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... 🤔
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
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.
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?
Of course they will! /cough
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.
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.
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).
Google warns of security risks
lol. if they actually kept all the bad shit out of the play store, they might have a valid argument.
They are the security risks
To be fair, more stuff gets through the apple app store.
This said, fuck Google.
The Apple App Store is a cesspool. Has been for years. It’s just pushing short-term games with gobs of micro transactions by the hundreds. That’s almost all you see. Tons and tons of it.
Fuck Google. It is turning Android into dumb platform, which is tightly controlled by them piece by piece. From restricting different APIs (accessibility for example) to Play Integrity checks and recently developer identification even for stupid APKs. Fuck Google, I hope they keep being put in place.
I hope an alternative open platform emerges and google android goes poof. It would serve as a warning to others.
Honestly, that is quite unrealistic, is it?
It is. But dreams are what future realities are made of.
Not really, given there are already multiple flavours of android in the Chinese market, that are Google free. Samsung has kept up pace on their alternative to keep Google at bay. Linux phone and other alternatives like e/os exist. The main problem seems to be adoption and Google apps. It just seems crazy to me that the hardware makers want to lock themselves in to one supplier that could turn on them in an instant. Open sourcing their drivers would give free community improvements and make tech enthusiasts favour them. The public often follows enthusiasts, provided it's easy to do so.
Does this undermine Googles plans to block side loading?
Well, if i can download a F-droid app via Playstore... then i'm basically not "sideloading" anything. This could be interesting!
But the whole (paid) 'verification' thing still is troubling tho. And we know Google; they are good at breaking things one way or another.
My thoughts exactly. That could be very comfy for us users, but many devs will be (and justifiably so) wary of verifying themselves.
If I understand well, even if you were able to install F-droid through the store (which you can't because Google doesn't like it), you won't be able to install apps with F-droid anyway if they implement this.
that's why they're pushing to lock down the devices themselves.. that's outside the scope of the ruling.
Google has to allow other app stores in Google Play Store in 2026, if Google likes it or not is not relevant.
And yes, the question remains if you can download from F-droid after installing through PlayStore, i agree with you there (because of the verification thing). It depents on what the court thinks 'sideloading' is, since we already know what Google think it means...
A lot of apk devs of nice little unique and often free apks are made by people who aren't going to want to hand over there identification and private info to Google in order to be verified.
I mean, they can still send the code to F-Droid and F-Droid can sign it under their banner. F-Droid doesn't have to do ID verification.
There is no "under f-droids banner". Any apk under any store or no store at all gets its check through google.
What does this mean for Apple then? Will someone open a case against Apple arguing unlawful practices? Man I hope so.
Welcome to the Android community on Lemmy. Here you can participate in amazing discussions and events relating to all things Android.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
1. All posts must be relevant to Android devices/operating system.
2. Posts cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
3. No spam, self promotion, or upvote farming. Sources engaging in these behavior will be added to the Blacklist.
4. Non-whitelisted bots will be banned.
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.
Community Resources: