this post was submitted on 25 Mar 2026
98 points (98.0% liked)

Technology

83027 readers
3630 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
98
From F-Droid to emulators, here's who's hit hardest by Android's new verification rules (www.androidauthority.com)
submitted 5 hours ago by throws_lemy@lemmy.nz to c/technology@lemmy.world
5 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 5 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] N0t_5ure@lemmy.world 32 points 3 hours ago

I can't see this move by Google as anything but a power grab to reduce competition. If someone wants to bear the "risk" of installing software that hasn't been vetted by Google, why does Google insist on being a nanny that makes it more difficult? Money, that's why. Google is acting to try to enforce its monopoly over android apps. GrapheneOS, which is more secure than android, doesn't make a fuss over this issue. No, this is only an issue with the company that hoovers up all your data in breach of your privacy.

[–] greencoil@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz -4 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

Saving you a click:

Read the fine print carefully, and Google’s new app-loading processes aren’t as invasive as they could have been. For many users, nothing will change. Even for users exploring apps outside Google’s walled garden, the process is usually a one-time setup with a few simple steps and a short wait, keeping the experience virtually the same as it is today.

We have phone manufacturers who offer unlocked boot loaders as a feature, but require two weeks or more of device ownership, registration using personally identifiable info for an online account, and many times don't even allow you to relock the boot loader. Despite all this hassle, these devices still get updated third party OS's with Lineage and eOS.

Anyone who was publishing to FDroid already is not going to be annoyed about the 24 hour scare screen for users. The most inconvenient aspect is that they can't use the same signing keys as a Google Play release, which they should never have been doing anyway. Its absurd that developers were using the same signing keys across all different distribution methods in the first place.

[–] Zak@lemmy.world 12 points 2 hours ago

Anyone who was publishing to FDroid already is not going to be annoyed about the 24 hour scare screen for users.

Bullshit.

It's hard enough to get people to step outside the Play Store ecosystem. Any additional friction will greatly reduce the number who do, and the combination of a reboot and a long waiting period is a lot of friction for the average person.

[–] Zedstrian@sopuli.xyz 18 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

The APK installation process is already more inconvenient than it should be, and now it will be getting even worse. There should be no difference in installing an APK via Google Play versus any other method.

The fact that the process will still have a 'security' warning each and every time after the 24 hour wait period shows that even for "advanced users" they want to make it as inconvenient as possible while claiming to still be keeping Android open.

[–] greencoil@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz -1 points 2 hours ago

I agree. I do not want to come off as defending Google here. Things will get worse as they always have, and the sooner we got off Googles corporate platform, the better. Google has no business forcing themselves as a "trusted central source", especially with all the evidence showing that the Play Store is a more common and successful attack vector than third party apks. Third party offerings should be as easy and accessible as Googles.

I guess I'm just really annoyed at the public response because it continues to be doom and gloom; as if open source app development was going to die overnight due to this one change. I'm pointing out that there is already more restrictive things on the Android platform, and big projects still exist despite that. As hostile as a development platform Android has been, a new one time, 24 hour scare screen is likely not going to be the final straw for developers.