19
Keep Android Open (keepandroidopen.org)
submitted 1 week ago by not_IO@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/android@lemmy.world
45 comments fedilink hide all child comments

People should be able to write software for Android, and distribute it outside Google's Play store, without having to:

  • pay Google
  • give government ID to Google
  • agree to Google terms and conditions

People should be able to install the software they want on their phone, from sources other than Google's Play store, without having to jump through Google-imposed hoops.

e.g. via F-Droid.

We've got until September this year to stop Google squeezing the open Android ecosystem.

https://keepandroidopen.org/

https://mastodon.neilzone.co.uk/@neil/116087210269757672

top 45 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 week ago

Or... just don't use android. There's a few degoogled forks out there, they should really catch on.

"The tighter you squeeze, the more slips through your fingers."

Also, we all know this isn't about keeping malicious apps off people's devices, because even the play store is full of malicious apps. I'd trust anything on F-droid more.

[-] Olgratin_Magmatoe@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 week ago

I trust 8 year old out of date F-droid apps more than google play front page apps.

[-] Trudge@piefed.social 1 points 1 week ago

Deleted by author

[-] krigo666@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

And I'm already steadily moving to Linux based platforms like Mobian, SailfishOS, Ubuntu Touch, and others.

This vile move by Google was written on the wall for years. Those who use their products are test subjects who then are promoted to cattle, not customers.

[-] certified_expert@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago

Dumb question: how is this affecting projects like Graphene OS?

Can android just be forked and detached from google?

I am guessing that despite being "open source", the project depends on many binary blobs to interface with the wireless devices ??

[-] AmbitiousProcess@piefed.social 1 points 1 week ago

GrapheneOS is currently unaffected, at least specifically regarding your freedom to install apps. They've stated this won't affect GrapheneOS.

The main problem as pointed out by floofloof is that a lot of Android development is no longer part of AOSP, but separate proprietary implementations. For example, if you install stock Android, Google has a feature to recognize music playing around you and provide a list to you later. GrapheneOS lacks this feature, because it relies on proprietary code. Same goes for the features to find your device if it's lost, AI stuff, etc.

[-] floofloof@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago

Google has been systematically moving stuff out of the open-source part of Android and into proprietary areas for some time now. They're making it harder and harder for anyone to make a working Android OS that isn't full of closed-source Google spyware. For now these projects survive, but Google is clearly hostile to them.

[-] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 week ago

My last straw was when I had location services permission denied to chrome, and then one day discovered that it had turned them back on without notifying me...

Also, every time my apps updated they gave themselves back permissions that I had disabled.

[-] certified_expert@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago

What would it take to start from a clean slate? I mean, a mad lad said about 35 years ago "UNIX expensive. I'm gonna make my own OS"

What are the obstacles for something like this to happen for phones? I assume device drivers, but probably it is much more complicated than that

[-] IratePirate@feddit.org 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I assume device drivers, but probably it is much more complicated than that

Yes, device drivers are an issue. Reverse engineering them is a bitch and slows you down, particularly if you want to support a wide range of models and those models keep getting hardware updates.

But that's not all, software ecosystem is another big one. Android and iOS have seen two decades of people developing software for them. In order for them to want to port their software over to your cleanSlateOS, it would have to have a significant user base. And in order for cleanSlateOS to draw that significant user base, it would have to have an attractive suite of apps to run on it. It's a catch-22.

You could, in theory, try to develop emulators or compatibility layers so that Android apps will also run on cleanSlateOS. But that, again, is time-consuming, will never be free of friction, and require you to make compromises with regard to security and privacy (many apps simply don't run properly without Google's main piece of spyware, the Play Services). It will also kind of tie you to Google again - and that was the thing you were trying to get away from in the first place...

[-] Canuck@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I have a GNU/Linux phone I carry in my other pocket. Here are the biggest issues I can see:

  1. Driver support for components in the mainline kernel (lets you install any distro and things like camera, Bluetooth just work)
  2. Power management; turns out it is a hard technical problem to have your phone suspend to save energy, while being awake enough to know what and when to turn back on to receive chats/calls, playback music, etc
  3. Cameras have a lot of stuff beyond drivers happening behind the scenes these days in software that would need to be developed, especially given it is a big reason people choose their phones for
  4. Phone certification is tough, this has stopped even companies like Fairphone from shipping their devices worldwide, I imagine even harder for a device like the Purism Librem 5 where you can literally upgrade Wi-Fi, BT, and cellular generations like a gameboy cartridge
  5. App ecosystems take a while to build up, it is a chicken/egg scenario. I think things are in a useable state for all the default apps an iPhone has, but if you want Uber, Uber Eats, you either have to draw even more power essentially running Android via Waydroid, or use a typically more janky web app that may be missing some features
[-] aarRJaay@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago

Aren't there also issues with Banking Apps and their requirements around security and signing?

[-] giacomo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 week ago

access the bank website in the browser?

[-] fluffykittycat@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 week ago

I've been thinking of carrying two devices, one three devices and one corporate nonsense for unlimited few apps that require it. The corporate one can just be some cheap thing it doesn't matter. Honestly I'll probably use my current phone for that all as long as it still holds up battery charge through my day

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago

Honestly we need operating systems to be regulated to have the freedom to install any app you want without the company's permission. Maybe not all of them, but any provided with a general computation device such as a computer or smartphone, and the freedom to replace operating systems on any device that isn't highly specialized with immediate safety concerns (stuff like insulin pump systems and cars)

[-] Turret3857@infosec.pub 0 points 1 week ago

The problem is these companies have infinite lawyers and will find ways around. With the way you've worded it, PCs and Phones will no longer be marketed as personal devices. They will instead be a licensed device you paid to have the privilege to use, and only to be used for communication, work and internet access. This making it so it won't fall under "general computation"

What we really should be pushing for is open platforms. Getting our friends and family on open platforms, and asking our governments to fund open platforms. The EU was almost doing good until this ID bullshit where you have to have a Play Certified or iOS device.

[-] fluffykittycat@slrpnk.net 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

The logical goal here is that locked bootloaders should be illegal.

[-] pkjqpg1h@lemmy.zip 0 points 1 week ago

United States?? antitrust Law??

[-] IratePirate@feddit.org 2 points 1 week ago

I'm anti trusting any U.S. law these days.

[-] SendMePhotos@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Yall are following laws?

[-] IratePirate@feddit.org 1 points 1 week ago

Yup. We're big on pre-fascist nostalgia.

[-] kbobabob@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 week ago

From the FAQ page

Sideloading is fundamental to Android, and it's not going anywhere.

What's the concern here?

[-] ChanchoManco@lemmy.zip 0 points 1 week ago

The problem is that "not going anywhere" doesn't mean it won't get severely restricted, and that they're still gonna force devs to verify before being able to distribute an app.

[-] kbobabob@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 week ago

It doesn't mean that it will be severely restricted either.

What's wrong with making devs verify? How does that hurt the end user if side loading still works?

[-] qqq@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

These questions are always asked in the opposite direction. What's right with making devs verify? What does it gain an end user?

[-] kbobabob@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 week ago

You think AI app slop is good? Cause that's all you'll have if literally anyone can just put an app into whatever store they want.

[-] qqq@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

This isn't about the play store: it's about installing anything at all. I couldn't care less if AI slop is on the play store though to answer your question

[-] vala@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 week ago

So let the app stores sort that out. If Google wants signing on play store then fine. Don't force it on people who don't want it.

[-] markz@suppo.fi 0 points 1 week ago

If someone makes an app and I want to install it, that's between me and the developer.

What's wrong with making devs verify?

It's just okay to you if an unwanted third wheel wants the power to choose which developers apps I can install? They also conveniently collect a fee for it.

[-] kbobabob@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 week ago

It's a curated app store. App devs are still free to just not put it on that store and host it themselves. You can definitely keep it between you and the dev.

[-] vala@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 week ago

This is not about Google Play it's an OS level thing.

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago

Because it exposes devs of projects that may not want to be exposed such as ICE trackers. Furthermore it gives Google veto power over whst you can sideload

[-] kbobabob@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 week ago

it gives Google veto power over whst you can sideload

Source?

[-] vala@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 week ago

The source is Google themselves doing exactly this.

[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev 0 points 1 week ago

Don't interrupt your enemies when they are making mistakes. Let Google make this mistake and the EU fuck them up.

[-] mEEGal@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago

What are you talking about ?

[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev 0 points 1 week ago

What do you not understand?

[-] SCmSTR@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 week ago

I think they were asking you to elaborate

[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev 0 points 1 week ago

@mEEGal@lemmy.world Google has been allowed to operate this way because they are the only real alternative to Apple. If that alternative disappears, it will pressure either the community to rally and create awareness, for it to work on alternatives, or (and this is my bet) for a bigger instance like that of an EU nation or the EU itself, to step in. Since the EU is beginning to see the US threat and voices for digital sovereignty are getting louder, such a move by Google could realistically draw the attention of the EU Commission, parliament, and courts.

However, that can only happen if Google makes the mistake. If we prevent it from making the mistake, it will have moved the Overton window enough to make the situation worse than it is now, but not as bad as it could've been. So we'll just end up with a worse situation and no political nor judicial attention. Google will have boiled the frog.

The short term gain of Google backing off will offset the long-term gain of a real solution.

We saw what it's doing for Microslop with their forceful introduction of windows 11...

[-] mEEGal@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Thank you for elaborating

I think you make good points, but I'm still convinced pushing back is necessary. It may not be enough, but it will at least make some of our voices heard.

Then the EU has 3 options :

  • It does nothing because it doesn't even think it's a problem (e.g they seem to think this about Apple, because they do the same thing. Correct me if I'm wrong)

  • It tries tu regulate it, but fails because of Google's lobbying and possibly corruption

  • It successfully breaks Googles fingers and gives back freedom co the consumer.

I personnally wouldn't try to pass the breaking point hoping for the best. I'm more of a pessimist: I'd rather fight, thinking of the worst outcome but still hoping to be wrong (if that makes sense)

[-] quoll@lemmy.sdf.org -1 points 1 week ago

fuck google and fuck android.

donate to https://postmarketos.org/ (and any of the great opensource mobile projects).

stop begging for longer chains and bigger cages.

[-] SilentKnight1369@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Lowkey postmarketos isnt where its at sorry i think mobian would be better because look at debian, ubuntu made it better but not quite there and then we got mint and zorin. I think the same will happen mobian and postmarket is based on mobian. Also kde and gnome are the one that need the funding since they run the gui/desktop environment.

this post was submitted on 18 Feb 2026
19 points (95.2% liked)

Android

33535 readers
2 users here now

DROID DOES

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:

Rules

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:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Rooki@lemmy.world
L3s@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world