r/degoogle • u/henk717 • 3d ago

Question Degoogeling will become required to install APK files google didn't approve

https://developer.android.com/developer-verification
1.2k Upvotes

99% Upvoted

166 comments sorted by

280

u/Think_Load_3634 3d ago

Developers, regardless of their channel of distribution will be required to submit details to Google. It's that correct?

So if you write code on github you can't get your apk installed without a certificate from Google? Same with Fdroid.

I'm hearing the "death of sideloading". Someone with more info and more nuance is needed!! (not me)

139

u/henk717 2d ago

Sideloading is allowed, but in the same way apple allows sideloading after the new EU rules forced them to.
Developers must sign up with google and get their app ID verified, and only then can they distribute apk's that are sideloadable.

Only way to obtain the possibility as a dev is to submit your private details to google.

191

u/Think_Load_3634 2d ago

So yes then. To me anyway. If I cannot install or uninstall any app of my choosing in any way I want, then I cannot trust the device to respect me as the owner and user.

I don't "sideload with Google's blessing".

This is how the UKs OSA, EUs digital ID and other legislative mechanisms will hobble free speech, development, user and citizen agency and sovereignty.

"oh but it's only 'Google certified' devices"

Which will be the only ones that will run State sanctioned apps for interfacing and engaging with their requirements (prove who you are, pay using this, log in, tap and save, the lot). A gilded cage is still a cage.

/rant

58

u/kommunistischePartei 2d ago

If you don't have root permissions. You already don't own your device

41

u/blasphembot Mozilla Fan 2d ago

Still waiting on Asus to make good on their promise to release the Zenfone bootloader unlocker.....from 2023....

24

u/Blaskowitz002 2d ago

https://github.com/melontini/bootloader-unlock-wall-of-shame?tab=readme-ov-file

edit: wrong link

7

u/blasphembot Mozilla Fan 2d ago

I hadn't seen this. Thank you!

4

u/henk717 2d ago

Awesome link if I ever do want to buy a new phone, although my usual trick is : "Does it have lineageos? What does the XDA forum look like?" because a proper unlockable popular phone has a lot of XDA activity and guides in advance.

3

u/Unfair_Cloud921 2d ago

You're confusing the ability to unlock the bootloader with root, it's two different things.

2

u/kommunistischePartei 2d ago

How so

3

u/kriggledsalt00 2d ago

i mean, rooting a phone means modifying the firmware with a su tool that provides low level priveleged functions. unlocking the bootloader just means changing a bit in memory that determines whether or not the phone can have new potentially unofficial firmware installed. it's two different things, but you need an unlocked bootloader to root the phone (at least, without a zero-day exploit), so, a locked down bootloader mean no rooting, but an unlocked bootloader doesn't necessarily mean you have root prievleges.

2

u/kommunistischePartei 2d ago

You didn't understand my point. I'm saying that the user should have root privileges by default. Just like other Linux distros on PCs. Phones should be like that too

1

u/kriggledsalt00 1d ago

ah okay, i didnt get the full context, i thought you were asking how they were different LOL. i do partially agree, but i think for mass market phones it's locked down because of security, malware could easily developed that exploits root priveleges if the security barriers aren't properly enforced, which requires more user diligence and technical knoweldge - e.g., on linux and windows you should seperate superuser/admin accounts from regular accounts, you have to look at permissions and stuff, etc... if malware was developed for phones and those phones were rooted by default, it would be easy to exploit. that doesn't mean i think samsung or google or whatever should modycoddle users and completely lock down phones and apps and stuff, but there is at least SOME reasoning to the fact that, for the average, non-technical user, a rooted-by-default phone could be a security issue, more of a security nuisance than it's worth it for the average user at least. phones often store much more sensitive data than computers and have a lot more specific and built in capabailities (nfc, telephony) than laptops, so having them have that extra privelege border between the kernel/core system functions and regular user activities makes sense. it's also why you get a bootloader unlock/custom firmware warning, since stuff that's stored in /data/data and other such folders can be sensitive - if you can touch it from anywhere in the phone by just using root permissions, it could be easily nabbed (root managers make this harder by needing user permission, but if any of those managers had a zero day exploit or backdoors.....). so overall i do agree with you, but i think companies have at least some interest in not making phones rooted-by-default because it's more of a risk than it's worth it for the average user, at least from a broad perspective.

1

u/Unfair_Cloud921 2d ago

For example i do believe i have full control of my device, when i choose to install GrapheneOS, even that it's not rooted at all.

If i just rooted my device, i still doesn't have control over what the pre-installed ROM is doing with my device, and what information it's sending to third party.

-7

u/AttentiveUser 2d ago edited 2d ago

If you root your device you’re more open to hacks too so it’s not all good…

EDIT: Downvote me all you want, you’re just showing that you don’t know much about OS security. Rooting is great, you just need to know also how to protect yourself though.

8

u/kommunistischePartei 2d ago

This doesn't justify locking down our devices. Would you give up root privileges on your PC just to 'protect' yourself from hacks? No way

0

u/AttentiveUser 2d ago

I didn’t say that did I?… I just made people aware of the pros and cons 🤦🏻‍♂️

2

u/ADMINISTATOR_CYRUS 2d ago

or get a degoogled rom, ez

1

u/Holzkohlen 1d ago

This is the final nail in Android's coffin.

1

u/PocketNicks 2d ago

It's fearmongering. Sideloading isn't going away.

85

u/BipedalPossum 2d ago

Waiting for them to kill the graphene project somehow

53

u/Markd0ne 2d ago

They are already in process of doing that. Pixel sources are not open anymore, but "on demand".

6

u/SabunFC 2d ago

I always felt it was weird that people talk about degoogling and Graphene but it can only be installed on Google Pixel phones.

187

u/Nearby_Disco 3d ago

>to keep it open

Damn, what a new level of corporate BS.

Title of OP post seems to badly reflect the meaning of the news.

TL;DR: Starting September 2026, Google will restrict side-loading of apps on Android only to "certified" developers who are favored by the company. Which will kill things like Revanced, etc.

61

u/schubidubiduba 2d ago

No, his title is rather good actually. Because this only affects "official Google devices", i.e. devices that came preinstalled with a Google Android version and are still running that.

Hence, an alternative, degoogled OS would be a solution. Which is probably why they are simultaneously working on gutting those.

4

u/HeKis4 2d ago

Nope, that's for "android certified devices" which is, to my understanding, every phone that google gives a license to ship play services preinstalled. So like, 95% of devices.

Please at least read the first two sentences of articles...

1

u/schubidubiduba 2d ago

I didn't read this article because I had already read a different one about these news.

That one made it sound very clearly like I described. A non-google OS will absolve you of the need to ask daddy Google for permission to install apps.

3

u/HeKis4 2d ago

Just AOSP (android without the proprietary google stuff including play services) would work. It's a PITA to install and you lose more than a couple of features like real-time notifications and google pay.

1

u/schubidubiduba 2d ago

Notifications work fine for me with microG, and I never used GooglePay :D

1

u/Xepherxv 2d ago

Well shit, been rocking my pixel 3a(I know...) for years because it's the closest I could get and afford with a somewhat stock looking os and with working banking apps and ttp) , I can't stand the skins and changes most other oses use

85

u/dexter2011412 2d ago

🖕 you Google

We need to start investing in proton-like layer for Linux phones. Waydroid?

26

u/nojunkdrawers 2d ago

If Waydroid becomes the key investment, then why not simply fork AOSP? At that rate, it seems like a more straight forward solution.

1

u/dexter2011412 2d ago

Yeah I hope someone does that eventually

-5

u/nikolay7424 2d ago

Because AOSP is cooked Google will shut it down for good

3

u/Schnickatavick 2d ago

Google can't take back anything that's currently in AOSP, it's out there, we have it, we can do whatever we want with it. The only thing they can do is stop contributing future updates to it, and if they do that it will get forked into community managed "distro's". The only thing that's uncertain is how much community contribution there would be

1

u/get_homebrewed 9h ago

You mean the Android Translation Layer?

link

1

u/dexter2011412 9h ago

Nice. Glad to see projects gaining traction.

I need to get into Linux phone development and support.

75

u/rpdillon 2d ago

This is huge issue, as it is the death knell of the last major mobile platform that allowed users to run software of their choosing on devices they purchased. Now the vendor has to vet the author (not the software!) before allowing you to install it. Absolutely terrifying.

29

u/ExtraFly4736 2d ago

I would not be so sure about that, at least in EU, Apple was forced to allow side app stores to publish apps.

If Android goes that way, then they might also have to allow 3rd party app stores no?

33

u/kjjphotos 2d ago

But every app developer will still need to verify their identity with Google so they can sign their apps, even if they are being distributed on a different app store.

25

u/blasphembot Mozilla Fan 2d ago

Yes this move effectively does exactly what they wanted to do probably for a very long time now. Take the last bit of control in application installation and removal from the user. Tantamount to requiring Microsoft to sign off on every piece of software that you install on Windows. From what I understand at least.

3

u/anto2554 2d ago

Can't you just click "install anyway" on windows?

14

u/blasphembot Mozilla Fan 2d ago

Oh windows doesn't give a shit about what's signed or not. You're talking about smartscreen which is one of the first things I disable when I have a machine stood up.

3

u/Yoshiofthewire 2d ago

There it is. This is in response to the Epic mandate to distribute 3rd party app stores. When it was installing from 3rd parties required work they left it alone. Now that anyone can run an App Store, thanks Tim, Google is vetting developers. The question will be how high is the bar to get vetted. Is it have a Google account, or is it pay us $99 a year?

2

u/HeKis4 2d ago

That's effectively the same. In both cases you have Google gatekeeping which apps can and cannot be installed. Sure they are making the process different, but in the end, if Google doesn't want you publishing, you won't. Same difference.

1

u/michael0n 2d ago

Any non profit can get those certificates, then release 1000 apps under that account. Google could only about this if those app misbehave. Let things play out.

5

u/carwash2016 2d ago

There not stopping side loading they have put a verify requirement on it, the EU will love that

2

u/HeKis4 2d ago

And if they decide that the (arbitrary) requirements aren't met, you can't distribute your software. How is that not stopping sideloading ? Sure you can call it gatekeeping instead of stopping, but come on.

68

u/BlueMoon_1945 3d ago

Boogle, the censor inquisitor and privacy destroyer, continue to do its job. Time to really look for alternative. Isn't there a law preventing monopole ? Of course, they can get away with it...

35

u/final-ok 2d ago

Linux phones might in future. They need proton level improvements before that happens. Maybe for now diy cyberdeck?

13

u/Axelwickm 2d ago

Yes but how long before governments crack down on switching OS too?

4

u/CoronaMcFarm 2d ago

That will never happen, you can't even get drivers for the hardware, there is no future where phones is not controlled by mega corporations. It is the same reason i hope arm CPUs never succed on PCs.

1

u/Holzkohlen 1d ago

No, not for those phones. You need to design new hardware to work specifically with linux for phones. Or find a company that open sources their drivers. What about those fairphones? Do they open source those drivers?

1

u/CoronaMcFarm 1d ago

It is a qualcom chipset, it is a case of picking your poison, all companies that supply arm chipsets are horrible.

14

u/Mixels 2d ago

I mean, there's iOS, which has been like this since the beginning.

No successor will achieve substantial market share without an enlightenment of the masses. And the masses don't use sideloaded apps. I don't imagine we'll see compelling successors anytime soon, due mostly to the economics of scale.

4

u/HeKis4 2d ago

And the masses don't use sideloaded apps.

I don't care about the masses, I care about my consumer rights.

And go tell that to all the people I've installed revanced for that cannot live without it anymore.

2

u/Mixels 2d ago edited 2d ago

That's great. But Google can do whatever it wants with its phones. All you need to do is choose not to update the software if you already own a Google phone, or don't buy a new Google phone if you don't.

As for alternative phone models that use operating software without these limitations, you're going to need the masses. It's not profitable to R&D and manufacture smartphone hardware unless you can sell a whole bundle of them--unless you're offering them at a subsidized price, near free, in which case the "payment" is your customers' data. And in that case, that company is probably going to lock down the phones the same way Google wants to here--because it's not profitable for them if you disable data sharing on the device.

1

u/HeKis4 2d ago

But Google can do whatever it wants with its phones? All you need to do is choose not to update the software

So I signed an EULA for a service, signing away privacy and entering a walled garden, and a decade later, that service just comes in, kneecaps my device that I own and the answer is "just leave bro" ? Yeah no.

because it's not profitable for them if you disable data sharing on the device.

Well make it more expensive instead of doing anti-consumer bullshit. I'm willing to pay.

1

u/Mixels 2d ago

Ok. You can bark at the fence all you want. But at the end of the day, to escape it, you will likely have to purchase future phones with budget hardware at a premium price to be able to escape it. And you'll probably have to switch brands year to year as previous manufacturers fold. If you're ok with paying extra for an open system, then you might have options from time to time.

Actually I do believe you might see the first such option soon(ish). I've heard GrapheneOS is partnering with a phone manufacturer to sell what might be just what you're looking for. Keep an eye on that.

2

u/HeKis4 2d ago

At the end of the day, yep, unless the EU actually does something. Ngl it feels unreal to add "google hasn"t put their hands on this one yet" to the list of considerations for buying hardware.

1

u/HeKis4 2d ago

Isn't there a law preventing monopole ?

In the EU yeah, this goes against previous rulings issued to Apple and may even be going against GDPR if they rule that the collected PII is not necessary to protect users of android devices (which, in good faith, isn't).

37

u/DeusoftheWired 2d ago

Ugh … great, now they’re doing the same crap Apple does. Get ready for having to renew some bullshit self-signed certificate in a non-automatable way every week just to run an APK that’s not from the Playstore.

Why the fuck is it so hard for companies to understand there are people who just want to write their own code and run it on their devices without anyone meddling with it?

By making Android safer, we're protecting the open environment that allows developers and users to confidently create and connect.

No, you’re just making it harder for indie developers. You’re also not protecting the open environment but destroying it. Requiring a developer registration lessens the openness of the ecosystem. Building a walled garden and using security as an excuse is such a lame move. Everybody with half a brain knows what your intent behind all this is.

11

u/HeKis4 2d ago

there are people who just want to write their own code and run it on their devices without anyone meddling with it?

I'll even go farther with this. It is my device. I, and I alone, have the final say in what runs on it, period. There's this thing called consumer rights and ownership that is getting awfully scarce.

5

u/eXtc_be 2d ago

"you will own nothing and be happy"

it just got a bit more real

46

u/ChrisofCL24 2d ago

We are actively watching Android and Apple switch positions in gatekeeping practices.

5

u/final-ok 2d ago

What is apple doing?

10

u/realddgamer 2d ago

Apple was forced into allowing side loading by the eu

7

u/henk717 2d ago

Who did this method first btw, you still gotta pay apple big fees to be allowed to make a sideloadable app.

8

u/realddgamer 2d ago

Yeah, evidently that made Google realise that they can get away with it, so they're doing it

5

u/Blevita 2d ago

So, its the same situation. Side loading is allowed and ok, you just need to dox yourself to either Apple or Google to do so on stock ROMs.

17

u/Noldir81 2d ago

So after this, what's the point in sideloading? You might as well publish to the play store at that point.

21

u/Jimmy_Fromthepieshop 2d ago

That's what they want. More control and money for them. That's what it's always about.

4

u/henk717 2d ago

Application backup is one of them, but modifying them to for example not contain ads is gonna be a lot harder for googled phones. And your of course going to miss out on the apps made by hobby devs who quit their projects over this. Personally I wouldn't give up my passport to google for a hobby project. Thankfully the one I am involved with is a webapp which bypasses the play store stuff entirely.

2

u/anto2554 2d ago

Rules could be different

5

u/Noldir81 2d ago

So, no practical difference then. Just one for show

2

u/anto2554 2d ago

Well they could sign things like porn apps that they don't allow on the store, but then not sign viruses or degoogled stuff

2

u/HeKis4 2d ago

Or they could not be. There's nothing preventing them from doing stuff differently, and there is no incentive either. I have zero expectations and to be honest, I think that anyone who thinks they'll do good for no reason is delusional.

27

u/No_One3018 2d ago

Android is forgetting the only reason it has market share

1

u/Holzkohlen 1d ago

Because it has no alternative (besides Apple - same same)

26

u/ConfusedIlluminati 2d ago

"Sideloading" (installing damn freaking apps) is the only thing keeping me on Android side. Once that is gone, I am just switching to Apple.

12

u/Expert_Squirrel_6584 2d ago

I was just discussing this with an acquaintance of mine. Do Samsung and Pixel(so, Google) think people will buy their iPhone priced phones if they are as personalizable as iPhones(which means, they aren't), but have objectively uglier defaults?

8

u/starlinguk 2d ago

Same. I have an Android phone so I don't have to sit through a bajillion ads.

5

u/michael0n 2d ago

Huawei is building HarmonyOS and already releasing phones with it. Its intended to be a full Android (and even Windows on low end devices) replacement. They are based enough to push this.

10

u/HeKis4 2d ago

The day I have to turn to a Chinese company as an option for consumer rights and true ownership will truly be a cursed day.

1

u/TheMan2204 2d ago

Same, if this bs ever gets out, I'm going take a trip down to the Apple store!

--signed by a lifetime android user

1

u/henk717 2d ago

For me I am keeping degoogled android as thats not effected, but if I had to pick between iOS and crippled android i'd pick iOS to. I am still on Android 10 because it has proper file system access, I can sideload, bootlocker unlock etc. But a phone that doesn't do all these things but at the same time has worse security isn't appealing to me. Thats the worst of both worlds. But thankfully I don't depend on play services much so its gonna be hard for them to take things from me.

1

u/csolisr 2d ago

I don't quite understand the people that would move to Apple - going from a platform that has an alternative on AOSP and GrapheneOS, to another that is and will always be closed-source? Why?

1

u/ConfusedIlluminati 1d ago

There is no connection between these. Just because I like some apps from F-Droid or Obtanium, does not mean I am willing to install custom OS on my device and deal with all the inconveniences.

19

u/zxuvw 2d ago

I need to buy a pixel and slap GOS on it ASAP.

1

u/Sensitive-Check-8105 2d ago

i wish i could afford it. wouldn't even think for a second. F Google.

22

u/DarthZiplock 2d ago

If you haven't drafted a plan to live your life without a smartphone, now might be a good time to do so. I'm working on mine.

Already launched my switch to Linux for my computing needs. That was two years in the works.

5

u/henk717 2d ago

For me its not without a smartphone but without dependency on google play services, all I really need it for at this point is email notifications because proton mail doesn't have ntfy yet.

1

u/Holzkohlen 1d ago edited 1d ago

There's only two Apps I could not replace on an linux phone like a pinephone. It's Signal and the app that I use to scan my government ID to get access to digital services by my government and for taxes and such. Both are only on Android or iOS.

Edit: I just found out about special USB devices I can use to read my ID's chip instead of using my phone. Just need one of those that works on linux and I'm down to just Signal. I need a decent chat app that friends and family can install on Android and I can use from my Linux phone.

18

u/RoomyRoots 2d ago

I wish EU would just pull the antitrust flag on Android too, but it will probably come to Chrome first.

24

u/M1k3y_Jw 2d ago

This sounds like it violates the Digital Markets Act. Google can not use it's dominant position to gate-keep the platform and prevent side-loading.

2

u/lmarcantonio 2d ago

The initial deployment will be non-EU, it seems. Wouldn't be surprised for an EU-only android branch.

3

u/henk717 2d ago

This thing is not in android, its in the google play services. Any of the people here who actually degoogled their phone will not be effected.

6

u/ValianFan 2d ago

I swear if I have to buy a Ubuntu phone in a few years just to install my custom shit then there is something really wrong

6

u/MatthAddax 2d ago

I guess it'll be time to move over to e/os (https://e.foundation/e-os/)

1

u/henk717 2d ago

They dropped support for my phone which then becomes a big issue with keeping microg up to date enough so I had to drop them. But in my upcoming vacation ill figure out how to fix the microg cert stuff with xposed so I can go native microg.

When /e/ was still supported it was really nice.

6

u/noerpel 2d ago

That is a total BS-move. Half of my best apps are from fdroid, a lot of them from single person devs.

So lineage or some suitable ROM from xda it is, then...

12

u/saunderez 2d ago

Any manufacturer that forks Android and does not implement this bullshit gets my money forever.

4

u/henk717 2d ago

Its not in android, its in the play store. So what you are saying is you want a degoogled phone. In that case your next phone might be from vendors like murena who put degoogled android on.

Any of you who degoogled aren't gonna be effected other than devs possibly abandoning their apps.

10

u/schklom 2d ago

This (i think) will be enforced by Play Protect, that's the feature that already does something similar.

If so, you will be able to simply turn off that feature and sideload whatever you want.

If not, you can always open the Android settings for Play Store and disable the app, which should turn off that "protection" until you re-enable the store

4

u/henk717 2d ago

Yes, its extremely likely to be a play protect thing or a service inside the play services itself.

3

u/No_One3018 2d ago

I hope so, I have an S25 Untra and I don't think I can install a private OS on it

2

u/MarlenHamsic 2d ago

That's good info to know, thank you

5

u/WillAdditional922 2d ago

I think this will be very helpful from now on seeing how aggressive google has been becoming... https://github.com/vvb2060/PackageInstaller/releases

1

u/henk717 2d ago

Personally I like this one : https://github.com/MuntashirAkon/AppManager

1

u/cvslap 1d ago

how do you use either of these? when I try use them to install things it still uses the system UI to confirm the install

1

u/henk717 1d ago

I run mine in root mode, but their own UI is very similar. I mainly use it to install apks / xapk files correctly, which apps like this tend to bundle into an installable app before invoking the installer. But I am not getting a system install popup.

13

u/Warchetype 2d ago

Wanting control over literally EVERYTHING and everyone - even things that don't belong to them - to sickening extents, is actually a psychopathic trait. 🖕🏻

Fuck Google, those evil fucks need to perish asap.

•

u/JaySeraphon 2h ago

I could not have said it better myself.

3

u/jungfred 2d ago

This affects custom roms as well? I mean we can install apk's through recovery, or will this be blocked too?

9

u/2xspeed123 2d ago

Probably not, custom roms will likely remove this restriction

2

u/henk717 2d ago

It will effect custom roms to, but only if you installed play services. Same thing that the current restrictions on malicious apk's take in effect on custom roms with play services but not with microg.

1

u/jungfred 2d ago

Thanks, I'm already using custom rom with microg for years. So i should be fine then :)

4

u/Dramatic_Paramedic86 2d ago

Damn just when I need a new phone this comes around. I just want a small comfy phone and none of these allow installing customRoms.

3

u/orangesheepdog 2d ago

Google destroying the primary advantage that their smartphones have over their competitors

7

u/Erlend05 2d ago

Eww. Why cant we have nice things‽‽

2

u/IntelligentSchool834 2d ago

Greed of the few outweighing the convenience of the masses.

8

u/anto2554 2d ago

Is this even legal within the EU?

7

u/dvgmusic 2d ago

Damn. I was thinking about getting a Pixel 9 for Graphene but now I'm pretty much certain I will.

3

u/AceLuan54 2d ago

Any OS options for Samsung Tab S7 FE?

3

u/Lacey-Box558 2d ago

Degoogle the phone. Go with a dumb phone. Don't need Google or the rotten fruit company.

3

u/Raaaaaaac 2d ago

Dumb (me) asking a dumber Question.

Does that means Grapheneos prior pixel 10 are also in "danger"

Been thinking about pulling the trigger on a second hand pixel 8 but with pixel 10 thing and all this I'm not sure where GOS stands at specially for previous pixel support or if its better to go with fairphone and e/os

1

u/henk717 2d ago

I don't know if graphene os isolates this or not. I don't have a pixel so I can't use that OS as they don't have any desire to support my phone.

If when you install an apk file you get a google play protect message asking if you wish to upload it for scanning or see it being scanned then your probably going to have issues.

A microg based OS like /e/ won't be effected, that should be available on the pixel there is no need to buy a new phone if you do get impacted next year.

2

u/Androxilogin 2d ago

I've already noticed apps like Fetch requiring Google services to be installed in order to function.

1

u/henk717 2d ago

Thats a different feature where app devs can flip a toggle to make their app have automatic tamper protection inside the app forcing you to not sideload it.

1

u/Androxilogin 2d ago

I know. I wrote of a relevant change.

2

u/Glxguard 2d ago

I am sure that it can be bypassed.Ok,if they will change android- remember,it's open-source,and somebody will delete this feature.No?Okay,we still have root,that can do something with it,like delete app that will control that,or replace the installer with any other.

1

u/nikolay7424 2d ago

They are actively killing AOSP and bootloaders So in the near future nothing like this will be possible 

1

u/Glxguard 2d ago

It's gonna still be possible.Android cannot lock bootloader(because this is ROM).Only phone company can do that.If xiaomi doesn't want to lock the bootloader,they won't do that.And,Google don't want to kill AOSP.They did Android open-source not because they want to,but because they need to.They need developers support,they need other companies support (lets be real,not anyone likes how pixelOs looks),and this is not possible without open-source.
They are doing business,not self-destruction

1

u/nikolay7424 2d ago

More and more companies lock bootloaders. Google is big enough to develop Android on its own 

1

u/Glxguard 2d ago

Google is big enough,but that is just stupid for their business.Until anyone starts installing AOSP,they don't need this.AOSP is just not a problem for them,they don't need to spend that much money on some "FOSS group of people" until that group isn't bigger than 20% of android users. About locked bootloaders: some people will find a way to bypass this, some people can just go to another company,like Fairphone or Nothing,or any other company with unlocked or easy-unlockable bootloader

1

u/michael0n 2d ago

Xiaomi are horribly with their mi account unlock process. Some people waited month to get their device unlocked. They don't want people to install other OS either.

1

u/Glxguard 2d ago edited 2d ago

At least you can unlock it.Also,there's a shell script for most xiaomi phones that will unlock your phone in seconds(Had 3 xiaomi phones,never used standart unlocking method).

I used xiaomi just as an example of "tech-making company).

2

u/Creepy-Bell-4527 2d ago

They're not currently enforcing APK file approval, only the developers.

2

u/Efficient_Culture569 2d ago

Just the push I needed to get off Android.

2

u/Shahius 2d ago

Huh. What reason do I, as a user, have to buy an Android phone instead of an iPhone now? I will switch to iOS immediately if no workaround is found.

5

u/henk717 2d ago

If you degoogled it can't effect you.

2

u/Zealousideal_Ride968 2d ago

Viva o HarmonyOs, LineageOS e GrapheneOS.

3

u/Axelwickm 2d ago

Ahh, so this is how they plan on stopping people circumventing chat control.

1

u/henk717 2d ago

Can still circumvent that by using chat platforms that can't implement this kinda thing but do have dev certs. Think Element (But without using matrix.org's homeserver), think Session, etc.

3

u/c0verm3 2d ago

We might be cooked bois.

1

u/MackTUTT 2d ago

I'm wondering how this affects Android tv and Amazon Fire devices.

1

u/Pagrastukas00 15h ago

It is possible remove google completely?

1

u/henk717 12h ago

Depends on the phone, you'd need to research if your phone can be flashed with a custom rom.

1

u/Pagrastukas00 12h ago

So i did. Says I can on a52s

1

u/Curius_pasxt 12h ago

Im switching to iPhone, 🖕 you Google

1

u/Festering-Fecal 8h ago

Goodbye EMUs and Ad guard.

I'm done with Android when they do this. There is zero reasons to stay. As much as I don't like apple they have a better track record.

1

u/JaySeraphon 2h ago edited 2h ago

Perhaps independent "Dataspheres/Infospheres" should be considered. Only way I can think of off the top of my head we might be free of the corpo B.S. Or maybe something like Betanet: https://youtu.be/sTzBO_BliZ8?si=aD4ZV39ZjEfZ57OD

1

u/DeliciousPackage2852 2d ago

They still haven't understood that I won't even waste time degoogling, when X moment comes when things get really hot, I will simply throw away the phone and live without it... So the only thing I will be able to install will be a bit of brain, which in recent years I feel I have half burned.

-2

u/76zzz29 2d ago

That explain why my friend coulsn't install apk on his new samsung flip shit

7

u/DeusoftheWired 2d ago

Nah, it will only start in September 2026.