what your OS developer forces on you. Wish I had that option now.
Hasn’t happened to me, but I guess that you could always install a third party keyboard. Both Microsoft and Google have offerings in the App Store.
The keyboard can be changed in iOS.
The iOS version of most social media apps is better. IOS simply has better API integration to it's hardware, where with android, many OEMs (hell this was even the case to a certain extent with older pixel phones), do a number of things that make the hardware not as easily accessible as quickly from the OS API for said feature.
This is especially relevant for the camera, but also various other sensors and hardware modules that exist inside these phones.
That said, in recent years there are just a number of other areas that android is much better at such as deeper AI integration, which goes back to even prior to the current LLM craze.
What are those things?
iOS has less device models to target for. This makes it easier to support and deliver a more consistent experience, especially for gaming. I have also heard a few other points back in the day, but I am not sure how true they are now. One is that some social media apps might offer better quality in app camera experience. Another is that iOS userbase is more willing to spend money so devs are more likely to target iOS.
This is a really ideology driven push. I don't think you really think the iOS browsers are worse, there's just less choice, because they all fundamentally use WebKit. Having to use Chromium is a worse experience, and not being able to use Gecko under Firefox is not a clear upgrade - particularly as WebKit is so tightly integrated with the hardware, leading to less battery use. If you really don't like WebKit for whatever reason, I get it. But that's not worse.
Whenever there is an app with full feature parity (WhatsApp) you assume at best it can be equal, based on nothing. You have specific apps that work for you, and that's great, but my practical experience is much different: whenever I haven't had a choice in an app (think banking apps, carrier apps, local library apps, the Covid apps) the experience has been much better on Apple. Whenever there is a choice in apps, they're often cross-written in something that allows easy porting, and very similar, or the native Apple solution is much smoother. It's rare that an app just feels better on Android, and usually limited to cases where a specific app is only available on Android or, you know, Google.
no ublock
How can whatsapp be better? Android at least has features like scoped storage.
Where is the ios equivalent of newpipe? Where is the iOS equivalent of pojavlauncher? where is the iOS equivalent of libretorrent or syncthing?
Open source is essentially banned on iOS.
What is the advantage of iOS? "Feels smoother"? Totally subjective.
The YouTube app on iOS is superior to the Android app for one
This used to be true, but really is not anymore.
> I assume worse
You know what they say about assuming.
sorry this is not correct. (do you consistently use both?) iOS apps are consistently better, because people prefer using swift
As an Android power user (I’ve ran Lineage, Graphene, rooted with Magisk and passed safetynet) that’s moved to IOS this last month. My subjective opinion: app quality is the same.
I have both an iPhone and an Android phone and I agree. The largest chunk of apps are the same anyway, using something like React Native or Ionic.
Honestly, you’re so wrong about the app situation that it’s almost staggering. iOS apps tend to be more stable, better polished, have better integration with system features (like the Dynamic Island), and even often have more features. This isn’t even an unfounded opinion, it’s a material problem for Google and led them to vastly investing in automated testing and quality efforts
App addressable user base is another problem for Google, one that they have mentioned in developer conferences. It’s a big part of why they’ve been trying to ship a tablet and unify android and Chromebook. If Google isn’t careful they could find themselves in a downward spiral situation, stuck between apple on one side, and android forks on the other.
And the last answer is, as always, money
- browser is deemphasized on iOS, and so it’s weaker feature set matters less
- iOS is generally easier to develop for because of less device differentiation
- on average iOS has significantly wealthier users who tend to be higher return or paying customers (seriously, look it up). This in turn leads companies to invest more heavily in iOS.
- easier integration due to a narrow system services ecosystem (no Google vs Samsung slapfights)
- unified platform advantage (apps written for iOS easily port to the watch and tablet, unlocking larger markets, and justifying greater spend in developing apps)
- apples review process is significantly stricter (for better or for worse)
Yes, Apple doesn’t have something like fdroid, and that’s really disappointing and honestly a legitimate dealbreaker for a lot of people
> iOS apps tend to be more stable, better polished
It's been a while since I was last using Android, but first-party Apple apps no longer meet my standards for "polished".
e.g. type this sequence into the calculator:
The answer should not be negative, but the app says "-4".The desktop Contacts app has been putting invisible LTR and RTL codes around phone numbers for years now, breaking web forms when auto-entered. The mobile version refreshes specific contacts several times in a row to add no new content, preventing copy from working while it does so.
The MacOS Safari translation button appears on the left of the omni-bar, until you click it, at which point it instantly moves to the right and your click turns out to have been on the button that the left-side translation button had hidden. Deleting a selection of items from browsing history is limited to about 5 items per second, as it deletes one then rebuilds the entire list before deleting the next.
If I'm listening to a podcast on headpones and an alarm goes off, it doesn't play the alarm through my headphones, it plays on device speakers only.
Podcast app's "Up Next" is a magical mystery list that can't be disabled or guided.
The "Do Not Disturb" mode can be activated unexpectedly, leading to missed calls, and cannot be deleted.
Localisation is inconsistent at every level, including system share sheet and behaviour of decimal separators.
I could go on, but you get the point. Apple's quality control just isn't visible in the software at this point.
> The answer should not be negative, but the app says "-4".
When I do those exact keypresses I get the correct answer.
Good for you? The fact this happens on my versions of both MacOS and iOS means they didn't have automated tests covering this from day one.
Famously, "it works for me" is not how high quality software happens.
When I do those exact keypresses I also get "-4".
> e.g. type this sequence into the calculator
Works perfectly for me.
The pricing gap also rules Apple out in a lot of markets. Almost nobody has Apple here in Spain, the only people i see are tourists and expats.
While not as popular as Android, last time I checked iOS was at 28% market share. That’s hardly “almost nobody”.
> browser is deemphasized on iOS, and so it’s weaker feature set matters less
That's precisely the OP's point. They gimped their browser so there's bigger incentive to use their proprietary system frameworks.
> iOS is generally easier to develop for because of less device differentiation
That's nonsense. What year are you from? I've heard this like 10 years ago when there only 1 or 2 current iPhone models in circulation.
> on average iOS has significantly wealthier users who tend to be higher return or paying customers (seriously, look it up). This in turn leads companies to invest more heavily in iOS.
If you offer subscription service, like Netflix/HBO/Nest or whatever, your main goal is volume, not how wealthy your demographic is.
> easier integration due to a narrow system services ecosystem (no Google vs Samsung slapfights)
Easier integration with what?
> unified platform advantage (apps written for iOS easily port to the watch and tablet, unlocking larger markets, and justifying greater spend in developing apps)
That's like Android's moat from the start, not bolted on during some 10+ major versions like on iOS. And it works much better, Android apps are truly the same apps. Not gimped, cut off things like Instagram on iOS (is it even fixed now?).
> apples review process is significantly stricter (for better or for worse)
Both are shit these days due to volume of shovelware produced.
Re: iOS apps being easier to develop: device sizes are the minuscule of the problem.
The real problem is that Android vendors mess up with the OS in weird ways by adding custom ultra battery savers, removing APIs etc. which is much less predictable than dealing with a few Apple devices, that are more homogenous.
Then many vendors ship their own apps which are buggy and you need to know that vendor's Z Calendar app has a weird bug to account for.
FWIW, starting a sentence with "Honestly ..." always makes me think the rest of what this person has to say is dishonest.
Your BIO on HN is:
> I HAVEN'T SHOWERED AT ALL! THAT'S WHY I REEK! WORKING IN FINTECH! AIN'T SHAVED IN WEEKS! POUR CRUMBS FROM MY KEYBOARD! THAT'S WHAT I EAT! WROTE A CURRENCY LIBRARY! 3RD TIME THIS WEEK! LURKING HN! I PREFER /b/! IN MOM'S BASEMENT! I'M THIRTY THREE! IT'S 3'O'CLOCK AM! THAT'S WHEN I SLEEP! AH!!!! COME ON FUCK A GUY!!!!
What level of credibility are you seeking?
"Honestly" is a colloquialism used to indicate disbelief with the previous statement or to preface candidness. Choosing to interpret the colloquial use of "honestly" as an indication that everything else that person says is dishonest is a very weird trait I've only seen show up in grammarian literalists and pedants that only makes yourself seem like a disingenuous person.
Ngl I think that bio is hilarious.
For context, I'm a long-time iPhone user, who switched to a Pixel 8a about 18 months ago.
> Apple has had better mobile hardware for years.
I can't say I noticed a difference in quality when switching. Maybe some people can, but for me it was just a different, but still well-made phone.
> Apple has higher consumer trust.
I can't speak for consumers in general, but this is certainly no longer the case for me.
I also used MacOS for 20 years, and switched to Linux about a year ago because I didn't like the direction Apple was headed. It may be my choice of reading material (HN), but I receive almost daily confirmation that this was a sound decision.
> Apple has better app selection (for most people).
Not selection, necessarily, but certainly quality.
As a side note, my iPad (my sole remaining Apple device) quietly updated to iOS 26 a few days ago. Despite having spent months reading about how bad it is, I was still genuinely shocked.
Again, I can't speak for "consumers", but for me Apple now has a far worse user experience.
""Apple has better app selection (for most people). Apple has been increasingly implementing the core features that differentiate Android devices, like USB-C and RCS.""
You mean Apple has been forced by regulators to implement core features like USB-C and RCS?
https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/justice-department-s...
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32...
Sure, but uninformed consumers won't see it that way. Maybe in their circles it just sounds like a great idea and they thank Apple for implementing it.
Saying they were forced to implement USB-C is really overstating things. Apple loooved USB-C - so much so that their ill-fated butterfly switch laptops went all-in on it. They also helped design it. It's highly likely they were planning a move to USB-C anyway and the EU just pushed it forward a year.
Why the surprise, they do the same with search, they do the same with their Google workspace (the degree to which they are pushing AI is really hurting the product).
Google stopped being aware of their customer's needs a really long time ago, they are so arrogant they think the audience is now fully captive.
I can't remember a youtube change that did not degrade my experience on their platform.
> they think the audience is now fully captive.
It is, for the large sub-$800 segment of the smartphone market.
you mean sub $599, right?
https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-iphone/iphone-16e
Which is still a valid argument, the number is just lower. And the UX on these sub 600 devices have definitely gotten worse over the last 5 years too... Likely because Google isn't really targeting that price point anymore, so Android isn't getting enough optimization to be viable on underpowered devices.
That was different in 2010-2020
This market still exists and is pretty strong, especially outside of US. It's all on Android so Google doesn't need to try to compete here.
This is why with Pixel they're focusing on competing with the iPhone, they want people to use Android so there is no point in competing with other Android manufacturer.
Is it really Google's Android? I have the feeling it's mostly Chinese manufacturers with their own Android versions sans the Google services.
Android is still developed by google, yes.
The chinese are mostly adding skins on top, not developing the core of the operating system.
There is however a chinese fork of android (state sponsored), but it has not gotten wide market adoption in china either to my knowledge, but i dont live in china so i'm open to be corrected.
Finally, even if that OS has gotten widely adopted in china - it IS a fork. the changes are not being upstreamed to android, hence irrelevant to the discussion on this forum.
I'm talking about the Google services which is where Google profits. Chinese phones ship without them. When I said "Google's Android", I meant Android+Google Services. The people buying cheap Android phones are most likely not buying Pixels. Even Samsungs aren't exactly cheap anymore. I'm not talking about Android forks. I'm talking about customized Android without Google services.
The biggest Android market (internationally) are Chinese phones. If Google suddenly decided Play Store should be the only way to install apps, that doesn't affect Huawei and Xiaomi phones at all, they don't ship with Play Store and Play Services in the first place.
Chinese phones sold in China ship without Google services. Chinese phones sold outside of China include them.
That's false. The ones you can get here in Slovenia don't have them. I've personally helped quite a few friends sideload them. I also remember how shocked people were to find out there's no YouTube or Play Store after buying a Huawei or Xiaomi phone when that first came into effect.
Correct, same in Germany. Here is a photo I shot last December in an electronics store. Aurora Store is now official, I guess.
https://imgur.com/a/v6zaRYo
> they think the audience is now fully captive.
the audience is captive. Do you have a choice to move from android, if you didnt want to have an apple device? Do you want to use a different search engine other than google? Is there another email provider than gmail (for the non-technical person - i know you can run your own). Is there another browser other than chrome (and dont say firefox or edge - because both don't compete)?
Google behave in ways that they think makes them more profit. When users cannot migrate (nor even threaten to), then it simply means they can do this.
Why are saying that Firefox or even Chrome reskin can't compete with Chrome? I haven't been using Chrome for maybe 10 years or more, so I'm genuinely interested. Even if you hate Firefox, something like Brave is felt the same way but without google's garbage. I heard there are new guys in town like Helium and other Chromium based browser which choose to remove telemetry, support manifest v2, adblocks and so on.
The browsing experience without constant upselling some trash and proper adblockers are magnitudes better.
The most compelling argument I've heard is around security, while Firefox does sandboxing, it is not as comprehensive as what went into Chrome.
I'd still choose Firefox over it for the reasons you've mentioned.
I'd agree if you picked Google Docs or something like that, but Gmail? Chrome?? Come on! Edge is just Chrome with extra features, plenty of people use Bing without even noticing and many even non-techy people are fine with DuckDuckGo, good free email providers are everywhere (yahoo, hotmail, proton...).
> Is there another browser other than chrome (and dont say firefox or edge - because both don't compete)?
Can I run an ad blocker in Android's Chrome? I can in Firefox
> Do you have a choice to move from android, if you didnt want to have an apple device?
Not wanting and not having a choice are two different things.
> Do you want to use a different search engine other than google? Is there another email provider than gmail (for the non-technical person - i know you can run your own)
My wife uses ddg and outlook, she's non-technical. I convinced her to use ddg but she's always used outlook/hotmail.
> Not wanting and not having a choice are two different things.
As a general statement, sure. But if we are talking about mobile phones this is a very privileged and unrealistic point of view.
According to chatgpt, 70-80% of mobile phone sold worldwide every year cost less than the cheaper iPhone.
Some people could probably stretch their budget and get the cheapest iPhone, but otherwise it seems safe to conclude that more than 50% of people simply have no choice.
> My wife uses ddg and outlook, she's non-technical
My mom too. The difference though is that they have us. Most people don't.
the move don't have to be permanent, there are alternatives and as we increase our usage and give active feedback and commit to invest even little money in them, they will improve too. I've seen this pattern a thousand times the monopoly gets worst and worst until a revolutionary new tech will rise it applies to social concepts, business sectors, companies, mother-in-laws, etc.
>Do you want to use a different search engine other than google?
Yes, type yahoo.com into your browser, or install an app. Non-technical people love installing apps on their phones.
>Is there another email provider than gmail (for the non-technical person - i know you can run your own).
Yes, there are hundreds of good e-mail providers to use instead of Gmail. Easy for the non-technical person to use.
No, that is not how you change search engines.
In Chrome on Android (and yeah, on desktop too) you just go into "Settings" and change your default search engine. I can choose between Google, Yahoo!, Bing, Yandex, or DuckDuckGo.
There are also custom searches through Wikipedia and other resources. You can use little shortcuts to get to almost any custom search you set up in advance.
This has been configurable by the user for a long, long, long time. This is not a surprise or a concession. This is built-in stuff by Google for Chrome. (Edge too, of course.)
Changing your browser, you can do, but it won't be comfortable. I have Edge installed on my Android, but it is not possible to run natively on Chromebook and the Android emulation is bad. I will not set Edge to my Default Browser because it messes things up. It is not a great experience to change your Default Browser on Android. I just go with Chrome and use Edge for specific tasks and topics.
You can set up all kinds of email services in the Gmail app, or you can install a native app. I use Outlook in both of those ways, and it's fine.
> No, that is not how you change search engines.
See it from the perspective of a non-technical user:
1. I install the Yahoo Search app
2. When I want to search I poke the Yahoo icon on my home screen.
Or:
1. I open my browser.
2. I poke Yahoo on the grid of suggested sites.
Sure, there's more than one way to skin a cat.
There are lots of non-technical users who navigate purely by doing a "google search" on whatever domain they're aiming for, too. Nobody said they were efficient about it.
> Do you want to use a different search engine other than google?
I've been on Kimi now for 3 months. I rarely used Google in that time. Kimi is largely free though sometimes when I run of the free quota I fallback to DeepSeek/Perplexity. I have no idea where they are getting their index from though.
> Is there another email provider than gmail (for the non-technical person - i know you can run your own).
There is microsoft/apple/yahoo mailboxes. However, I think most people should pay for their email especially that it's cheap and also critical (2FA).
> Is there another browser other than chrome (and dont say firefox or edge - because both don't compete)?
Firefox is a solid fallback and also webkit (Apple) is now basically a different browser (ported to Linux on GNOME Web). Not the best situation though it could be worse (given Firefox situation).
For me personally, the only two things I still use Google for are chromium and maps. I am unlikely to move from Chromium anytime soon but might consider alternative for maps (though might still need maps for reviews/photos/street view).
I am the most bullish I've ever been on Google losing its monopoly especially after they botched AI and hyper-scaling.
Once an alternative to one of their things, like immich, becomes viable, people run as fast as they can.
The strategy of doing everything you can to make sure your customers truly and utterly despise you and want to spit in your face is probably not productive.
Google's AI in their docs suite is so bafflingly bad. I wanted their AI to automate a sheet for me and it just choked. I switched to Claude for making a sheet that I ended up hosting in my local NAS using Microsoft Excel format.
Embedded AIs always suck. It's a dead end, long-term. By its nature, AI subsumed software products, reducing them to tool calls for general-purpose AI runtime.
> Google stopped being aware of their customer's needs a really long time ago
Google's customers are advertisers. They cater to that segment very well. They only need to attract users with "free" and cheap services so that advertisers think their campaigns are reaching enough eyeballs. Whether or not that's the case, and whether or not the end user has a good experience, is hardly relevant.
Apple only implemented USB-C due to pressure from the EU.
One area Android has a clear advantage is Android TV devices verified by Google, because there is a much wider array of streaming apps of all kinds available. However google doesn’t seem to focus on this very much, and if you look for forum recommendations for google android streaming devices it’s very often the NVIDIA shield pro from 2019. Hopefully that device will I’ll be supported for a few more years because there seems to not be good easily available alternatives.
The killer apps that gave Android an advantage on TV are now mostly available on tvOS. To me, these were VLC and RetroArch.
Apple was among the first to implement USB-C in early 2015. A whole year before Samsung and the likes.
> Surely the marginal revenue from the inconsequential number of sideloading users isn't attractive enough to justify that kind of strategic blunder.
If the rumors are true that the whole anti-sideloading thing is mostly because some governments complained, it might not have to do with a business strategy at all.
Why not limit these restrictions to these specific locations? Surely there's already lots of location-specific and carrier-specific customizations like shutter sound in Japan, different radio frequencies and many more. It still sucks for those who live in these countries, but at least they know who to point their finger at.
I'm similarly baffled for the reasons you state but your breakdown of the market differentiations is a little hyperbolic.
> Apple has had better mobile hardware for years
Apple has never had better hardware (on mobile). Apple has had better software support & integration for their hardware that has lead to e.g. strong camera quality advantages (iOS camera app has been able to use the hardware better to produce photos people want despite some Android OEMs having objectively better camera modules since those OEMs have to work through a lot of Google contracts & software extraction).
The hardware has never been better - their holistic ecosystem has just made integrations with it smoother.
> Apple has better app selection (for most people)
This has been true but it's always been marginal, & the "for most people" qualifier has contracted significantly in recent years. Both Google's & Apple's 1P offerings have declined in quality & popularity, but Google have increased lock-in & reliance on theirs in ways Apple can't, while the 3P offerings on Android have improved significantly relative to iOS. Gone are the days of companies releasing exclusively on iOS, or the Android version being an afterthought with missing features - if anything it's swung in the other direction.
To be clear, I think your points still stand: Google's recent strategy doesn't make sense for Google. I just don't think it's as glaringly clear cut as you make out.
One aspect that's worth keeping in mind is the non-US market. Apple has a 58% market share in the US but it's 28% worldwide. Outside of the US market the impact of that "every Android user lost to the increasing iOS market share" is significantly diluted (tbh I'm not sure it's even increasing outside of the US at all) & emerging markets are growth areas.
>Apple has never had better hardware (on mobile).
This is just straight up false. Qualcomm's current top of the line processors are about 3 years behind what you can get in Apple's cheapest product (that being the 16e), and the budget phones (and by "budget" I mean "the 600 dollar ones") are another 3 years behind that.
iPhones don't generally become too slow to realistically use until their support lifetime expires. Androids are like that out of the box unless you spend over a thousand dollars, and those only last for about half the time (a combination of inferior hardware and inferior software). It doesn't matter if you have a 120Hz screen if the UI only updates at 20.
This is why the only killer feature for Android (outside the cameras) is adblocking- which, of course, is what Google wants to prevent. They don't want you to run real Firefox (with the only effective adblock remaining), and they want you to pay for YouTube Premium rather than using NewPipe (or some other ReVanced successor) so you can't get out of paying 10 bucks to listen to a video with the screen off.
Because antitrust laws are strong in a few countries. While most of the 2nd or 3rd world antitrust laws are non existent. Google's strategy is to squeeze those markets. They have higher population too and hence many more advertising to sell and much more control of the "online experience" in those countries.
Realistically, they have nothing to lose. There a duopoly. It’s not like people pissed at this are going to migrate away.
Sure, a small proportion might move to Linux Mobile.
Most of the rest of the population will just stick to Google, because they don’t have a choice.
In many countries, your government or some other essential service demands that you have either an Apple or Google device.
personally, it makes me less enthusiastic about android as i don't need another iphone but n=1, so maybe it will work out for them....
It’s incredibly sad to watch Google abandon the values that inspired so much trust and belief that there is a better way to build a company.
Long time Pixel user here who has always believed the story that Apple has the closed, but refined, higher quality experience and Google has the slightly freer, but coarser UX.
I was convinced to make the switch this year and the Apple iPhone 17 Pro + whatever iOS version is, by far the worst phone I’ve ever owned.
Photos are worse, low light is worse, macros are worse, the UI is laggy, buggy and crashes.
The keyboard and autosuggest is shockingly bad.
Incredibly popular apps on iOS (YT, X, etc) are just as bad and often worse.
iMessage is a psyop. The absolute worst messaging app in history with zero desktop access for non-Mac users?!
If you’re on Android, and especially pixel, please know that Apple has completely given up and no longer executes at the level you remember from 10-15 years ago.
The whole software world is shit now. The foundations were stable decades ago. Like Windows kernel, WinAPI, .NET, WPF, Linux kernel. But end user software is so terrible. Windows 11 with ads and unhelpful AI. macOS which is a bit less terrible, but still too bloated. Linux with its eternal changes between X, Wayland, Alsa, Pipewire, Pulseaudio, sysvinit, systemd, and endless choices. Both iOS and Android are terrible. iOS was perfect 10 years ago, it's absolute clownfest now. I would blame AI vibe coders, but it started before. I don't know who to blame. Why can't we just build solid minimal non-bloated OS that will last for decades without major rewrites. We've got so good foundations but so terrible end product.
What confuses me is that easy "sideloading" has been the main thing that kept down the proliferation of degoogled custom ROMs.
Secure boot prohibits custom ROMs on most android devices
If custom ROMs will be more popular, it probably will push some vendors to unlock their devices. In the end, I don't think most of them really care.
Well you misunderstand enshittification. It will never get better again. Both Google and Apple have enshittified their phones. You can verify this on the App Store, on the Play Store, both of which have now more than 50% of search result screen space dedicated to ads, more when it comes to scams [1]. AND you can verify this in the financial statements of Apple and Google, where you see what we've always seen in Google: steadily increasing at a fixed rate profits from ads on the play store in Google's case, and steadily increasing at a fixed rate profits from "Services", which is App Store ads.
In Apple's case this has been the only Apple business to grow at all in several of the recent years. In fact there's quite a few Apple businesses that look like they are "revenue neutral", most famously iPads. Google is better, but not by much. Cloud is growing fast ("but why?" is a question that's unanswered. I mean, "because of AI", of course, but ... seriously?)
So not only are they enshittified, and you see them getting worse and worse over time, but the financial statements show: if you're expecting this to get any better either in the Apple or Google case, you're insane. Because clearly ads for scams are worth it for advertisers, and most other types of ads are not worth it. The situation evolves more and more towards the cable channel situation of 20 years back.
You could also reverse the view. The simple question: "are people willing to compromise on hardware quality to get less ads?" has a very clear NO answer. "Are governments/institutions that are totally dependent on these systems willing to pay to either improve phones or make an alternative available?", again has boatloads of evidence that the answer is NO, in all caps.
[1] Search for "credit card" or "lose weight" and judge for yourself. Top results are promoting Apple or Google themselves, everything else are ads, and very bad deals that trivially will neither accomplish the promised financial independence nor weight loss. Or should I put it like this: the credit card deals advertised are so bad they might achieve weight loss. By the way ads designed to mislead, which the top ads for either search obviously are, are what both Google and Apple promised time and again never to do.
>Every Android user lost to the increasing iOS market share is another customer Google has to pay exorbitant fees to a competitor to access.
What? Are you referring to the 36% of ad revenue Google pays to Apple? I don't think Google is too concerned about that.
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/11/14/apple-gets-36percent-of-goog...
Apple makes a lot more money. Google wants to do what Apple does, to make more money like Apple.
Google might also get paid to enable surveillance.
I have a feeling, despite Google's communications, this is all an attempt to thwart the numerous ad-free YouTube apps.
Another reason it should have been broken apart years ago. It's laughable that the biggest ad company in the world owns the largest video site in the world, largest browser in the world, largest search engine in the world, and largest mobile OS in the world.
NewPipe (FOSS available on F-Droid) is nice alternative to ads-infested YouTube. I disabled YouTube and YouTube Music apps on my mobile, and I use NewPipe instead. You can even download YT videos or audio from YT videos using it.
I'm using Pipepipe. I believe it's a fork from NewPipe, and has more features, namely skipping sponsor block, and intros
I'm using Grayjay at the moment. Somehow still available in the play store (though with reduced feature set).
So entitled. How do you expect Google to pay it's content creators that you watch if they didn't have ads?
When Google's ads do all the following, I'll consider guilt:
a) Don't throw malware in their ads.
b) Don't throw seizure-inducing flashes in their ads.
c) Allow turning off gambling in their ads.
They are the ecosystem shapers, let them figure it out.
I will be downvoted, but I'm not fooling myself. I don't care. As long as uBlock and yt-dlp still work, I'll use them. If Google breaks them, I'll resort to some automated screengrabbing + maybe some AI automation to click "skip" in a virtual machine or something.
People will use all sorts of excuses, like the ads are about gambling, or contain viruses, or are detrimental to mental health, or whatever. No, don't use these excuses. You just don't want ads, and it is still possible to not see them. That's respectable.
The issue is obviously one of trade-off.
Google pays content creators so little they have all started including ads in their videos. Si technically as long as you are counted they get paid. Meanwhile, Google is more and more aggressive with their own ads interrupting videos and pushing you to subscribe to their expensive offer.
Some people, like me, have just stopped watching YouTube. Other are turning to blocking ads.
It's the usual tug of war between revenues and UX but I don't think consumers have to feel bad about not playing by Google's rules.
What's going on with NewPipe? Their F-droid repository is down. Their domain is down. Their github repository is up, but it links to their domain, which isn't. Are they dying?
Seems like a DNSSEC screw-up. You can find more details here.
https://github.com/TeamNewPipe/website/issues/420#issuecomme...
If google push too hard, someone will make a "youtube mirror" - ie. a complete copy of youtube at a different domain.
The actual data could be hosted p2p across all the users devices, and any missing data retrieved one-time-only from real youtube servers.
That website will have an IP address and a registered owner. Taking down piracy websites is routine for governments, server providers, and domain registrars now, and they don't care whether the site is actually illegal. You can only get away with this long-term if the site is hosted in Russia, but Russia is sanctioned so how will you pay them?
Eh, somehow The Pirate Bay, Fitgirl Repacks, Anna's Archive, Sci-Hub etc seem to manage it.
The real challenge is delivering good enough performance that your site is better than waiting through 30 seconds of ads; and making it worth your time to run the site: there's hassle, legal risk, and it's not like you can run ads to make some cash.
They're all severely bandwidth limited. Wouldn't work for YouTube. TPB and FGR get around this using torrents.
Has there ever actually been a success story for using end user mobile handsets as servers?
> The actual data could be hosted p2p across all the users devices
Sounds like a Pied Piper app.
Do you have an estimate of how much would be needed to mirror?
BTW PeerTube is a thing.
1GB per video
I guess you never received a copyright infringement notice from your ISP for seeding a torrent.
Their strategy is growing markets, especially in india, and africa, and of course China. It's where the chinese oem dominate. Beside chinese OEM, i think the only other player is Samsung. So google strategy seems to be to circumvent people from misusing their OS by blocking certain services (mainly ads). This is done via apps from fdroid, and rooting and what not. If google can control how people uses their devices (block vpn based adblocking, or rooting all together), they have better grip on the market. At the end of the day, Android is front for an ad platform.
> [Google's] strategy is growing markets, especially in india, and africa, and of course China.
Really? China? Where Google services are banned and Android phones come with local OS versions that cut them out? "High-friction sideloading" won't affect anyone in China. It won't be part of their experience at all.
I think OP is suggesting that the ability to sideload is what is preventing their phones being distributed in China.
If you can present a "locked down" phone to regulators, you might be more likely to get permission to sell large volumes of them - like iPhones in China.
But there still won't be Google Services so what extra money is Google to make there? The markup on hardware. But they have to compete with local manufacturers with the very same OS. At least Apple is the only manufacturer selling phones with iOS.
Except only a few countries in the world have wages where their citizens can afford Apple.
While I can afford Apple, out of principle I am not buying anything above 300 euros, that requires me to also buy another computer for hobby coding, and a dev license.
All my use of Apple hardware is via projects where pool devices are assigned to the delivery team.
Mobile providers usually offer loans ("service contracts") where people get phones outside their financial standing (I regularly see high end iPhones and foldable phones of €1-2k run by people in a country where average monthly salary is less than €1k): if a highly visible device like your phone can be had for 10% of your monthly salary, people will, unfortunately, opt for it.
I tend to not use Apple not due to cost (I honestly believe it's OK to pay a premium for quality; I might disagree they offer it today though, as I do use a couple of their devices at work), but because of how closed their ecosystem is (and yes, all my personal devices are running some sort of Linux, and Android phones are rooted and with bootloader unlocked).
Many countries prefer the freedom of pre-pay/post-pay than being bound by contracts though.
Not everyone has the US culture of running their life on credit.
Because when life changes, it isn't only their phone they lose.
The only single time I had a contract, because it was the only way to get a Nokia N70, I learnt never to do another one ever again.
Are you sure it is your whole country or it's you?
I mostly buy my phones outright too, but I am under no impression that everybody else does it as well.
In my country, for example, buying phones from carriers as part of your plan just isn't a thing. As in, you couldn't do it even if you wanted to. Same for postpaid plans and contracts.
As a result, quite a lot of people use the "I can't believe they could make and sell an entire phone at this price" Xiaomi and similar phones.
This is a legitimately crazy take, yes the differentiations are less but how we got there isn’t so altruistic
I’m firmly in the Apple ecosystem and every one of those examples were not Apple’s unilateral decision
I think seeing the noose circling around both Apple and Google’s necks better explains the quagmire that Google is in
Apple was getting ahead of a European consumer protection ruling to switch to a single interoperable cable, USBC was there
Apple and Google worked to make RCS better for years, as Apple was ignoring it and Google was using a non-standard RCS
People who are reaponsible for Android all use Google phones. They dont care about android. They dont use it. They dont understand their use cases.
If you are hired by a manufacturer of say cola, you cannot drink the competition cola.
Those in google laugh when asked to show their phones - and then show iphones. In any other business they would be terminated.
I think an edit is in order, as your post, in the current form, doesn't make any sense.
> Apple has had better mobile hardware for years.
Well no, Chinese phones are above Apple material-wise (better battery, better cameras, better cooling) and on par SoC-wise since last year. That's what makes Google's strategy so baffling.
> Apple has better app selection (for most people).
It's entirely the same. I have gone back and forth regularly for the past 10 years. Android is completely on par app-wise. Apple has the iMessage lock-in in the US obviously but not in the rest of the world. Apple might have a slight advantage on the pro segment with the iPad but I don't think it has a huge impact on phones.
The really baffling thing to me is that while they lock down Android, they pay to put Gemini on iOS. Google has a real competitive advantage with IA and they just gave it to Apple.
It's clear to me that they are two companies fighting each other inside Google: the ex-Motorola who wants to be Apple and the service side who wants to be Microsoft.
I personally fear that they are making the bed of the regulators who will probably come for Play Protect at some point to open the door for alternative OS providers at least in Europe. But maybe they think it's coming anyway and are strengthening their position and trying to milk what they can in the meantime.
How are they on par SoC-wise? Last time I checked, Qualcomm was still trying to catch up to Apple.
Well, recheck.
Both Qualcomm and Mediatek have caught up on the phone SoC market.
The Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 has a better CPU than the A19 Pro but a slightly worse GPU. Apple has a very slight advantage in watt usage but that's more than offset by the battery gap. Same thing with the Dimensity 9500.
The SoC market is now extremely competitive.
> they pay to put Gemini on iOS. Google has a real competitive advantage with IA and they just gave it to Apple.
What Google loses by pushing iOS AI customers to ChatGPT outweighs what they gain by trying to convince people to switch phones for access to Gemini.
>>Apple has had better mobile hardware for years
Are you joking? Look at the latest Xiaomi, Oppo and other Chinese manufacturers, Apple would love to have the hardware they are shipping right now. From batteries to cameras and screens, apple is way behind on hardware tech. Yeah they are better than Samsung - but Samsung has also massively fallen behind what's the state of the art.
>>is another customer Google has to pay exorbitant fees to a competitor to access.
Last time I checked, it's apple paying Google, billions of dollars a year? And it will be even more now that Apple announced they are going to use Gemini as their AI base model.
> Last time I checked, it's apple paying Google, billions of dollars a year?
You checked wrong. Google pays Apple on the order of $20 billion to be the default search on iOS - this is so significant it accounts for ~5% of Apple's annual revenue
> Look at the latest Xiaomi, Oppo and other Chinese manufacturers, Apple would love to have the hardware they are shipping right now.
This is true, but their phones don't ship with Google services out of box (at least the last time I checked). So in reality, "Google's Android" is really mostly Samsungs and Pixels.
They do when purchased outside China (largely EU, UK, also Singapore and others)
They don't in the EU. Not in Slovenia, so not the entire EU. I've seen it first hand. It's also not some special law that we'd have invented here so I'm pretty sure there are other EU countries where it's the same.
Thinking Apple hardware is better is utterly laughable when you look at non-US Android devices.
Much better camera sensors, much better silicon carbon batteries etc in Oppo, Vivo, Honor and Xiaomi devices than anything Apple produces. Form factors Apple still hasn't figured out, such as 7th gen Foldables, Flip foldable phones etc, Camera zoom lenses that can be attached...
I take the opportunity to let people know that there are alternatives to Google/Apple duopoly on mobile. Link: https://www.ubuntu-touch.io/
Sure, GrapheneOS is often suggested but Ubuntu Touch is a really interesting alternative, their own store and ecosystem.
The community is amazing and welcoming. If there are Android apps which you can't do without, they can be emulated and used anyway. Imagine switching to Linux and then using Wine for the apps you really still need.
Yes, it's not perfect but Linux isn't either. If you think you're sufficiently tech savvy and want to make a change, give Ubuntu Touch a try. Find a cheap second hand supported device and play around, make some fun apps. (devices currently supported: https://devices.ubuntu-touch.io/ )
To me it's like being back when there was only Windows and Macs as viable home computer OS, and people were getting their feet wet with Linux and all its flavours. Now, it's the same but for mobile.
Ubuntu Touch has amazing UX, IMO. Sadly it's been non-viable for practically forever, and is non-viable today unless you want to use a 7-year-old out-of-production device. It's practically abandonware with a few hobby maintainers at this point, as much as it had potential compared to other alternatives.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I suppose emulating Android apps on a non-Android system will have the same problem as trying to run them in an Android without Google Services or in a rooted phone, i.e., banking (and similar) apps detecting it and refusing to run?
Were it not for that, I would never have stopped using Huawei, IMO the best phone brand by a mile. But I'm too busy a person to depend on hacks and having to regularly find new workarounds to access my banks.
I think you're right about certain apps refusing to run in an emulated environment.
I'm beginning to think we need to consider such apps, and the hardware they run on, as the outsiders. Keep a cheap "normal" Android phone for those apps, and those apps alone. Then keep a "real" second device for everything else. Up to you which one gets the SIM card and provides connectivity for the other (and ordinary phone services).
I'd rather go back to old-fashioned hardware dongles from banks – but hey, lacking that, maybe I'll just think of the first of those two devices as a clunky, overly expensive one of those.
Ubuntu Touch so far has the best hardware compatibility for things like camera and battery life. But it also insists on doing a lot of its own thing like using Mir instead of X and click packages. Running programs inside Libertine often crashes for me and is cumbersome. It makes developing for it harder. clickable needs Docker installed just so you can build and run your own apps on the device! Instead of letting you launch things quickly from terminal.
It make some things that should be easy on Linux harder. I.e., there's no Firefox + mobile tweaks like other linux mobile OSes, in part because it wants you to use Morphic.
But other linux mobile OSes dropped support for Halium/libhybris and even the very few that still have it don't seem to match Ubuntu Touch's level of hardware support.
> like using Mir instead of X
X11 is dead. It's over. At least Mir is now a Wayland client.
XLibre exists - it keeps x11 alive
Thank you for the much needed hopeful note. Maybe I'll try doing exactly that, sounds like a fun hobby. My biggest worry about Linux on mobile is that banking apps will stubbornly refuse to offer support to these platforms, basically forever.
I would like to see a high friction flow for installing all the crap from the Play Store to "protect and educate users". "Are you sure you want to install this app? It's only got a score of 2.8 and only 7 reviews, and will ask for all of these permissions?"
I want even worse restrictions on my parent phone so they dont install spyware. I want "install ONLY from fdroid". I trust their one server in a basement more than Google at this point.
Even if it has 4.8 and 7000 reviews it's often fake 4.8 because the reviews are botted / paid / dark patterned (e.g. when you pop up star rating on your users and beg them "rate the app plz" and when the users tap anything but 5 stars you say "k, ty" and keep those "bad" reviews for yourself)
That was just an example to communicate my idea: a better way to validate authenticity of the app could and should be used.
But to your point specifically, Play store and App Store have APIs to rate from within the app: when the pop up shows, app author does not have an option to avoid getting a 1-star rating (they are also time-restricted, eg. at most once every 180 days for Apple IIRC).
What devs do though, is to preempt it with "Are you enjoying our app?", and only giving you a formal rating pop-up if you answer "Yes".
And I want to see transparent price structures. Hey, this app is free. Installed. Only works with subscription. I hate it.
Edit: to clarify, I don't hate subscription, I hate that I cannot search for free apps in the store.
The hilarious part in all of this is watching Epic Games sue Google over how bad the "high friction" flow was for them to sideload their hefty bundle of Google Play violations and win the rights to be back in the Play Store.
It's OK now that Epic can have a one-click download for Fortnite to shove all the friction back into the sideloading experience.
Sideloading is a neologism to scare users and lawmakers, it just means "Installing software" and should be a basic right.
Also software installation in Android has been high friction for a while. Installing an APK on my phone is at least 10 clicks.
It looks like there is an astroturf brigade to parrot a blog post from F-Droid last October. Everyone is jumping on this bandwagon now, to pooh-pooh a perfectly cromulent term of art.
https://f-droid.org/en/2025/10/28/sideloading.html
That is my own opinion as an Android developer and ex custom ROM maintainer, I've not read that blog post.
Instead of ad-hominem, can you explain what do you really disagree on?
I disagree that "it simply means installing".
Because when you install software that isn't from the app store, it's unvetted and untrusted.
There is a whole different structure of trust when you download and install an app from your provider's app store.
No, it's not perfect. No, it won't prevent malware or scams. But there is trust, and there is a vetting process, and there are automatic updates and in-app purchases and the other perks that you get with an integrated app store.
Sideloading, or "simply installing" from an APK, is a different procedure that involves mostly disabling the trust and certification features that your app store was providing. I have never needed to do this for any app on any Android device, and I've owned them since KitKat.
In fact, I will probably enable S-mode on my next Windows machine, because it's that easy to just avoid 3rd party apps and crapware.
So I don't know why people want to muddy the waters. You literally want to stamp out a differentiating term "because it's scary". Is that not censorship? Are you opposing freedom of speech now? Don't users and vendors have a right to call a thing what it is, or use different terms for different procedures?
It seems absolutely nuts to try and censor this word, because y'all believe it was foisted on you by "lawmakers". That's nuts.
You're infantilising the users. It's untrusted by Google, but it's trusted by myself. I actually trust the Termux and Kodi devs way more than Google, yet they Google has been blocking their updates.
Note that the term sideloading is exclusively used by mobile OSes. On Windows MacOS and Linux you can install anything.
What I'm talking about is actual trust. Like, there are cryptographic measures taken, certificates involved, code signing, that kind of thing.
You claim that you "can install anything" on Windows, but that is simply false. The system's Driver Signature Enforcement will prohibit the install of unsigned or invalid signatures on device drivers. Windows SmartScreen will also give you trouble by blocking unsigned apps.
So yeah, you can bypass these protective measures and "install whatever you want" ultimately, but it is basically the same process as sideloading on Android, isn't it? Disabling a bunch of protections that are there for your safety?
Your trust, honestly, doesn't mean jack shit. There is cryptographic signing, and certificate authorities, and processes to approve the certificates that authorized developers use. You don't got jack shit with your "trust" of Termux and Kodi. It means nothing to the end-user.
We do not work in "trust me bro" territory when it comes to signing software, anymore. I am sorry/not-sorry to say. It is very important to have a chain of trust that goes up somewhere above "goldenarm @ HN".
Cryptographic trust is a different thing than actual trust. The latter is what makes the world work, the former is a tool people occasionally confuse for the real thing, but actually is mostly opposite to it.
Look we are talking about computers here. Computers don't understand or exercise actual trust as you describe it. Actual trust doesn't make computers work at all, because it doesn't exist in their world. So you need a proxy for it.
The security vetting, the authentication, the scans that are done, whether by Google Play or by F-Droid, are a process that tries to eliminate egregious abuses and basically curate the collection so that the users have something to actually trust. Now you understand that actual trust comes in degrees, right? I don't trust everything on Play equally. There are plenty of different types of trust relationships between me and the Play Store and the devs who put their apps on it.
But cryptographically, cybersecurity-wise, we need that CIA triad, and we need to authenticate that developers are who they say they are. And that authentication is the crux of cryptographic code signing. That we can trust that updates came from the source, and not a 3rd party injection or supply-chain attack. If Google or F-Droid countersigns it, then it's been through their vetting process as well. That's how cryptographic signing establishes trust relationships for computers.
If your computer doesn't trust an app or a driver, it won't download, install or run it. Since you cannot teach a computer "actual trust" there must be an analogue to this. And it's working fine. I don't know what you're on about "opposite to actual trust". If you don't trust Google Play, that's a you problem.
The inconvenient fact that bursts this bubble is that installing already is the default term, and it's the emergence of "side loading" which is the anachronistic attempt to redefine the term.
The idea that a precondition for something to count is installing is that it's vetted by a big company is the abberation, and the notion that it's trustworthy is belied by the avalanche of unsafe and privacy violating apps that find their way into the store. F-Droid apps are actually more carefully vetted than Play Store apps, so there goes the trust rationale.
You're the one muddying the waters.
You are actually wrong about F-Droid, because F-Droid uses code signing and has a PKI just like the Google Play Store does.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-Droid#Key_management
So, in terms of "trustworthiness" and "vetted by a big company"... oooOOOoooOOooo F-Droid isn't so big, but they are still needed to vet the apps that you get there?
F-Droid has their own vetting process, and their own assurance against malware, and a "stringent auditing process", so basically, they seem to be doing all the things that the Play Store does, but more strictly, and perhaps safer for people, and a panacea of open-source for everything.
So using F-Droid is not actually "sideloading" even though you got to bootstrap it a bit that way. In fact, the word "sideload" is not even found in its Wikipedia article.
It is, simply, an alternative app store. So if you trust F-Droid more than Play, that's fine, but don't pretend that there is no code signing, no vetting, or that you can "install whatever the hell you want" with F-Droid, because you can't: they won't let you, either.
So it seems that you are muddying the waters and obscuring how F-Droid actually works. Isn't that quite precious of you.
Cromulent for describing something of secondary importance or shadowy nature yes, but the entire idea is that that is wrong.
Look at everyone becoming a prescriptive grammarian all of a sudden! Yes, my friends: this is what censorship looks like.
Like, I have no idea why "sideloading" is supposed to be scary. It's not a scary term to me. Because it simply means data transfer. It's no more scary than "uploading" or "downloading" really. I mean perhaps "torrenting" is a little scarier? I don't know. I am not a torrenter.
But really it should imply some friction and some barriers. Because it involves breaking the trust model. You're not jailbreaking your phone but you're setting up something that's inherently less than secure. People should be aware of that.
It is not infantilising users; it is educating and empowering them to know the difference. Is user awareness and preparedness a problem for y'all?
The uneducated one here is the one who appears unaware that "installing software" was a thing long before app stores. Security is irrelevant to the meaning of the word, so continuing to go on about it only further devalues your point and does nothing to counter the OP's point.
"installing software" sometimes still consists of
So if you want to have a conversation about trusting curl and bash and random gists...Like I said, I installed software in many ways back in the day. I typed it in; I loaded off cassette tape; I loaded off disk. One common denominator was loading from trusted sources. My Atari cartridges were store-bought and not homebrew. I went to B.Dalton mostly for the software, and got it shrinkwrapped from the publisher.
I had a number of classmates and colleagues who caught viruses and malware from loading and installing cracked software or untrusted programs... or even alleged porn, from shady sources. This is still a good way to get infected.
When I get on a friend's computer, I often have occasion to congratulate them for being uninfected, and it's nearly always because they "practiced good hygiene" in terms of loading only trusted software from trusted sources.
So you're correct, in that really nothing has changed. Back in 1983 you could certainly "sideload" crap from a pirate BBS and then suffer the consequences. And we all had choice words for people like that.
If the make sideloading high-friction, either via account-bound or apk upload or permissions from MNO/ISP, I will leave android. I have a bunch of my own apps that only I use, not released to the public, if I cannot use them, I have zero reason to stay on android.
I think one of the reasons they want to lockdown the system is to prevent guys like me from locking THEM out of my home/ecosystems, as and example, I build my own launchers, specifically for TCL TV's, which runs Android TV and has Developer Mode + adb. Which means I remove all the bloat & ad garbage, which they want to prevent.
We will get to the point where google will remove your ability to set custom dns servers and only use theirs.. just wait & see friends.
Anywhoo, when this side loading fence materializes, I will jump ship to apple.
Yeah, as an iOS dev, the grass is not greener on this side of the fence…
From that I can see from the early leaks, it may actually be if you live inside of the EU where alternative app stores are now a requirement.
iOS doesn't have the F-Droid ecosystem equivalent, but she F-Droid dies because of Google, there's a chance AltStore will be able to take its place.
It's not, but at least it will be equally ungreen.
Why jump to another abuser when you could seriously start looking into alternatives? Ubuntu Touch has a really active community and it's very stable, you can even emulate android apps which you might absolutely need.
I don't see Apple as the obvious next step; the obvious step, when one is pissed off with abuse of power is open source, not Apple.
Can I install my banking apps? Is there a Google pay equivalent?
As much as I want open source, I really don't think it's there yet for most people.
> Can I install my banking apps?
Choose a bank with viable web banking.
> Is there a Google pay equivalent?
It's called a debit/credit card.
Saying 'don't use those things' is not a viable solution. It's like when I was trying to move to linux a couple years ago I asked for help getting HiDPI/scaling to work and there were many responses saying 'who needs that?'
> Choose a bank with viable web banking.
There are five options in my country, 3 of which require app push based 2FA to log into the web interface and 2 of which only have an app interfere.
Maybe I could get a EU bank from another EU country but my employer will not accept an out of country account for salary deposits because it makes their tax life difficult and my mortgage provider doesn't trust foreign accounts either.
> It's called a debit/credit card
Since about two years ago, activating a card requires the app.
> Maybe I could get a EU bank from another EU country but my employer will not accept an out of country account for salary deposits because it makes their tax life difficult and my mortgage provider doesn't trust foreign accounts either.
I do not doubt this is happening, but it is forbidden under SEPA. All IBANs, no matter from which member country, must be treated equally. Unfortunately, "IBAN discrimination" happens quite frequently still. The European commission recommends filing a complaint with your national governing body.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_banks_in_the_Republic_...
so Eire has 5 significant banks, and 15 'less significant'. There are also 276 Credit Unions, I don't know if they are useful. (I had a Credit Union account in the past, could send/receive online but no payment card)
(I don't know their suitability, but there are more than 5 options in your country)
Of the "significant banks" listed, only AIB and Bank of Ireland do consumer bank accounts. I suspect the presence of the others is more to do with wanting an EU entity for targeting larger EU markets than the Irish domestic market. For example, Citibank only expanded from "large tech multinationals" to also "mid sized businesses that are planning to scale internationally" in 2023 [1]
Also on that Wikipedia page are Dell's private bank, Danske Bank (closed their Irish retail business in 2013), Klarna (sort of banking-adjacent, but they're not giving you a current account), etc.
The 5 banks offering retail consumer accounts nationwide are AIB, permanent TSB, Bank of Ireland, Revolut and N26. The first 3 are the surviving brick and mortar banks and the latter 2 are recent-ish neobank entries.
Credit unions are limited to serving customers in their local area. The one credit union who's catchment area I'm in also requires app based 2FA.
[1]: https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2023/0925/1407279-citi-to-g...
(Side note: The name of the country in English is Ireland, the name in Irish is Éire - using the accent-less Irish name in English was promoted by the UK government and BBC because they didn't want to recognise the name of the country prior to the GFA in 1998. Most people will also accept Republic of Ireland if you need to distinguish from Northern Ireland, even though that's technically not the name)
Your employer's tax obligations should depend on where you live and where they live and where the work happens, not where your bank account is.
Most people don’t want to rearrange their life around what their phone can’t do.
If you are a normal human being who doesn't enjoy suffering, you'll give up the idea of doing web bank on a mobile phone.
Sideloading is already worse on iOS
Why to apple?
> Matthew Forsyth, Director of Product Management, Google Play Developer Experience & Chief Product Explainer, said the system isn’t a sideloading restriction, but an “Accountability Layer.”
And... What about accountability for hosting distributing spyware, malware loaded apps from Google Playstore and hundreds of copy cat, misleading apps?
Why can't they pose a question when the phone is setup?
- Yes, I want to sideload
- No I dont want
If the user says NO then to later enable it to allow sideload Yes, the user needs to factory reset phone. Done.
>And... What about accountability for hosting distributing spyware, malware loaded apps from Google Playstore and hundreds of copy cat, misleading apps?
The rules don't apply to billion dollar corporations. Meta is showing 15 billion scam ads per day.
https://www.reuters.com/investigations/meta-is-earning-fortu...
> And... What about accountability for hosting distributing spyware, malware loaded apps from Google Playstore
This is no joke. The Playstore is filled with malware that pretend to be a different app. It takes days if not weeks to remove these apps.
I have twice now had to recover the devices of family members when they installed malware on Samsung phones running up to date firmware.
That malware to this level is even possible is another matter.
A somewhat unrelated thing, is I got bombarded with ads for a 'mental health mindfulness' service on one of the major international news websites.
I decided to Google the company after a few days. I was immediately confronted by thousands of reports by angry users, complaining about how after they tried the app, they got locked into a yearly subscription at exorbitant prices and it was impossible to cancel. The company itself is registered in some offshore tax haven.
They used to scare us, that if we went to those shady pirate websites, somebody would steal our credit cards and steal our money. Well...
This right here exposes the bullshittery about the reasons behind preventing sideloading on Android phones.
For Google everything is about protecting revenue, even when doing so exposes their users to real harm, and that's why they will not address the issue of copycat apps, poor practices on play store security or anything else that lowers the number of downloads on apps on play store. But, heaven forbid, I want to download an app that doesn't create revenue for them onto a phone I OWN, Google spends money lavishly.
The Internet cranks are right. Google is run by bean counters and all the invective the cranks heap on the Google leadership is entirely earned.
When this whole thing got announced, I purchased a new Pixel 9 and flashed it with GrapheneOS.
I am hoping that in about 6-8 years (when I realistically need to update) the landscape might be a bit better. Or who knows, maybe I'll just continue using GrapheneOS.
So far I have not had a single issues with it. Apps the rely on attestation do not work, but honestly it's only two applications out of hundreds so I can live with it.
I also financially support GrapheneOS on a monthly basis (15$). This is just too important of an project not to.
GrapheneOS can choose to simply not apply the same restrictions but now that they're partnering with another vendor to get security updates earlier, I'm not sure what the future holds in this aspect.
This is only an issue for Google compliant Android so projects like LineageOS will be fine. Depending on their implementation, this may even just be restricted to AOSP with Samsung and others just ignoring the extra restrictions.
But, if they make compliance a requirement for being part of their parent programme, GrapheneOS will be in a tough spot.
I think the EU should pile in as well. It's basically an oven-ready independent mobile OS.
Graphene OS spends its social capital on hallucinating attacks from other projects and bullying other projects by sending their followers against them, based on those hallucinated attacks. It also has a completely intransparent project structure based around a supposedly retired mean developer, who then just did not (and still does almost all commits). That's not a project where the EU can invest money in, and the confidence users on HN tend to put into that project is baffling.
Yes that guy is extremely weird, he should delegate operations and community management to someone who isn't weird and stick to development.
The EU hate GrapheneOS. They chased them out to Canada just last year because they didn't want to put in backdoors for law enforcement.
The EU should pile money into /e/OS. It's maintained by an EU company (Murena) and has European hardware options - Fairphone (NL), SHIFTphone (Germany), and Volla (Germany). Yes, I know some of them use US Qualcomm chips, but you have to start somewhere.
Europe is hostile towards Graphene users.
I am sure you know this, but just in case:
Europe is a continent, with many disparate nations and cultures. This continent is not hostile towards Graphene users.
In Europe there is the European Union (EU), which also is comprised of many disparate nations and cultures but a subset of those comprising Europe.
I say the following as a staunch supporter of European integration and cooperation:
The EU is actively hostile towards any software with the stated goal of safeguarding users right to privacy and security. That means GrapheneOS but also Signal, Matrix and more.
edit: spelling & grammar
Source: https://boingboing.net/2025/07/23/your-google-pixel-might-ge...
The new phone is a nice reward for Google for this announcement
My next phone will be on GrapheneOS or EOS as well, the last straw was Samsung removing the bootloader unlock with an update (not even sure what they've done is legal)
So I was actually planning on upgrading from a Pixel 7 Pro to a Pixel 10 around the time this announcement came out last year, but have put it on hold as I wait to see what form these changes take.
Like if it was "you need to do the developer 7-tap of the version label in settings", it'd be like "whatever". But given how long this process has taken, I suspect that is not what they've planned - it wouldn't take this long to develop, it certainly wouldn't take this long to explain.
So I suspect that we're actually in the "Maybe Later" phase of "Google wants to control which apps you install: [ ] Yes [ ] Maybe Later". And I mean, if their proposed solution turns out to be "Me and 25 of my closest friends can install apps I make by phoning home to Google servers", then like, I can do that on iOS too. And if I'm not going to have meaningfully more control of my Android device, I may as well just go to iOS where Apple at least have a better privacy record and don't seem to have have an all-encompassing goal of "where can we put AI features to drive AI usage metrics up the most?"
Honestly just install grapheneos on your Pixel, that is what I did and bought a Pixel for that reason alone. I use all Google play services and it works great, only payment with phone doesn't work.
I heard that the frog boiling is a myth. You can't boil frog alive, it will jump out. As opposed to humans
The frog had to be pretty well lobotomized to keep it from jumping out. One can recreate the ”experiment” with a lobotomized frog and mostly get the result described though
That's because the frog has low switching costs from the pot to the outside world.
The image at the top of the article is actually what already happens in Android and has done for years. At first, I thought that this meant that the article was very outdated, but no, this is from January 2026.
I imagine the text of the article is fine, but I'm a little bit disappointed that Android Authority chose to lead with that image and caption and make it seem that this is what the future flow would look like. You'd think they'd know better.
I was never an iOS user, or developer - exactly because Android was more "open", exerted less control over a user of the device.
The same reason I use Linux for 25 years (not ideological, but it just makes most sense by far). In time where this view (win11 vs. Linux) is starting to make sense to more and more people, few rare config nuances are getting easier to solve due to LLM-s, going into the opposite direction with a mobile OS calls for users to also start seriously considering more open alternatives and making a path for users of our app to do the same.
The highest risk is the play store itself. Gambling and addiction. So, when does Google add "high friction" there, instead of encouraging it? Ah, well, it's the money! Than stop bending the truth.
As TFA does not mention it, and I don't see any top-level comments discussing it, this is a continued rollout of a "feature" first piloted in Brazil, Indonesia, Singapore, and Thailand. See:
https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/08/elevating-...
https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/11/android-de...
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/google-android-dev...
Of course, HN reaction has always been skeptical about this including in earlier news. But the reporting on it, and the countries in which it is piloted in, seems to me to involve government/banking industry cooperation with or pressure on Google to combat cyber fraud. These polities are prime targets for Android cyber fraud of this sort due to Android penetration, and seemingly (to me) also cultural proximity to scam operators, and tech-illiteracy among the vulnerable demographic. (And anticipating a reply I got from a previous article on my comment on this feature---no, it's just not feasible to comprehensively educate retirees against evolving tactics by scam operators and expect that to be a sufficient sole countermeasure.)
These measures are indeed the result of governments blaming their citizens getting scammed on phone manufacturers. There's not a lot Google can do here.
However, Google is choosing to extend these changes worldwide. That's where the problem really starts. People in Asia and Brazil may vote for idiots who will shift the blame for their citizens' lack of basic digital education onto others, but that doesn't mean that countries where this type of fraud barely exists should also be subject to these extreme measures.
I know in some people's eyes saying this will make me a Google shill but this reminds me of the manifest v3 thing. What makes it to the top of HN is mostly clickbait a las "Google is cracking down on ad blockers" or in this case "Google is preventing side loading". These articles don't link to primary sources (Google) and they (intentionally?) miss all nuance.
There is no doubt that sideloading by uninformed users can be used as a backdoor.
It's also not a surprise that banks/industry that's accountable to recover the losses for tricked customers is looking to someone else to solve it for them.
However, if this was "piloted", do we have the numbers of how much has it decreased the number of scams or their impact?
I wouldn't go as far as to say that it is impossible to "educate the public", but it is indeed extremely hard. But click-through pop-ups have succeeded when?
Yeah for every HN user complaining about it there are hundreds of people sideloading apps (not realizing what they're doing - under promise of loans or other advantages) and then getting their phone ransomed
For every person getting ransomed by a sideloaded app there are ten people getting ransomed by apps they installed from the Play Store.
And two wrongs don't make a right
If we ban sideloaded apps under this reasoning, we have to ban the Play Store as well, ten times more urgently.
The current system is already high friction. Enabling "advanced protection" in your google account additionally requires installing apps through adb.
Some manufacturers like Xiaomi already have a very annoying flow for enabling developer options and using ADB. You need to have a SIM card inserted, need to create a Xiaomi account and there's several popups with timers you have to wait through.
I'm sure I'm missing something but wasn't this already the case where the first time you try to install an APK, you had to go into Settings and mark the relevant application as a trusted source for installing APKs from?
Some friction is probably wise. I remember them introducing the requirement to individually allow each app you're installing things from. The question is, how much more friction will they add? I suspect they will add prompts per install, too.
So, which 3rd mobile vendor and/or OS are you moving to?
Not OP but my GrapheneOS phone is fine with me installing things on it. It just seems like a better Android at this point.
If auto-updating apps stops working on fdroid, I'll be installing Graphene, Lineage or taking a shot at something like postmarket/ubuntu touch/plasma mobile. I've used Lineage as a daily driver before for a while, so I'll probably just go back to that and tell developers to support the platform I'm using. It doesn't rent seek on developers or users.
Don't be evil
Can we please stop calling it "sideloading"? It's simply "installing" software on hardware that I own, and that I should have full control over.
If that's your bar - you should ban the whole of Android's ecosystem from your networks.
https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/malicious-and...
Those of us who use Android phones now - and install FOSS apps form F-Droid or just any apps from elsewhere other than the church of Google - might be thinking: "Oh, I need to work out how I'll have decent app access after this happens."
But what we should really be thinking is: "Oh, I need to _donate_ to projects which aim to patch Android-based phones to remove these restrictions; or to projects which aim to replace (most/all of) Android completely".
We need to speak with our wallets in addition to just ranting about Google.
The real question is if you can still sideload:
1) a .apk that was not developer-verified
2) without informing Google of this
Steam phone incoming in 3... 2... 1...
"3? What's that?" - Valve
I am not very well educated when it comes to alternative stores landscape. But I do know that in Russia there's now Rustore: https://www.rustore.ru/en which functions by automatically downloading and updating APKs for you.
During the APK install, however, you do see the ugly Android prompt about how this app may be dangerous.
Rustore has its own app payment system, which obviously circumvents Google Play fees.
This works on regular Android phones.
Are there other examples of such stores? Perhaps it's Google's answer to that.
F-Droid and derivatives are really popular in the FOSS community.
oh, right! Didn't have my coffee yet :-)
But one difference is Rustore actually has payments and subscriptions, which hurts Google more.
I was expecting Google has stopped doing most of the business in Russia due to sanctions. Do you still see Russian-company ads in Google Search results or Youtube? Similarly, I thought they were not selling apps or ads in Google Play store in Russia either (they might be showing ads from non-Russian companies because, well, that just increases the show-count and absolute number of clicks).
I no longer reside in Russia, so I am not being targeted by these.
But I think that it mostly comes down to companies being able to pay for these ads. Mastercard / Visa payments no longer work in Russia. If a company has a way to pay (by having another business entity in another country), then it probably works.
Unfortunately both Russia and Ukraine are slacking in losing the war so it doesn't seem that making payments to Russia will be easy soon. Now of course if they were Uzbeki or Kazakhstani stores it would be completely different.
In the technofeudal new world order, your smartphone is not just a device, it is your gov issued digital ID/wallet
The Apple/Google OS duopoly exists by design, they view bootloader unlocking and sideloading as threats because they break that control
They want to be able to define and/or revoke your existence in the system
No escape, because no alternative
Exactly. For most people not having a bank app, probably no digital payments due to that, and no government-issued digital ID is too much friction to even consider any alternative.
How does this relate to the announcement from a while back about introducing signatures that tie back to Google? (IE trusted developer program or whatever they're calling that horse shit.)
This is in response to all the pushback they got from that
Funny way to say 'dark patterns'
Add high friction to scammy ads on your platform, Google
The year of linux desktop unironically may be close. What is the situation with mobile?
There are community projects, but no Valve in sight.
Part of me thinks they wouldn't be doing this if their own ad team wasn't knowingly accepting money from fraudsters.
Ah yes, such enormous friction, to install F-Droid and install an app via it, instead of Playstore. Argh, sooo much friction, really unbearable. /s
Google is getting more ridiculous by the day.
I agree with high friction sideloading. it is the best of both worlds. no friction sideloading is too easily exploited by scammers. having a member of my family exposed to this kind of thing in the past taught me some things.
I don't agree with the word "sideloading" though. It's just _installing_.
"Installing" has the connotation of doing it directly from the Play Store. This is also known as "Downloading" (because the data is on a server, in the cloud, and you're fetching it "downstream" to a local device.)
"Sideloading" doesn't refer to the installation process, but to the file transfer process. You're sideloading when you transfer, e.g. APKs from your notebook to your Android. Or, from a USB stick into your phone or something.
In general, though, "sideloading" also refers to any "non-app-store" installation. It's a kind of colloquial shorthand. It's not really a technical term. But it's adequate for getting the point across.
If you just called it "installing" without qualifying it, how would anyone know that it's a different process, or that it's accomplished not by navigating to the app store? It seems that you would invite ambiguity here!
The point is that before walled-garden app stores, that was how pretty much every normal person installed software on their PC's. Using the term "sideloading" for that is a clever invention to try and retroactively rebrand what is actually super-normal as something scary.
It is not really though.
"Sideloading" refers to data transfer between two local, peer devices. Really, that is it. It is not "something scary" or something forbidden. It is not even really installing. It's data transfer.
So "before walled-gardens" people would install software in many many ways. I originally typed it in from scratch, or from a magazine. I loaded it from tape. Or diskette. That's not really "sideloading" if you think about it, because it's just "loading" from peripheral storage.
Later, when people dialed up on a PC, they could "download" software and then install it or do whatever with other data or media. They could also upload it. They could transfer it among devices locally. This was not, at the time, called "sideloading" but just transfer, or "null modem", or "sneakernet", or "a station wagon full of backup tapes".
If we're going to use "sideloading" in the strictest sense, then we cannot actually refer to the process of downloading APK files separately and then installing them, because that's literally downloading. But that is the colloquial meaning now.
Hey, if you want to coin a new term or neologism for it, by all means do so. But it seems absurd to downplay "sideloading" as having "scary" or "negative" connotations, when it really doesn't. You've got to look past the hype and F.U.D.
Remember, there was a time when people considered FTP and torrenting to be dangerous or subversive. Perhaps they still do.
Given that you've agreed that "sideloading" is not an accurate descriptor of installing apps directly from the web browser, I'd think you could see how using "sideloading" incorrectly like this is a marketing gimmick designed to scare users (and politicians!) into backing the official platform app store monopolies...
Honestly, no. Not for everyone.
As someone from Germany, I don't want Google to nanny family members computing devices. They don't want it either. It is completely absurd for an ad company in a surveillance state an ocean away to play IT services for everyone. This has already gone to far.
Rather, there should be tools for value-aligned IT services and technically minded family members to help.
You should join Google PR. Or are you?
TBH this doesn't seem a particularly high friction change. It seems very like what we have to do already, or like what we do on OSX.
They did not specify what exactly is the new workflow is/what is high friction about it in the post no?
> like what we do on OSX.
You are on macOS. Not others. You are following Apple. We don't.
I absolutely HATED the first time I had to deal with it... at least now it works a little better.. but the first version didn't actually tell you that you needed to go into security settings right after to enable the install.
Still not a big fan of it... though admittedly mostly just install stuff via brew/cask more than direct downloads as a result.
> like what we do on OSX.
...which is so much of a complicated nuisance that most people simply give up. If this will go the way I think it will prepare to have to skip 10 things, write 3 ADB commands and submit a video of you spinning around for 30 seconds just to install your pirated game.
Just to install a proper call recorder or a better Work Profile manager.
Turning a possibility to install software outside of the app store should be about as normal as the fact you're using a laptop or desktop to install your pirated games.
Yeah, you.
If someone having access to "side load" an app has it to install a pirated game, then you have your OS, where you are not limited only to Apple/Amazon/Google store, simply for installing pirated software.
QED :)
> so much of a complicated nuisance that most people simply give up
Most people should give up.
The number of legitimate unsigned apps for MacOS that your grandparents should frictionlessly one-click-to-install is essentially nil.
Meanwhile, they're receiving countless bullying demands a day to install keyloggers and drain their bank accounts.
The threat model tradeoffs are clear.
The threat model doesn't work. It depends on Apple doing their job, and even $99/year doesn't prevent Apple from signing a Trojan horse of your competitor: https://blog.lastpass.com/posts/warning-fraudulent-app-imper...
You want to talk about confusing Grandma? Why isn't Lastpass the first entry on the App Store when you search for it verbatim? At the going rate, installing signed software is more deceptive than searching for the official installer online.
Not sure if anyone should be installing Lastpass. It's been massively hacked in 2022 and 2024, and there's currently an ongoing attack (Jan 2026).
That's true but does not detract from the GPs main point: if you are curating your app store then you should do a proper job of it or you lose the curation argument.
A single scary warning per source (ie per new certificate that you choose to trust) would be fine. If I had to jump through a few hoops to install f-droid on a stock device that would be fine. But once I've authorized f-droid the OS needs to shut up and stay out of the way for good. No "are you sure you want f-droid installing this other thing" nonsense.
This is the human death drive externalized into thought. Reject it in all of its instances with extreme prejudice.
I think i have an idea that would better protect normal users while not getting in the way for power users and developers:
1. All applications must be signed with a valid store key.
2. Anyone can import a store key after rebooting into the bootloader (similar flow as custom roms)
3. Google can maintain a list of malicious keys and reject them
Why is this better? Because it makes it much harder to trick grandma into installing an APK some site just dropped.
1. google can arbitrarily revoke key. Countries can revoke key.
3. Like the amazing malicious crapware from PlayStore that they allow. They don't reject that.
4. Grandma installs crap mainly from PlayStore