lengthy bureaucratic approval processes with some plenum acting as gatekeepers that make live hard for small devs to have their apps listed in the store.. but a safe store every noob can rely on
easy unbureaucratic approval process, open to everyone, but with some responsibility for the end user to not download every shit they come across
DamnTargetGalaxy S8, OneUI 1.0 (Android 9) !!1 month ago
Whether or not it is Googles fault is another argument but surely we can all agree apps like this should have never made it to the play store if Google actually did some testing before publication like apple does.
The play store is literally full of malware with millions of downloads and yet nobody thinks anything needs to change (cause freedom in android WOOOO)
Why doesn't Google create a repository system, where the repository enabled by default only includes software that's been checked ( at least to an extent), and users can manually enable ALL repositories to access apps that may not be safe?
It's very common in desktop Linux distros, don't see why Google can't do it. I think even F-droid allows you to enable/disable app repositories.
Umm guys, obviously it's not Google who's made it, but why do you think that matters?
If your corner store/or say Walmart or whatever sold goods or services that are unexpectedly dangerous, illegal, or outright try to harm the user there would be hell the pay. Why the hell should digital stores get a free pass?
I think "Clipper" was the name of the hidden malware, while the actual app in the Google app store was named "MetaMask" (obviously fake app, and unrelated to the real MetaMask).
The arstechnica article references the below ESET blog post:
stop trying to play ignorant.
the only person who wants the malicious material on the market is the person who makes it or profits from it.
there are rules against it. however the android operating system is much more versatile and less locked down than crapples ios.
I'm not talking about malicious material, I'm talking about privacy features such as hiding the wallet from my phone's homescreen and opening it by "calling" a pin number etc.
Not that I care *that* much about it, but I don't believe Google cares about my freedom *that* much either.
Yes, I want to use that wallet with that feature. But google doesn't allow it anymore (since a few weeks). Hence, I don't believe the "freedom" thing too much. Not that I blame google for anything (their store - their rules), but "user's freedom" is definitely not the vibe I'm getting from them. That was my whole point. :)
dont have to use apps from the app store. side load. the app store is just convenience.
everyone dosnt use the windows store because we remember "games for windows live"
If you really want something, go out there and build it. I cant find what I want, so I just build it. tired of the world holding me back. get on github.
I remember 2 Ars editors attacking me on Twitter for commenting on a tweet of theirs stating that these sort of click bait/misleading titles are why ad blockers are necessary. At the time, they were white-listed (well I was subbed at the time, so I did not actually need to white-list)... but after being harassed by two of their editors, I decided to cancel my sub and add them to the black list.
They should not get paid when they are doing shit like this. I suggest others to do the same.
I feel like Android Police is very close to becoming this kind. They also had/still have pretty good content, but look at their provoking title and very biased reporting.
Then, their intrusive ads and toxic content section. I can see them spiralling down from here relatively quickly. I mean I really like their content but they are taking 'opinionated journalism' to extreme.
They were going pretty well even after the acquisition... It is much more recently that they became more focused on click bait and less focused substance... Plus, unprofessional editors. I wish I had screenshot their responses. They were quick to curse me out.