Seems that google’s announced plans to restrict sideloading on Android are now in direct conflict with the Supreme Court’s order to open the Play Store to alternative app stores and reduce its control over app distribution.
Don’t call it “sideloading” it’s a negative term attempting to rebrand installing any app you want: taboo and illegal by effect. Call it what it is, installing apps. Thats it.
Google’s announced plans aren’t actually about restricting “sideloading” (aka installing). They’re about restricting actually running the code, and developing/distributing the code.
Content distributed through these “other app stores” and elsewhere will remain installable, but your phone will refuse to run the software if that content isn’t signed with the special Google’s Favorite Boy token that the developer got by providing personally identifiable information to Google. Get that “certification”? Your app can be run on Android no matter how you distribute it, including “side loading” (download APK file, install app).
Don’t have the Official Nintendo Seal of Quality Verified Developer token to sign your app with? The only way a user can run your code is by connecting to a PC and installing your app with adb (a development tool).
Not at all, they can still require apps to be signed, so long as you’re free to allow app installations. They’ll weasel out by saying the signing is for safety/security reasons, to avoid malware and shit.
Right and then they might well lose the next antitrust suit for weaseling around. Judges know what this kind of behavior means, though who can say how they’ll react.
The timing is too perfect, the effects are too apparent.
No, as it stands this is the end of F-Droid. Each developer registration must include the manifest IDs of all apps they publish. No way F-droid can include all the apps they publish in their registration.
Nope. No apk you can get a hold of will be installable without googles over the internet check. At current it looks like you’ll be able to force an install using adb shell commands, but that will effectively gut almost anyone from installing an unsigned apk. Also, Google would be able to remove even that option if they so choose.
To be clear, it’s not the Supreme Court’s order, they only declined the appeal or to issue a stay, so technically it is a “regular” court order, which is just as binding.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
5. Engage respectfully: Harassment, flamebaiting, bad faith engagement, or agenda posting will result in your posts being removed. Excessive violations will result in temporary or permanent ban, depending on severity.
6. Memes are not allowed to be posts, but are allowed in the comments.
7. Posts from clickbait sources are heavily discouraged. Please de-clickbait titles if it needs to be submitted.
8. Submission statements of any length composed of your own thoughts inside the post text field are mandatory for any microblog posts, and are optional but recommended for article/image/video posts.
Seems that google’s announced plans to restrict sideloading on Android are now in direct conflict with the Supreme Court’s order to open the Play Store to alternative app stores and reduce its control over app distribution.
How will this play out in the end… 🤔
Don’t call it “sideloading” it’s a negative term attempting to rebrand installing any app you want: taboo and illegal by effect. Call it what it is, installing apps. Thats it.
I like this way of thinking right here.
Google’s announced plans aren’t actually about restricting “sideloading” (aka installing). They’re about restricting actually running the code, and developing/distributing the code.
Content distributed through these “other app stores” and elsewhere will remain installable, but your phone will refuse to run the software if that content isn’t signed with the special Google’s Favorite Boy token that the developer got by providing personally identifiable information to Google. Get that “certification”? Your app can be run on Android no matter how you distribute it, including “side loading” (download APK file, install app).
Don’t have the
Official Nintendo Seal of QualityVerified Developer token to sign your app with? The only way a user can run your code is by connecting to a PC and installing your app with adb (a development tool).with a $500m check made out directly to the commander in sleep
No, that’s illegal. They’ll make it out to the Trump Presidential Library
They will buy his shit coin
Not at all, they can still require apps to be signed, so long as you’re free to allow app installations. They’ll weasel out by saying the signing is for safety/security reasons, to avoid malware and shit.
So this means they’ll take responsibility for malware and offer support, right? Right?
Right and then they might well lose the next antitrust suit for weaseling around. Judges know what this kind of behavior means, though who can say how they’ll react.
The timing is too perfect, the effects are too apparent.
So one dev can sign off on f-droid and then we’re fine as long as we use that in stead of the play store?
The OS will probably check the signature of any app you’re trying to install regardless of if it’s from F-Droid or the Play Store
No, as it stands this is the end of F-Droid. Each developer registration must include the manifest IDs of all apps they publish. No way F-droid can include all the apps they publish in their registration.
Or of course, each developer themselves becomes responsible for “registering as a developer” and thus loses all anonymity as a dev.
That won’t work either, because F-Droid produces the builds themselves.
Nope. No apk you can get a hold of will be installable without googles over the internet check. At current it looks like you’ll be able to force an install using adb shell commands, but that will effectively gut almost anyone from installing an unsigned apk. Also, Google would be able to remove even that option if they so choose.
I was wondering if these 2 things will be somehow connected 🤔
To be clear, it’s not the Supreme Court’s order, they only declined the appeal or to issue a stay, so technically it is a “regular” court order, which is just as binding.