188
Keep android open (lemmy.today)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/android@lemdro.id
40 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

In August 2025, Google announced that starting next year, it will no longer be possible to develop apps for the Android platform without first registering centrally with Google. This registration will involve:

  • Paying a fee to Google

  • Agreeing to Google’s Terms and Conditions

  • Providing government identification

  • Uploading evidence of the developer’s private signing key

  • Listing all current and future application identifiers

  • Here is the https://keepandroidopen.org/

all 40 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 61 points 1 year ago* (23 children)

We need a viable alternative to Android. Google has clearly shown that it's a terrible steward for anything under its wing. Even if they somehow backtrack, they will continue pushing anti consumer practices in the long term. It's been a couple of years now that I can't install an apk that is unavailable in my country, because they're somehow verifying my country with Google Play services. I've managed to ditch Chrome this year after 16 years and I'm not looking back, I wish I had done this earlier. If only there was an open Android alternative I could jump to.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 23 child comments
    •
  • [–] 37 points 1 year ago (13 children)

    I'm keenly watching GrapheneOS and what they plan to do; supposedly they are working on a strategy.

    Long-term, yeah Android needs a rival; I hope at least one of the Linux Phone projects out there can get good enough to use on some common brands or make an entirely new platform viable.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    What sucks is more and more android phones are locked down and won't ever allow you to root or change the OS. As far as US working phones, it's almost down to only Pixels, which is likely going to change soon; and OnePlus.

    I don't know anyone who owns a OnePlus phone.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    No strategy needed. GOS are not "Certified Devices".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    That seems to be their mid-term strategy, release their own certified device. That should have some interesting implications on safetynet attestation, too.

    I still think we need a fork of AOSP, before the community atrophies any further.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    That seems to be their mid-term strategy, release their own certified device.

    If you look up what "Certified Device" means in the context of Android, we don't want that.

    I still think we need a fork of AOSP, before the community atrophies any further.

    GrapheneOS is a fork of AOSP.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Honestly, I don't know if having play services running in a profile that can be deleted would pass that standard for certification. Probably not, I guess.

    As for being a fork, I mean the larger community of Graphene, Lineage, Calyx if it continues to exist, and probably a couple Chinese manufacturers who rely on AOSP to manage a fork that is collaboratively developed going forward, that no longer relies on Google's maintenance of the project.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    that no longer relies on Google's maintenance of the project.

    Yeah that's just a gargantuan task or someone would have done it already. Sadly, too few people care to make that happen.

    Huawei did it (HarmonyOS) but only because they're a huge company with the necessary resources, and because they were legally prevented from using Android.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    I know, but it's looking more and more like there won't be an alternative for long. I'd rather have a consortium of interests united in moving a fork forward as the core for all of their own OS's.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (1 child)

    The Android alternative can be Android. I think you mean a Google alternative. Android is FOSS, only Google Mobile Services (GMS) is proprietary. GrapheneOS for instance, is an alternative to Google's Android.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago

    You're right. But they already started keeping their internal dev branch private this year, which hinders everyone else working on the AOSP, including GrapheneOS. While in theory AOSP is still FOSS, they are doing everything they can to gain more control and keep rom developers and other stakeholders out of date.

    And even though Android is FOSS, more and more Android device manufacturers are locking down their bootloaders, thus leaving no option to switch to an alternative.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I don't think open Android is viable.

    It's technically open, but it's structured in a way that it's de facto not open.

    I am personally planning to move over to a Linux phone of some sort. Going to keep my A73 for critical apps/use cases and slowly move over to a Linux phone.

    In a way, it's good that Google is killing sideloading (in the real sense, where I decide what gets installed, not some hoodlums in Mount View or wherever).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    There's nothing about AOSP that's not open. The thing that's not open is the Play Store and FCM notifications. So long as everyone continues uploading exclusively to Play Store and not supporting UnifiedPush, even those who should absolutely know better, the Android ecosystem might as well be closed.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    From what I understand the new, more closed way Google adds patches to AOSP does make Android more closed albeit technically open.

    Many FOSS apps support UP and there's a vibrant open source community outside of Google's walled garden. Have you browsed Izzy's repo? That's not the problem as i see it.

    My Fairphone runs e/os, a lineage-based ROM. So no certification. But my device is certified... I wouldn't put it past the big evil to bake in some sort of cascading dependence that will block certified devices from even AOSP.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    An open Android is perfectly viable, it can even be hardforked if people are that unhappy with what Google did with it over the years.

    I think mobile Linux has functional advantages that can make it a lot more desirable, but there is no reason a truly open Android cannot exist.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 16 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    So no sideloading APKs? Doesn't this contravene the EU DMA?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    No you can still sideload...

    So long as that apk/developer has registered. It doesn't have to be on the Play Store for that.

    Still shitty tho

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
    • [–] 20 points 1 year ago

    Google: be evil

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    Would be cool if they provided some boiler plate text

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    Pretty sure that ship already sailed, I'll be honest

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    They can announce what they want. They're impotent and have no control over pure Android. They can only control Android with their Google spyware installed

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

    So you're not gonna fund Linux phones ? OK ??

    UPDATE: Also check out OpenHarmony which is a FOSS version of Huawei's HarmonyOS.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
    • [–] -4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Compared to Apple fees, that fee is actually managable. It's a one-time thing.

    However, it's still a small hurdle for poor/younger indie-devs to het their MVP out and tested.

    On a side note, if they want to restrict users from sideloading apps, fine! But we as users also want to decide what we do not want installed on our devices, so a debloated device with no BS apps and games installed. How about we make this happen as well?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    Compared to Apple fees, that fee is actually managable. It’s a one-time thing.

    I don't care if it's a nickel. It's bullshit. It's one of many reasons people avoid apple products.

    On a side note, if they want to restrict users from sideloading apps, fine!

    Also no.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent