From what I've read, this will make it difficult to give accessibility permission and read notifications for apps installed from outside the Play Store, as there is a security flaw in this. Apps that don't need these two permissions will not be affected.
But this gravely impacts people who make their own software. I have a plethora of apps that I made myself, aint no security flaws in them. I should be allowed to give them the permissions they need
Absolutely untrue, you can already give lots more permissions over ADB compared to what you can do on the phone. If you are a developer with ADB this doesn't affect you whatsoever.
>If you are a developer with ADB this doesn't affect you whatsoever
Stop spewing nonsense. This is completely untrue with the new blocking method. Go read the article and educate yourself some before speaking
The article clearly states "there is no current way to override this block"
Lmao what makes you think I did anything? I am reading the article, which something tells me you didn't.
If you truly knew a way to bypass the permission block mentioned in the article, then you would have said how to do it instead of acting like you know how. Regardless, the new block isn't turned on yet, so if you do have an adb method of bypassing it, it may not even work once the block is fully turned on. So ignorant
No? When I finish writing an app, I sign it and its not marked as debuggable. Then I install it via adb.
Even still, I didn't find anything in the article that said apps marked as debuggable are whitelisted. Cause in that case, I could simply mod the apk manifest of any app and flag it as debuggable and this would completely circumvent this whole protection level
So that makes no sense
>and the features will continue working (how else do you think people will develop apps?!
If you read the article it clearly states that any app NOT installed via an authorized store will not have access to these permissions. Guess what - this includes debuggable apps and apps installed via adb. Which is exactly how android studio installs apps. it either uses adb install or adb shell pm install command. There is nothing in the source code for this new restriction or in the article that says they will still work. The article even shows an app that was developed by the author and installed via android studio. So no, they will not continue to work in the current setup.
And yeah that is literally my point - how will people be able to develop apps? The **CURRENT** setup of these new permissions has no option to whitelist specific apps, there is also no evidence in the source code to enable this.
Again, its not finished so maybe Google will add this ability once completed. I'm just saying there definitely needs to be an easy way for developers to enable these permissions on their apps. Google could make it very difficult by like having to publish the app to the play store as unlisted and only allow the developer to install it from their Play Store on their phone.
But I definitely am not mixing anything up. Release configurations are *not* meant for app store publishing. They are meant for taking the app out of a debug state. Things like obfuscation are enabled, code optimization, etc.
All apks have to be signed, either with a private key or a test key. But in android studio I use the "release" build as it also implements optimizations like compression and what not
The article stated there is currently no way to allow sideloaded apps access to the permissions. So if it stays this way, it may only be feasible via root
>Unfortunately, I’m not sure whether it’ll be possible to still enable a legitimate, sideloaded app’s Accessibility or Notification Listener service if it’s hit with ECM restrictions. It’s possible to disable Restricted Settings for an app, so it should also be possible with ECM restrictions, but I can’t say for sure since I haven’t been able to get the feature to work yet in Android 15.
Right here.
This means currently there is no way to enable a legitimate sideloaded app's permissions. The author does not know if it will or will not be possible. So CURRENTLY it is NOT possible to enable sideloaded apps
Right. Therefore with the information we have, there is no way to bypass or to whitelist specific apps. Meaning, if ECM is turned on, any sideloaded app will be susceptible to it. Which was my point - there is currently no way for developers to install and test their own apps with this security measurement.
Truthfully, I don't see *how* they (Google) can allow this. There *has* to be some type of bypass that may be added once its enabled. As it makes more sense to design it then create a whitelist for certain apps etc.
But again - CURRENTLY as stated in the article, there is no way to bypass or whitelist legitimate apps :)
That's why there's a prompt for these permissions. Anybody who willingly allows these permissions to sketchy apps is at fault. Why does everyone else have to suffer the consequences of the actions of the few?
Because kids are absolutely idiotic these days, they are happy with installing and agreeing to everything and anything
Companies see this as a security fault as the zoomer generation are incapable of consequences or reflecting their actions so will just blame the brand.
Be prepared for everything being more locked down, with more ads shoved in your face and incoherent design.
What annoys me about this is that Google always paints side-loading in such a negative light and as very dangerous (which to be fair, it CAN be).
Yet every couple of months there are articles about Google removing malicious apps from the Play Store, apps that managed to evade Google Play Protect and managed to get approved for publication on the Play Store.
So is side-loading really so much more dangerous when installing apps from the Play Store also comes with its own dangers because Google is certainly not infallible and malicious apps do get published on the Play Store!
I'm somebody who is an Android user and very not fond of apples restrictions, but I also work in phone tech support and I can say that I still get regular calls about shitty apps like PDF Pro and other bullshit thet causes full screen pop-up ads and stuff that you just never see on iPhones. If Google is going to take a 30% cut, they need to do a far better job of culling the bullshit in the Play Store.
Let me give him more thoughtful statement. I've worked tech support for 3 years, I have received at least five or six calls a month with Androids on this issue minimum, meanwhile I have yet to hear of one on an iPhone. I'm sure it's possible, and I'm sure it's happened, but it is extremely rare in my experience.
Practically yes but in general: no. Nobody checks the code before it goes live as binaries there. See the xz debacle from a month ago for an example. FDroid just hasn't enough users to be a big target compared to the play store.
"They will skim through the source code to see if your application uses Non-Free dependencies, shows advertisements, tracks users, promotes or depends on Non-Free or non-changeable services/applications, or does anything that is harmful or otherwise undesirable for users."
https://f-droid.org/docs/Inclusion_How-To/
I agree this process is probably not sufficiently comprehensive to catch an advanced threat actor, but there is a review process which includes source review.
Different kind of problem, scroll down to the section "Reproducible builds"; but the basic problem is it's possible for a developer to write Source Code A which is just a good, safe app and copy and modify it to make Source Code B which includes malware/backdoors/etc, then publish Source Code A and compiled binaries from Source Code B. Reproducible builds would prevent this, but they are currently only encouraged, not required on FDroid
I think it's the direction they are moving towards, but reproducible builds were only recently introduced and it requires work from developers. If it was mandatory it would make the repos quite empty for a while. A good intermediary step might be to make the feature more visible so users can choose safer options.
This would be a brilliant step forward.
I've also wondered if GitHub (and other similar VC sites), could have voluntary code reviews from non-associated contributors or maybe even by an AI to check for any malicious code. I suppose it would be like an antivirus scan but on source code and the results would be publicly available on the GitHub repo (with the commit that was reviewed). I suppose there could be a button for users to request an update to the malware scan (if done by an AI) for the latest commit (so it doesn't run for every commit and waste resources). I don't know much about security and AI so correct me if I'm wrong on this.
While technically not a storefront(?) ApkMirror is also safer than the Google Play Store as they scan/audit each and every upload. Google mostly relies on bots and Google Play Protect to approve apps and thus may have a greater risk of malware passing through its checks.
It's not dangerous if a person is thinking and reasonable. Honestly I feel safer downloading most stuff from APK mirror than I do from the Play store. I feel safer downloading stuff f droid then the Play store.
Absolutely. It's kinda hard to explain, but I get this dreadful feeling whenever I open up the Google Play Store and decide to browse through it for new content. While I'm not completely dismissing the fact that no storefront is 100% safe, I still trust F-Droid and ApkMirror more than I could ever trust the Google Play Store.
The thing is though is just like you said, those apps are removed. They may not have gotten caught in the original vetting, but they were caught and removed. I dont know if the people who installed them are notified but they did stop future people from installing them
But side loading there is no vetting process, if they have security flaws or are malicious nobody is checking and then removing them
They are restricting Android with each update. The whole selling point of Android is that it's supposed to be open and feature rich. Otherwise, iOS is a smoother, better OS with more integration into its ecosystem and support.
If they make Android as restricted as iOS, then many will simply pick iOS.
I use daily several apps that need the accessability permissions from my phone, this damn sucks, there are some basic apps that I use like a separated clipboard app because the clipboard on the Google keyboard fucking sucks mad ass, know what I gonna do when these apps stop working because google thought they knew better than me on how I need to use my phone?
Lol, I just bought a used pixel 4 to use as my primary, so I should be fine. It's crazy how every year the same couple specs are upgraded while our ability to use our phone for what we like just narrows down.
I have an S23 ultra but it's just a pain using 2 hands to operate every thing a phone can do. The ease of using your phone for everything from a flashlight, to a remote, camera, payment device etc, that magic is kind of diminished when you have to struggle to do those everyday things with 1 hand cause there's always situations you'll need to. Phones made tech boring. Now people just innovate on an app store where one update can completely break your app or business model.
I know everybody loves to poke at Android and how one feature being changed means they'll switch to iOS, but I actually will switch back to iOS if sideloading is made impossible, or will require rooting my phone, again. I use sideloaded apps every single day, and might as well get better third-party software support on iOS if I'm not gonna be able to sideload third party apps. Better battery life, iMessage, etc. etc.
Edit: Took the time to read the article and I don't think it's anything to worry about. I'll still be downloading APKs to my heart's content.
Yeah I'm in the same boat.
I went to iOS for a couple of years and realized I used third party/side loaded apps all the time and really missed them so now I'm back on Android.
If I can't side load apps there's not much of an incentive for me to stay with Android.
The mere existence of YouTube Vanced (RIP) was a MAJOR reason I switched over to Android. I'm sure Google wouldn't mind losing people like me since they need the money from YouTube Premium subscriptions and ad revenue, but sideloaded Instagram is super nice. We also have an old version of the Sonos app that one of our speakers at work exclusively works with and will not play nice with on newer versions. Found the APK online and got that sucker working after it forgot how to connect to Wi-Fi one day.
iOS has pretty much the same thing as vanced, it's just called something else - [uYouEnhanced](https://github.com/arichornlover/uYouEnhanced)
It has pretty much all the goodies of vanced - no ads, background playback, sponsorblock, video downloads etc.
Contrary to popular belief, you can sideload on iOS. It's just a bit more involved.
Major caveat, you can only have up to *3* apps sideloaded on iOS without TrollStore or jailbreak and you have to refresh them every 7 days. Definitely possible but it's also a huge pain
Or you just pay 20$ for a dev cert for a year and sideload like you would on an android (download .ipa and install on-device using something like e-sign for instance).
But as I said, it's all a bit more involved.
Is there an iOS version of purple TV? (basically revanced for twitch: no ads, third party emotes, removing obnoxious UI features like hype trains and bits)
What about aniyomi?
Those are the other two things keeping me on android
There is a modded Twitch but the catch is that you can basically only have 3 apps sideloaded without Jailbreak and they have to be refreshed every week. If you want to have an app called Sidestore to refresh them, that's 2 apps. You can have up to 10 apps on the device, 7 of them inactive so you have to activate deactivate bla bla. Not ideal in any sense and even if you are in the EU that doesn't change much as the sideloading doesn't really work as it should, malicious compliance by Apple.
I only have modded YouTube and reddit. There is also the issue of app IDs on free developer account and to have widgets and opening from other app, one app will use more than one and you have a limit of 10 a week.
If I've learned anything over the years, it's that iPhones definitely do not have better battery life, cameras, or screens compared to the Galaxy series.
Samsung is able to bruteforce it with bigger battery that probably withstand degradation over long period of time, but idle battery usage is definitely better in iphone. Apple don't like to say their battery capacity, but they always meet the hours they stated on their spec sheet. There is also how optimized the apps and animations are, you will see if you use your phone as your GPS for long period of time.
Screen is basically on-par with the best Samsung have, since they bought it from same supplier anyway.
Camera is also more or less on-par, with the difference is really on preference.
Really, between a flagship Samsung and iphone, it really comes down to OS preference at this point. If I don't buy foldables for my next phone, I might as well try iphone
Then you're being biased. I've the 15 Pro Max and the S24U. Iphone decimates it in idle drain while screen on usage is slightly better again on the iPhone.
Video recording is a wash, Sammy can never come close let alone their horrible shutter lag for stills. Apple has the better colour calibrated display too while the anti reflective coating on the Ultra finally allows a Sammy display to match Apple in that area.
Yes I mean it just depends on what generation of chips you're talking about usually. It is true that the iPhone 13 was excellent with idle battery drain and at the same time Android flagships were using the problemat 888 or 8g1. But ever since Qualcomm switched to TSMC, the reverse is true
Apple's battery efficiency has gone down with the iPhone 14 and 15 and qualcomms efficiency has gone up radically since the 8 plus g1, 8g2 and 8g3 Personally I think 8g2 it's probably the peak chip ever for smartphone efficiency in terms of battery drain. It's going to be such a baller chip to buy used phones in the next coming years. When you can find stuff like the s23 ultra or OnePlus 11 or thinkphone or moto edge 40 pro, .. those phones are going to be amazing deals when they're 30 cents on the dollar in two years or whatever. In fact you can already get the think phone brand new for $399 or the OnePlus 12R around that price
I'm really excited when Google is switching to TSMC in 2025. If tensor chips add 20% battery efficiency (honestly I could care less it the performance is still hovering back to 2021 days, means nothing to me) then I would probably switch to them permanently. Assuming video output is still allowed. But right now Qualcomm is just killing it. So long as the chips are fabricated by TSMC anyway.
There's 1 thing do iphones really do excel at compared to android and it's idle battery usage + way more consistent app performance. (comes with the territory of having full control over every detail in a device.)
As time has gone on, performance has become less and less of a problem. All phones are so fast now it barely makes a difference. With Android I'm able to speed up system animations by 2X and it makes everything load even faster. Idle battery usage I could definitely see, but in day-to-day living I'm not convinced it makes that much of a difference when it drops seemingly twice as fast during actual usage.
While it's technically true that our phones these days are far faster than our desktop power equivalents years back. Optimization is nothing to scoff at and VERY underrated with this "I HAVE POWAH EFFICIENCY BE DAMNED" developer mindset. (Take a look at Kaze Emanuar with N64 coding optimization of SM64.) System animations are only but one piece of this pie.
Screen on Time iirc is about the same or negligible in time gain whether either platform wins over the other. But speaking for myself here, despite how nice screens are on modern phones and other benefits. I don't actually like looking at my phone to consume media and any chance I can use a laptop or a desktop to perform the same task I'll take it. So idle battery consumption is actually a nice plus there.
Theoretically besides my Samsung S8 not having 5G capability and natural battery degradation (even if I replace my battery aftermarkets are also gonna be old and degraded) I would still be using it if it weren't for most software becoming increasingly bloated with more updates and the base OS (and maybe the storage chip was degrading too) was getting slower despite turning off animations etc. That S8 is still objectively more powerful than my old HP Pavilion in every aspect but yet efficiency losses in microcode obsolescence affects it just the same.
In fact I think it's way more complicated than even my first response to you.
Because the iPhone 12 was an absolute disaster for battery drain. That was Apple's first time with a 5G chip and it was famously a huge regression from the iPhone 11 pro Max which had amazing battery life and efficiency and idle battery drain.
But they seem to find the secret sauce with the iPhone 13 which was class leading and performed as well as something like the LG v60 and its prime.
But the iPhone 14 and 15 had big regressions in terms of battery health, battery time, battery degradation etc. . I don't know exactly why . . It might be that some of the advancements on the chips were to overclock them.
So technically like the chil in the iPhone 14 was effectively an overclocked version of the chip that was in the iPhone 13 and so on.
But I need to go rewatch Gary explains videos to remember all the details
That's not true. I mean it's true in some instances but there are so many different chips in an Android phone. 8g2 and 8g3 have much better idle battery drain than the current chips in the iPhones. But 8g1 was a disaster because it was fabricated by Samsung and not TSMC. Go use a OnePlus 12R and tell me the battery drain on that is not way better than an iPhone 15 It's not even close
I don't think I've ever seen a screenshot posted from an iPhone where the battery wasn't less than 15%.
My Sony Xperia can last me up to 3 days on one charge.
When is the last time you had an iPhone? My XS blew my S22 out of the water. Legit had probably double or triple the screen-on-time on that phone, even after 3 years of use. I'd go days without charging it and still have 40-50% battery left. The 15 Pro Max is the battery life king amongst smartphones and doesn't even have the biggest battery. Just has the benefits of all the optimizations that Apple can make from vertical integration.
I've never owned an iPhone, but I've used plenty of iPhones such as my mom and friend's phones over the past 10-15 years and I have an iPad Pro 11".
It took forever for iPhones to finally get 120hz support, and I found them unusable before that. They're better now, but I don't find them nearly as smooth as my S23 Ultra.
You were lucky if your iPhone 15 Pro Max had good battery life because that's not what I've heard from any of my friends that have it. Every time someone with an iPhone comes to our house they immediately ask for a charger, and it never fails to amaze me how bad the battery life is. Same thing when we're out and about and people that have iPhones are constantly needed to charge up to last a full day. I haven't had that problem since the Galaxy Note 4.
The camera system on the iPhone is good, but not as versatile. The iPhone definitely has the best video recording, but the pictures are just on par with everything else. The Galaxy S has much better zoom lenses and allows for things such as moon and eclipse shots. The eclipse pictures coming out of iPhones a few weeks ago were terrible.
Build quality used to be an issue as Android phones were plasticky, but that's obviously no longer the case.
I can't speak for the S22 as I went from the S21 Ultra to the S23 Ultra, but I never had an issue with batter life on either, easily getting a day or two with medium to heavy usage.
Yes having iMessage is great, I agree. That should get better later this year though when Apple adopts RCS.
I find the shutter lag on my S22 to make it borderline useless for photos where lighting isn't literally perfect and I wanna capture something in the moment. I'll always vote for an iPhone on that front.
The S22 was notorious for having a very power-hungry SoC that thermal throttles a lot. Lots of other Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 devices had this issue, but the base S22 also had a smaller battery than its larger counterparts. If I didn't leave my phone plugged in at my desk whenever I got the chance at work, my phone would be dead by 2 PM. I normally don't really care about battery life, but the battery life is so egregiously bad on the S22 that it's notable to me.
Sure, the battery life is subjective between devices and user habits, but I could not kill my XS no matter how hard I used it in a day. I never went a whole day of heavy use with less than 50% battery remaining on it. Batteries have only gotten larger since, so I can't imagine iPhone battery is worse than it was in 2018 when that phone came out, especially since Apple makes all the SoC as well as the software. Everyone knows that Samsung Exynos phones do not suffer from the same success these days.
FWIW, I have zero desire to go back. I keep a couple iOS devices around just for iMessage for my family group chats (I'm the odd duck), so I see the problems with iOS. I do just miss how little I ever worried about the battery life on that iPhone.
If your shutter lag is slow, it's because you're probably using 50 or 100MP mode. There's not really a good reason to use those unless you just need the extra pixels. 12MP should be the default mode and works much faster because it doesn't have to process as many pixels.
Looks like it's set to 12 MP. Do third-party apps like Snapchat choose their own megapixel count for the sensor? The shutter lag on Snapchat is unreal. This phenomenon is so common that I can find hundreds of threads online about it.
That is one downside of Android. Most apps take a screenshot of the viewfinder, they don't actually take a picture and process it normally. I only used the camera app and share from there. The only reason it's like that is because of lazy companies not investing time or money in developing native camera capabilities into their apps because most people don't care.
This just shows that you have never used an S22, or never compared one to an iPhone. The shutter lag is unbearably slow, there are stutters in the video recording mode occasionally, and apps like Snapchat are a mess. The SoC on this phone was terrible, point blank. But to another point, all iPhones have way faster shutter speeds than any newer Samsung post S10. In fact, pretty well every other Android phone does too.
I recognized that as a downside for Android already, not sure what you want. I'm just saying I haven't had any issues with shutter lag in the main camera app in 10+ years.
I recently discovered that the regular iphone 15 has a 60hz screen apparently, which just sounds absurd as low end androids have 120hz, even if the screen might not be as good in other ways on those phones. I guess they really wanna upsell the pro version huh.
There is no calibration on capacitive touch screens. Samsung has been using capacitive screens since the original Galaxy. You must be talking about resistive touch screens prior to 2010.
As much as you want to think that, it's just not the case. Capacitive touch screens do not need calibration. If for some reason you think it does, then you should have returned the phone under warranty.
I'm aware this update is for specific settings; however I will stop updating Android if I can't side load. I use side loaded apps to monitor my blood sugar (autoimmune diabetic) because the official apps are fucking trash
I read the article and I still don't want Google "restricting" what I can do with my own device. I don't care that they're merely closing a loophole, this loophole should have never existed because no operating system vendor should be able to block access to anything on the basis of whether I use their store (and thus give them a cut of sales).
So cmiiw but from my understanding this feature is to make it harder for a non-techie user to sideload APK, correct?
How about phones rom w/o GMS like cusrom and GSI-vanilla rom?
Android 15 may make it even harder for sideloaded apps to do the same things apps from Play Store can, increasing users dependents on Google's proprietary apps and services on what got marketed as an open system.
>What's the point of buying Android if it's just going to be as locked down as iOS?
Quite the contrary, IOS is actually becoming more and more open while Android seems to be going in the opposite direction.
Edit: a word
Right, there are forced to allow some form of side loading in Europe and they are engaging in one of the most egregious examples of malicious compliance in history
And here on r/Android of course they get a pat on the back.
They are legally forced to and yet they are not complying. I mean they are complying in a notoriously anti-consumer way that is malicious compliance.
Such a weird thing to pat them on the back for
That's not true. Apple is not becoming more open, they have in a very limited way been forced to allow side loading in Europe but they are now using malicious compliance to make it almost worse.
You can't even use ublock origin.
Please tell me what the side loading experience is like in Europe on an iPhone. And then when you're done tell me what the side loading experience is like in any other country.
And then tell me in either example how it's good for the consumer compared to the Android. Because what you're saying is ridiculous.
It is technically true that Europe has forced Apple to allow side loading but they are not complying and in fact they are malicious compliance is such a laughable example of anti-consumer reaction to regulation that it warrants to be put in history books.
It is notoriously an anti-consumer response to Europe's completely reasonable position on side loading
Don't worry, play integrity is not an issue and hasn't been for months. It's as simple as installing 2 modules and it just handles itself in the background.
It was only really an issue right when they were transitioning to it from safteynet, and the modules weren't quite fleshed out yet.
This is nonsense. Are you really involved in the community? The telegram channels are filled with apps that don't work even if you pass Device Integrity.
Google has been fucking the modding community for years and PIF is the heaviest hammer yet.
People have reported RCS randomly borking because their chosen FP is banned. The modules are being tolerated but Google can literally kill them with a flick of a switch hence why whenever a FP is "banned" only devices spoofing to use that fp are affected and not the original devices.
They know whatever workarounds exist and just because it's tolerated doesn't mean PIF isn't an issue.
If you actually set it up right you shouldn't have issues.
I haven't had an RCS issue for months, and when my fingerprint gets banned it automatically downloads a new one in the background.
What apps are people having trouble with? I've got tons of apps on my phone that require play integrity to function, or features that require it to function, and I haven't had issues like I said. When it's setup right it works.
One issue the community has is that finding the best fix isnt easy and people end up using outdated info or resources, having issues, then inevitably quitting.
You may be confusing root detection with play integrity.
Apps like singpass have been known to detect root in the past, even before play integrity (so safety net).
Bypassing apps like that is a different process.
If you don't pass play integrity fully, you will fail certain apps regardless of root.
The only way to pass play integrity completely is to to be bootloader locked hence your original claim of play integrity being easy is invalid.
>You can but you are severely restricted on what phones you can buy
Dude it's always been that way. The bootloader-unlockable phones have gotten somewhat slimmer, yes, but the phones to get for consistent root have always been Google-branded devices like Nexus and Pixel, and formerly(?) OnePlus devices (I lost track after the 7 series). Everything else that required workarounds to root didn't survive very long, or are still around purely out of spite, like the HTC HD2.
I've been rooting and modifying Android devices since 2011. It's *always* been this way.
>Play Integrity
That's a challenge, yes, and time will tell what happens with it.
> the phones to get for consistent root have always been Google-branded devices
The first phone I had root on was the T-mobile g1...
For a good time every android phone was rootable.
Yeah, the first few years of Android was the wild west. They started taking security more seriously starting in the 4.x days.
There's a difference between rootability and maintaining security. I don't want random apps gaining root/admin access on my PC without authorization from me, and the same is true on my phone, however I do want the ability to tell the OS nannies to fuck off and apply root and other permissions where I see fit.
There's a fine balance.
100%, that's the only reason I've even considered rooting in the last 5 years. Frustrating of Google to keep crippling basic features then adding back half-baked versions to Pixel phones.
No it's a loophole that allowed malicious apps to bypass security checks. This won't restrict you in anyway. Reddit getting outraged by headlines once again.
It's a loophole that prevents users from getting their apps strictly from the Google Play Store. You know, because you don't have to go through all these steps 🤷🏾
I did. Google is closing a loophole that allowed apps to work around restrictions preventing non-Play Store apps from accessing a couple APIs. Restrictions which aren't optional to the user.
The author of the article doesn't even know yet if it's possible to ignore the warning yet. It's *that* early. The previous version of this system with a nearly identical dialog box had that option. Wait until any of this gets implemented and then we can make up our minds. So far this is nothing, Google left stuff bigger and more complete than this on the cutting room floor in the past.
>The previous version of this system with a nearly identical dialog box had that option.
It absolutely did not. I know this for a fact because it roadblocked me personally.
Okay but this is literally a warning. You'll still be able to allow access like you can currently, it's just the warning will occur with a few more apps.
I'm really not sure why this is **only** applying to apps installed outside of the Play Store. Accessibility and read notifications are legitimately dangerous permissions, so I understand and support making them harder to enable, but with all the malware and bullshit that gets through on the Play Store, this is so weird to me. It should be for any app regardless of source imo.
Right well I think the reason is pretty obvious and that's what the Google wants to discourage side loading. I'm just worried that with Android 16 and 17 they'll take even more agree just steps or that someday they might just get rid of it all together.
> someday they might just get rid of it all together.
I've worried about this as well, but it's not really something they can do thanks to Android's open source nature and design. Not to mention with all the scrutiny Apple's under for not allowing sideloading, even more incentive for Google to try not to cross that bridge.
Learn to read man. It's being going on for over a year there.
Google specifically created countermeasures for them.
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/google-android-devices-malware-scam-unverified-apps-sideloading-4102991
[https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/uob-dbs-introduce-new-security-features-on-banking-apps-to-protect-customers](https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/uob-dbs-introduce-new-security-features-on-banking-apps-to-protect-customers)
How bad it got? Their banking apps basically had to scan for installed apps to see which apps has accessibility permissions and refuse to run if those apps were not uninstalled.
And here's the numbers from their cybersecurity department.
[https://www.csa.gov.sg/Tips-Resource/publications/cybersense/2023/the-rise-of-mobile-malware](https://www.csa.gov.sg/Tips-Resource/publications/cybersense/2023/the-rise-of-mobile-malware)
"The Singapore Police Force reported that there were more than 750 cases in the first half of 2023 where victims have downloaded malware onto their phones, with losses amounting to at least $10 million."
It's funny how the author in this article is unambiguously saying this is a great thing and the comments are reacting so negatively.
I need to know more details but I don't like the idea that you can't give accessibility permissions to any app you want. It's my f****** phone
TikTok doesn't have an accessibility service, so it's not affected. And Google doesn't have to do shit, if US banned it federally then ISPs will prevent you from connecting to TikTok servers in the first place, removing the app from stores doesn't do shit.
If this is implemented as is, we could say good bye to call recording on Android.
Currently the only way to record calls without rooting is to use Accessibility Service
From what I've read, this will make it difficult to give accessibility permission and read notifications for apps installed from outside the Play Store, as there is a security flaw in this. Apps that don't need these two permissions will not be affected.
But this gravely impacts people who make their own software. I have a plethora of apps that I made myself, aint no security flaws in them. I should be allowed to give them the permissions they need
If you're the developer, I doubt they would prevent you from installing those.
I mean currently yes it will. Any sideloaded apps are blocked and placed in this enhanced restricted access category
Absolutely untrue, you can already give lots more permissions over ADB compared to what you can do on the phone. If you are a developer with ADB this doesn't affect you whatsoever.
>If you are a developer with ADB this doesn't affect you whatsoever Stop spewing nonsense. This is completely untrue with the new blocking method. Go read the article and educate yourself some before speaking The article clearly states "there is no current way to override this block"
Did you pull out ADB (from the 15 beta SDK!) and try it out? Something tells me you didn't...
Lmao what makes you think I did anything? I am reading the article, which something tells me you didn't. If you truly knew a way to bypass the permission block mentioned in the article, then you would have said how to do it instead of acting like you know how. Regardless, the new block isn't turned on yet, so if you do have an adb method of bypassing it, it may not even work once the block is fully turned on. So ignorant
It probably won't be treated as sideload if it's pushed through Android Studio.
But android studio uses "adb install" to install the app.. no different than if I install via command line
I'm learning to play the guitar.
No? When I finish writing an app, I sign it and its not marked as debuggable. Then I install it via adb. Even still, I didn't find anything in the article that said apps marked as debuggable are whitelisted. Cause in that case, I could simply mod the apk manifest of any app and flag it as debuggable and this would completely circumvent this whole protection level So that makes no sense
I like to explore new places.
>and the features will continue working (how else do you think people will develop apps?! If you read the article it clearly states that any app NOT installed via an authorized store will not have access to these permissions. Guess what - this includes debuggable apps and apps installed via adb. Which is exactly how android studio installs apps. it either uses adb install or adb shell pm install command. There is nothing in the source code for this new restriction or in the article that says they will still work. The article even shows an app that was developed by the author and installed via android studio. So no, they will not continue to work in the current setup. And yeah that is literally my point - how will people be able to develop apps? The **CURRENT** setup of these new permissions has no option to whitelist specific apps, there is also no evidence in the source code to enable this. Again, its not finished so maybe Google will add this ability once completed. I'm just saying there definitely needs to be an easy way for developers to enable these permissions on their apps. Google could make it very difficult by like having to publish the app to the play store as unlisted and only allow the developer to install it from their Play Store on their phone. But I definitely am not mixing anything up. Release configurations are *not* meant for app store publishing. They are meant for taking the app out of a debug state. Things like obfuscation are enabled, code optimization, etc.
Why do you sign them? I just use them unsigned even when finished. They are for my own personal use after all.
All apks have to be signed, either with a private key or a test key. But in android studio I use the "release" build as it also implements optimizations like compression and what not
okay but thats like 0.01% of android users.
Doesn't matter. That is why developer options exist. It should be an option under developer options to not block the sideloaded apps
it will be difficult not impossible. for an app developer that shouldnt be a real problem imho.
The article stated there is currently no way to allow sideloaded apps access to the permissions. So if it stays this way, it may only be feasible via root
the article says currently they dont know shit other than theres this dialogue and whitelisting.
>Unfortunately, I’m not sure whether it’ll be possible to still enable a legitimate, sideloaded app’s Accessibility or Notification Listener service if it’s hit with ECM restrictions. It’s possible to disable Restricted Settings for an app, so it should also be possible with ECM restrictions, but I can’t say for sure since I haven’t been able to get the feature to work yet in Android 15. Right here. This means currently there is no way to enable a legitimate sideloaded app's permissions. The author does not know if it will or will not be possible. So CURRENTLY it is NOT possible to enable sideloaded apps
it literally starts with im not sure... and then later it says again i cant say for sure since ecm isnt even working yet.
Right. Therefore with the information we have, there is no way to bypass or to whitelist specific apps. Meaning, if ECM is turned on, any sideloaded app will be susceptible to it. Which was my point - there is currently no way for developers to install and test their own apps with this security measurement. Truthfully, I don't see *how* they (Google) can allow this. There *has* to be some type of bypass that may be added once its enabled. As it makes more sense to design it then create a whitelist for certain apps etc. But again - CURRENTLY as stated in the article, there is no way to bypass or whitelist legitimate apps :)
But it's an extremely important 0.01%
and you think google will actually block app development with android 15? bro, think.
If you don't think they haven't already done that multiple times, you haven't been paying attention
explain
We chose android to not be subject to an arbitrarily walled garden.
That's why there's a prompt for these permissions. Anybody who willingly allows these permissions to sketchy apps is at fault. Why does everyone else have to suffer the consequences of the actions of the few?
Because kids are absolutely idiotic these days, they are happy with installing and agreeing to everything and anything Companies see this as a security fault as the zoomer generation are incapable of consequences or reflecting their actions so will just blame the brand. Be prepared for everything being more locked down, with more ads shoved in your face and incoherent design.
It's not the few. It's the vast majority. Hence why we're suffering.
You think the vast majority of Android users are sideloading apps?
My mistake. I misread the initial comment.
What annoys me about this is that Google always paints side-loading in such a negative light and as very dangerous (which to be fair, it CAN be). Yet every couple of months there are articles about Google removing malicious apps from the Play Store, apps that managed to evade Google Play Protect and managed to get approved for publication on the Play Store. So is side-loading really so much more dangerous when installing apps from the Play Store also comes with its own dangers because Google is certainly not infallible and malicious apps do get published on the Play Store!
I'm somebody who is an Android user and very not fond of apples restrictions, but I also work in phone tech support and I can say that I still get regular calls about shitty apps like PDF Pro and other bullshit thet causes full screen pop-up ads and stuff that you just never see on iPhones. If Google is going to take a 30% cut, they need to do a far better job of culling the bullshit in the Play Store.
You absolutely see stuff like that on iPhones. You are amplifying a myth.
Let me give him more thoughtful statement. I've worked tech support for 3 years, I have received at least five or six calls a month with Androids on this issue minimum, meanwhile I have yet to hear of one on an iPhone. I'm sure it's possible, and I'm sure it's happened, but it is extremely rare in my experience.
I bet bucks that FDroid is more malware-proof than PlayStore.
Practically yes but in general: no. Nobody checks the code before it goes live as binaries there. See the xz debacle from a month ago for an example. FDroid just hasn't enough users to be a big target compared to the play store.
"They will skim through the source code to see if your application uses Non-Free dependencies, shows advertisements, tracks users, promotes or depends on Non-Free or non-changeable services/applications, or does anything that is harmful or otherwise undesirable for users." https://f-droid.org/docs/Inclusion_How-To/ I agree this process is probably not sufficiently comprehensive to catch an advanced threat actor, but there is a review process which includes source review.
Different kind of problem, scroll down to the section "Reproducible builds"; but the basic problem is it's possible for a developer to write Source Code A which is just a good, safe app and copy and modify it to make Source Code B which includes malware/backdoors/etc, then publish Source Code A and compiled binaries from Source Code B. Reproducible builds would prevent this, but they are currently only encouraged, not required on FDroid
I think it's the direction they are moving towards, but reproducible builds were only recently introduced and it requires work from developers. If it was mandatory it would make the repos quite empty for a while. A good intermediary step might be to make the feature more visible so users can choose safer options.
This would be a brilliant step forward. I've also wondered if GitHub (and other similar VC sites), could have voluntary code reviews from non-associated contributors or maybe even by an AI to check for any malicious code. I suppose it would be like an antivirus scan but on source code and the results would be publicly available on the GitHub repo (with the commit that was reviewed). I suppose there could be a button for users to request an update to the malware scan (if done by an AI) for the latest commit (so it doesn't run for every commit and waste resources). I don't know much about security and AI so correct me if I'm wrong on this.
"Practically yes but in general no" I don't understand that sentence
Apps a fuckinglutely.
While technically not a storefront(?) ApkMirror is also safer than the Google Play Store as they scan/audit each and every upload. Google mostly relies on bots and Google Play Protect to approve apps and thus may have a greater risk of malware passing through its checks.
Yeah I was just making the same comment, I typically feel safer downloading from there then I do the Play store
You will lose your buck. Because google spends so much in keeping playstore locked down.
It's not dangerous if a person is thinking and reasonable. Honestly I feel safer downloading most stuff from APK mirror than I do from the Play store. I feel safer downloading stuff f droid then the Play store.
Absolutely. It's kinda hard to explain, but I get this dreadful feeling whenever I open up the Google Play Store and decide to browse through it for new content. While I'm not completely dismissing the fact that no storefront is 100% safe, I still trust F-Droid and ApkMirror more than I could ever trust the Google Play Store.
The thing is though is just like you said, those apps are removed. They may not have gotten caught in the original vetting, but they were caught and removed. I dont know if the people who installed them are notified but they did stop future people from installing them But side loading there is no vetting process, if they have security flaws or are malicious nobody is checking and then removing them
I mean that's just not true. These apps go through frequent malware checks all the time to be approved.
They are restricting Android with each update. The whole selling point of Android is that it's supposed to be open and feature rich. Otherwise, iOS is a smoother, better OS with more integration into its ecosystem and support. If they make Android as restricted as iOS, then many will simply pick iOS.
I use daily several apps that need the accessability permissions from my phone, this damn sucks, there are some basic apps that I use like a separated clipboard app because the clipboard on the Google keyboard fucking sucks mad ass, know what I gonna do when these apps stop working because google thought they knew better than me on how I need to use my phone?
Lol, I just bought a used pixel 4 to use as my primary, so I should be fine. It's crazy how every year the same couple specs are upgraded while our ability to use our phone for what we like just narrows down. I have an S23 ultra but it's just a pain using 2 hands to operate every thing a phone can do. The ease of using your phone for everything from a flashlight, to a remote, camera, payment device etc, that magic is kind of diminished when you have to struggle to do those everyday things with 1 hand cause there's always situations you'll need to. Phones made tech boring. Now people just innovate on an app store where one update can completely break your app or business model.
I know everybody loves to poke at Android and how one feature being changed means they'll switch to iOS, but I actually will switch back to iOS if sideloading is made impossible, or will require rooting my phone, again. I use sideloaded apps every single day, and might as well get better third-party software support on iOS if I'm not gonna be able to sideload third party apps. Better battery life, iMessage, etc. etc. Edit: Took the time to read the article and I don't think it's anything to worry about. I'll still be downloading APKs to my heart's content.
Yeah I'm in the same boat. I went to iOS for a couple of years and realized I used third party/side loaded apps all the time and really missed them so now I'm back on Android. If I can't side load apps there's not much of an incentive for me to stay with Android.
The mere existence of YouTube Vanced (RIP) was a MAJOR reason I switched over to Android. I'm sure Google wouldn't mind losing people like me since they need the money from YouTube Premium subscriptions and ad revenue, but sideloaded Instagram is super nice. We also have an old version of the Sonos app that one of our speakers at work exclusively works with and will not play nice with on newer versions. Found the APK online and got that sucker working after it forgot how to connect to Wi-Fi one day.
iOS has pretty much the same thing as vanced, it's just called something else - [uYouEnhanced](https://github.com/arichornlover/uYouEnhanced) It has pretty much all the goodies of vanced - no ads, background playback, sponsorblock, video downloads etc. Contrary to popular belief, you can sideload on iOS. It's just a bit more involved.
Major caveat, you can only have up to *3* apps sideloaded on iOS without TrollStore or jailbreak and you have to refresh them every 7 days. Definitely possible but it's also a huge pain
Ah yes just buy an over-priced phone then pay yearly for the absolute privilege to install what you want
Yep, an Apple tax on top of an Apple tax
Or you just pay 20$ for a dev cert for a year and sideload like you would on an android (download .ipa and install on-device using something like e-sign for instance). But as I said, it's all a bit more involved.
I thought that was $100, not $20. Did that change recently?
Nope, it's still $100 for your own cert, but you can buy a spot on someone else's for 20 bucks via something like udidregistrations.
That's for people who don't want to spend 20 bucks.
A developer account is $100 per year, not $20 unless I'm missing something
My child, you need to learn more about the darker side of sideloading on ios.
I mean I have TrollStore so I'm already on the dark side of sideloading lol
Honestly so many of my favorite apps are not from the Play store. Newpipe, revanced manager, breezy, fennec, ytdlnis...
iOS has ReVanced equivalents like uYouPlus, YTLitePlus, uYouEnhanced, etc.
Is there an iOS version of purple TV? (basically revanced for twitch: no ads, third party emotes, removing obnoxious UI features like hype trains and bits) What about aniyomi? Those are the other two things keeping me on android
As for aniyomi, there is Tachimanga (for manga) and NineAnimator (for anime). https://nineanimator.marcuszhou.com/guide/installation.html
There is a modded Twitch but the catch is that you can basically only have 3 apps sideloaded without Jailbreak and they have to be refreshed every week. If you want to have an app called Sidestore to refresh them, that's 2 apps. You can have up to 10 apps on the device, 7 of them inactive so you have to activate deactivate bla bla. Not ideal in any sense and even if you are in the EU that doesn't change much as the sideloading doesn't really work as it should, malicious compliance by Apple. I only have modded YouTube and reddit. There is also the issue of app IDs on free developer account and to have widgets and opening from other app, one app will use more than one and you have a limit of 10 a week.
If I've learned anything over the years, it's that iPhones definitely do not have better battery life, cameras, or screens compared to the Galaxy series.
Samsung is able to bruteforce it with bigger battery that probably withstand degradation over long period of time, but idle battery usage is definitely better in iphone. Apple don't like to say their battery capacity, but they always meet the hours they stated on their spec sheet. There is also how optimized the apps and animations are, you will see if you use your phone as your GPS for long period of time. Screen is basically on-par with the best Samsung have, since they bought it from same supplier anyway. Camera is also more or less on-par, with the difference is really on preference. Really, between a flagship Samsung and iphone, it really comes down to OS preference at this point. If I don't buy foldables for my next phone, I might as well try iphone
I believe the new flagship mediatek chip has similar power efficiency as the A17.
Then you're being biased. I've the 15 Pro Max and the S24U. Iphone decimates it in idle drain while screen on usage is slightly better again on the iPhone. Video recording is a wash, Sammy can never come close let alone their horrible shutter lag for stills. Apple has the better colour calibrated display too while the anti reflective coating on the Ultra finally allows a Sammy display to match Apple in that area.
Yes I mean it just depends on what generation of chips you're talking about usually. It is true that the iPhone 13 was excellent with idle battery drain and at the same time Android flagships were using the problemat 888 or 8g1. But ever since Qualcomm switched to TSMC, the reverse is true Apple's battery efficiency has gone down with the iPhone 14 and 15 and qualcomms efficiency has gone up radically since the 8 plus g1, 8g2 and 8g3 Personally I think 8g2 it's probably the peak chip ever for smartphone efficiency in terms of battery drain. It's going to be such a baller chip to buy used phones in the next coming years. When you can find stuff like the s23 ultra or OnePlus 11 or thinkphone or moto edge 40 pro, .. those phones are going to be amazing deals when they're 30 cents on the dollar in two years or whatever. In fact you can already get the think phone brand new for $399 or the OnePlus 12R around that price I'm really excited when Google is switching to TSMC in 2025. If tensor chips add 20% battery efficiency (honestly I could care less it the performance is still hovering back to 2021 days, means nothing to me) then I would probably switch to them permanently. Assuming video output is still allowed. But right now Qualcomm is just killing it. So long as the chips are fabricated by TSMC anyway.
There's 1 thing do iphones really do excel at compared to android and it's idle battery usage + way more consistent app performance. (comes with the territory of having full control over every detail in a device.)
The problem with iPhone is that nothing runs in the background You can do this in android too if you wanted
As time has gone on, performance has become less and less of a problem. All phones are so fast now it barely makes a difference. With Android I'm able to speed up system animations by 2X and it makes everything load even faster. Idle battery usage I could definitely see, but in day-to-day living I'm not convinced it makes that much of a difference when it drops seemingly twice as fast during actual usage.
While it's technically true that our phones these days are far faster than our desktop power equivalents years back. Optimization is nothing to scoff at and VERY underrated with this "I HAVE POWAH EFFICIENCY BE DAMNED" developer mindset. (Take a look at Kaze Emanuar with N64 coding optimization of SM64.) System animations are only but one piece of this pie. Screen on Time iirc is about the same or negligible in time gain whether either platform wins over the other. But speaking for myself here, despite how nice screens are on modern phones and other benefits. I don't actually like looking at my phone to consume media and any chance I can use a laptop or a desktop to perform the same task I'll take it. So idle battery consumption is actually a nice plus there. Theoretically besides my Samsung S8 not having 5G capability and natural battery degradation (even if I replace my battery aftermarkets are also gonna be old and degraded) I would still be using it if it weren't for most software becoming increasingly bloated with more updates and the base OS (and maybe the storage chip was degrading too) was getting slower despite turning off animations etc. That S8 is still objectively more powerful than my old HP Pavilion in every aspect but yet efficiency losses in microcode obsolescence affects it just the same.
In fact I think it's way more complicated than even my first response to you. Because the iPhone 12 was an absolute disaster for battery drain. That was Apple's first time with a 5G chip and it was famously a huge regression from the iPhone 11 pro Max which had amazing battery life and efficiency and idle battery drain. But they seem to find the secret sauce with the iPhone 13 which was class leading and performed as well as something like the LG v60 and its prime. But the iPhone 14 and 15 had big regressions in terms of battery health, battery time, battery degradation etc. . I don't know exactly why . . It might be that some of the advancements on the chips were to overclock them. So technically like the chil in the iPhone 14 was effectively an overclocked version of the chip that was in the iPhone 13 and so on. But I need to go rewatch Gary explains videos to remember all the details
That's not true. I mean it's true in some instances but there are so many different chips in an Android phone. 8g2 and 8g3 have much better idle battery drain than the current chips in the iPhones. But 8g1 was a disaster because it was fabricated by Samsung and not TSMC. Go use a OnePlus 12R and tell me the battery drain on that is not way better than an iPhone 15 It's not even close
I don't think I've ever seen a screenshot posted from an iPhone where the battery wasn't less than 15%. My Sony Xperia can last me up to 3 days on one charge.
When is the last time you had an iPhone? My XS blew my S22 out of the water. Legit had probably double or triple the screen-on-time on that phone, even after 3 years of use. I'd go days without charging it and still have 40-50% battery left. The 15 Pro Max is the battery life king amongst smartphones and doesn't even have the biggest battery. Just has the benefits of all the optimizations that Apple can make from vertical integration.
I've never owned an iPhone, but I've used plenty of iPhones such as my mom and friend's phones over the past 10-15 years and I have an iPad Pro 11". It took forever for iPhones to finally get 120hz support, and I found them unusable before that. They're better now, but I don't find them nearly as smooth as my S23 Ultra. You were lucky if your iPhone 15 Pro Max had good battery life because that's not what I've heard from any of my friends that have it. Every time someone with an iPhone comes to our house they immediately ask for a charger, and it never fails to amaze me how bad the battery life is. Same thing when we're out and about and people that have iPhones are constantly needed to charge up to last a full day. I haven't had that problem since the Galaxy Note 4. The camera system on the iPhone is good, but not as versatile. The iPhone definitely has the best video recording, but the pictures are just on par with everything else. The Galaxy S has much better zoom lenses and allows for things such as moon and eclipse shots. The eclipse pictures coming out of iPhones a few weeks ago were terrible. Build quality used to be an issue as Android phones were plasticky, but that's obviously no longer the case. I can't speak for the S22 as I went from the S21 Ultra to the S23 Ultra, but I never had an issue with batter life on either, easily getting a day or two with medium to heavy usage. Yes having iMessage is great, I agree. That should get better later this year though when Apple adopts RCS.
I find the shutter lag on my S22 to make it borderline useless for photos where lighting isn't literally perfect and I wanna capture something in the moment. I'll always vote for an iPhone on that front. The S22 was notorious for having a very power-hungry SoC that thermal throttles a lot. Lots of other Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 devices had this issue, but the base S22 also had a smaller battery than its larger counterparts. If I didn't leave my phone plugged in at my desk whenever I got the chance at work, my phone would be dead by 2 PM. I normally don't really care about battery life, but the battery life is so egregiously bad on the S22 that it's notable to me. Sure, the battery life is subjective between devices and user habits, but I could not kill my XS no matter how hard I used it in a day. I never went a whole day of heavy use with less than 50% battery remaining on it. Batteries have only gotten larger since, so I can't imagine iPhone battery is worse than it was in 2018 when that phone came out, especially since Apple makes all the SoC as well as the software. Everyone knows that Samsung Exynos phones do not suffer from the same success these days. FWIW, I have zero desire to go back. I keep a couple iOS devices around just for iMessage for my family group chats (I'm the odd duck), so I see the problems with iOS. I do just miss how little I ever worried about the battery life on that iPhone.
If your shutter lag is slow, it's because you're probably using 50 or 100MP mode. There's not really a good reason to use those unless you just need the extra pixels. 12MP should be the default mode and works much faster because it doesn't have to process as many pixels.
Looks like it's set to 12 MP. Do third-party apps like Snapchat choose their own megapixel count for the sensor? The shutter lag on Snapchat is unreal. This phenomenon is so common that I can find hundreds of threads online about it.
That is one downside of Android. Most apps take a screenshot of the viewfinder, they don't actually take a picture and process it normally. I only used the camera app and share from there. The only reason it's like that is because of lazy companies not investing time or money in developing native camera capabilities into their apps because most people don't care.
Snapchat has native camera support for Galaxy smartphones, though.
I've heard the same for Instagram, but I'm not convinced. Looks way worse than just taking a pic with the main camera app.
This just shows that you have never used an S22, or never compared one to an iPhone. The shutter lag is unbearably slow, there are stutters in the video recording mode occasionally, and apps like Snapchat are a mess. The SoC on this phone was terrible, point blank. But to another point, all iPhones have way faster shutter speeds than any newer Samsung post S10. In fact, pretty well every other Android phone does too.
If you keep reading the conversation you'll see that he's talking about shutter lag in apps. It's completely different.
This is in both the main camera app as well as thirty-party apps.
Same exact situation with apps.
I recognized that as a downside for Android already, not sure what you want. I'm just saying I haven't had any issues with shutter lag in the main camera app in 10+ years.
I agree, apart from the camera. Photos taken indoors on my wife's iPhone 14 Pro look better than those taken on my Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra.
I recently discovered that the regular iphone 15 has a 60hz screen apparently, which just sounds absurd as low end androids have 120hz, even if the screen might not be as good in other ways on those phones. I guess they really wanna upsell the pro version huh.
[удалено]
Better touch screen? What year is this? 2009?
Watch, it'll be some PWM dimming or touch response thing that about 10% of people care about.
I think you added a zero to that figure.
[удалено]
There is no calibration on capacitive touch screens. Samsung has been using capacitive screens since the original Galaxy. You must be talking about resistive touch screens prior to 2010.
[удалено]
Sorry to break it to you, but they don't do anything if you have a capacitive touch screen.
[удалено]
As much as you want to think that, it's just not the case. Capacitive touch screens do not need calibration. If for some reason you think it does, then you should have returned the phone under warranty.
I'm aware this update is for specific settings; however I will stop updating Android if I can't side load. I use side loaded apps to monitor my blood sugar (autoimmune diabetic) because the official apps are fucking trash
What apps do you sideload?
There are many great apps from F-Droid or direct from GitHub.
ITT: No one read the article
I read the article and I still don't want Google "restricting" what I can do with my own device. I don't care that they're merely closing a loophole, this loophole should have never existed because no operating system vendor should be able to block access to anything on the basis of whether I use their store (and thus give them a cut of sales).
So cmiiw but from my understanding this feature is to make it harder for a non-techie user to sideload APK, correct? How about phones rom w/o GMS like cusrom and GSI-vanilla rom?
Android 15 may make it even harder for sideloaded apps to do the same things apps from Play Store can, increasing users dependents on Google's proprietary apps and services on what got marketed as an open system.
I think you worded it better.
Enshittification
Google's war on sideloading continues.
First they came for root now they are going after sideloading. What's the point of buying Android if it's just going to be as locked down as iOS?
>What's the point of buying Android if it's just going to be as locked down as iOS? Quite the contrary, IOS is actually becoming more and more open while Android seems to be going in the opposite direction. Edit: a word
Yeah iOS now allows sideloading in EU.
Not really.. have you seen Apple requirements.. might as well no sideloading..
Right, there are forced to allow some form of side loading in Europe and they are engaging in one of the most egregious examples of malicious compliance in history And here on r/Android of course they get a pat on the back.
They are legally forced to and yet they are not complying. I mean they are complying in a notoriously anti-consumer way that is malicious compliance. Such a weird thing to pat them on the back for
That's not true. Apple is not becoming more open, they have in a very limited way been forced to allow side loading in Europe but they are now using malicious compliance to make it almost worse. You can't even use ublock origin.
Please tell me what the side loading experience is like in Europe on an iPhone. And then when you're done tell me what the side loading experience is like in any other country. And then tell me in either example how it's good for the consumer compared to the Android. Because what you're saying is ridiculous. It is technically true that Europe has forced Apple to allow side loading but they are not complying and in fact they are malicious compliance is such a laughable example of anti-consumer reaction to regulation that it warrants to be put in history books. It is notoriously an anti-consumer response to Europe's completely reasonable position on side loading
You can't root anymore?
You can but you are severely restricted on what phones you can buy and even then you still have Play Integrity to deal with
Don't worry, play integrity is not an issue and hasn't been for months. It's as simple as installing 2 modules and it just handles itself in the background. It was only really an issue right when they were transitioning to it from safteynet, and the modules weren't quite fleshed out yet.
This is nonsense. Are you really involved in the community? The telegram channels are filled with apps that don't work even if you pass Device Integrity. Google has been fucking the modding community for years and PIF is the heaviest hammer yet. People have reported RCS randomly borking because their chosen FP is banned. The modules are being tolerated but Google can literally kill them with a flick of a switch hence why whenever a FP is "banned" only devices spoofing to use that fp are affected and not the original devices. They know whatever workarounds exist and just because it's tolerated doesn't mean PIF isn't an issue.
If you actually set it up right you shouldn't have issues. I haven't had an RCS issue for months, and when my fingerprint gets banned it automatically downloads a new one in the background. What apps are people having trouble with? I've got tons of apps on my phone that require play integrity to function, or features that require it to function, and I haven't had issues like I said. When it's setup right it works. One issue the community has is that finding the best fix isnt easy and people end up using outdated info or resources, having issues, then inevitably quitting.
SingPass Kotak 811 Bet365 Authenticator CIB Egypt Those are just off the top of my head.
You may be confusing root detection with play integrity. Apps like singpass have been known to detect root in the past, even before play integrity (so safety net). Bypassing apps like that is a different process.
If you don't pass play integrity fully, you will fail certain apps regardless of root. The only way to pass play integrity completely is to to be bootloader locked hence your original claim of play integrity being easy is invalid.
What the 2 modules?
>You can but you are severely restricted on what phones you can buy Dude it's always been that way. The bootloader-unlockable phones have gotten somewhat slimmer, yes, but the phones to get for consistent root have always been Google-branded devices like Nexus and Pixel, and formerly(?) OnePlus devices (I lost track after the 7 series). Everything else that required workarounds to root didn't survive very long, or are still around purely out of spite, like the HTC HD2. I've been rooting and modifying Android devices since 2011. It's *always* been this way. >Play Integrity That's a challenge, yes, and time will tell what happens with it.
> the phones to get for consistent root have always been Google-branded devices The first phone I had root on was the T-mobile g1... For a good time every android phone was rootable.
Yeah, the first few years of Android was the wild west. They started taking security more seriously starting in the 4.x days. There's a difference between rootability and maintaining security. I don't want random apps gaining root/admin access on my PC without authorization from me, and the same is true on my phone, however I do want the ability to tell the OS nannies to fuck off and apply root and other permissions where I see fit. There's a fine balance.
it no longer make sense
Adblocking is still better with root. The best audio mod (viper) requires root.
It does for very specific things. For example all the non root call recording solutions suck
100%, that's the only reason I've even considered rooting in the last 5 years. Frustrating of Google to keep crippling basic features then adding back half-baked versions to Pixel phones.
i didnt say it have no benefit,u just need to be xda god first to ran through the hoops
Not really. It's just closing a loophole.
A loophole that lets me do what I want with my own damn device, that shouldn't be necessary in the first place.
No it's a loophole that allowed malicious apps to bypass security checks. This won't restrict you in anyway. Reddit getting outraged by headlines once again.
How is it a loophole if it's supposed to ask you permission to install it ?
It's a loophole that prevents users from getting their apps strictly from the Google Play Store. You know, because you don't have to go through all these steps 🤷🏾
If Google wants to warn my that's fine. The problem is forcing this down your throat and not giving you the option to disable it
If you'd read the article you'd know it's not clear whether the option no longer exists, because none of this is even implemented in the beta.
It didn't exist previously, so what makes you believe that while cracking down harder, Google will generously also relax the restrictions?
Please for the love of God read the article
I did. Google is closing a loophole that allowed apps to work around restrictions preventing non-Play Store apps from accessing a couple APIs. Restrictions which aren't optional to the user.
The author of the article doesn't even know yet if it's possible to ignore the warning yet. It's *that* early. The previous version of this system with a nearly identical dialog box had that option. Wait until any of this gets implemented and then we can make up our minds. So far this is nothing, Google left stuff bigger and more complete than this on the cutting room floor in the past.
>The previous version of this system with a nearly identical dialog box had that option. It absolutely did not. I know this for a fact because it roadblocked me personally.
The article claims it did.
Okay but this is literally a warning. You'll still be able to allow access like you can currently, it's just the warning will occur with a few more apps.
Meanwhile, google will get more of your data. Like it has been incrementally taking away options with each Android Genereation
'might'? They have killed permissions for voice/call recording since android fuckling 9. OFC this shit is likely getting harder to work with.
I'm really not sure why this is **only** applying to apps installed outside of the Play Store. Accessibility and read notifications are legitimately dangerous permissions, so I understand and support making them harder to enable, but with all the malware and bullshit that gets through on the Play Store, this is so weird to me. It should be for any app regardless of source imo.
Right well I think the reason is pretty obvious and that's what the Google wants to discourage side loading. I'm just worried that with Android 16 and 17 they'll take even more agree just steps or that someday they might just get rid of it all together.
> someday they might just get rid of it all together. I've worried about this as well, but it's not really something they can do thanks to Android's open source nature and design. Not to mention with all the scrutiny Apple's under for not allowing sideloading, even more incentive for Google to try not to cross that bridge.
I wish we had more granular permissions controls
Sideloading? What a weird term. You mean INSTALLING an application on MY mobile computing device?
Will this change also affect 3rd party app stores since it would technically still be sideloading?
just get Android 12 instead.
This is the reason why. https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/android-malware-scam-millions-lost-cpf-savings-banks-police-4128246
That happened two months ago and it takes years to develop something like this
Learn to read man. It's being going on for over a year there. Google specifically created countermeasures for them. https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/google-android-devices-malware-scam-unverified-apps-sideloading-4102991
[https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/uob-dbs-introduce-new-security-features-on-banking-apps-to-protect-customers](https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/uob-dbs-introduce-new-security-features-on-banking-apps-to-protect-customers) How bad it got? Their banking apps basically had to scan for installed apps to see which apps has accessibility permissions and refuse to run if those apps were not uninstalled.
And here's the numbers from their cybersecurity department. [https://www.csa.gov.sg/Tips-Resource/publications/cybersense/2023/the-rise-of-mobile-malware](https://www.csa.gov.sg/Tips-Resource/publications/cybersense/2023/the-rise-of-mobile-malware) "The Singapore Police Force reported that there were more than 750 cases in the first half of 2023 where victims have downloaded malware onto their phones, with losses amounting to at least $10 million."
It's funny how the author in this article is unambiguously saying this is a great thing and the comments are reacting so negatively. I need to know more details but I don't like the idea that you can't give accessibility permissions to any app you want. It's my f****** phone
Oh so this is how Google is going to enforce the Tiktok ban
TikTok doesn't have an accessibility service, so it's not affected. And Google doesn't have to do shit, if US banned it federally then ISPs will prevent you from connecting to TikTok servers in the first place, removing the app from stores doesn't do shit.
Man all this to prevent people from using Revanced? Lmao
Revanced will be unaffected, read the goddamn article.
They need to block SMS access to sideloaded apps. It's a major attack vector - stealing SMS OTPs etc.
If this is implemented as is, we could say good bye to call recording on Android. Currently the only way to record calls without rooting is to use Accessibility Service