Hacker News

797

Keep Android Open

by LorenDB1771610331330 comments
It is a disgrace how Google has managed this situation.

To recap the storyline, as far as I understand it: last August, Google announced plans to heavily restrict sideloading. Following community pushback, they promised an "advanced flow" for power users. The media widely reported this as a walk-back, leading users to assume the open ecosystem was safe.

But this promised feature hasn't appeared in any Android 16 or 17 betas. Google is quietly proceeding with the original lockdown.

The impact is a direct threat to independent AOSP distributions like Murena's e/OS/ (which I'm personally using). If installing a basic APK eventually requires a Google-verified developer ID, maintaining a truly de-Googled mobile OS becomes nearly impossible.

by fermigier1771614120
The fundamental problem is that we are relying on the good graces of Google to keep Android open, despite the fact that it often runs run contrary to their goals as a $4T for-profit behemoth. This may have worked in the past, but the "don't be evil" days are very far behind us.

I don't see a real future for Andrioid as an open platform unless the community comes together and does a hard fork. Google can continue to develop their version and go the Apple way (which, funny enough, no one has a problem with). Development of AOSP can be controlled by a software foundation, like tons of other successful projects.

by paxys1771614501
the frustrating part is that the "advanced flow" alternative Google mentioned still doesn't exist in practice. the media ran with the reassurance headline and most people think the issue was resolved.
by snowhale1771627513
I contacted the EU DMA team about my concerns and got a real reply within 24 hours. Not just an automated message, it looked like a real human read my message and wrote a reply. I'd urge other EU citizens to do the same.
by ruuda1771611279
Just to put out what Google actually said in their blog post [0]:

> We appreciate the community's engagement and have heard the early feedback – specifically from students and hobbyists who need an accessible path to learn, and from power users who are more comfortable with security risks. We are making changes to address the needs of both groups.

> We heard from developers who were concerned about the barrier to entry when building apps intended only for a small group, like family or friends. We are using your input to shape a dedicated account type for students and hobbyists. This will allow you to distribute your creations to a limited number of devices without going through the full verification requirements.

> Based on this feedback and our ongoing conversations with the community, we are building a new advanced flow that allows experienced users to accept the risks of installing software that isn't verified. We are designing this flow specifically to resist coercion, ensuring that users aren't tricked into bypassing these safety checks while under pressure from a scammer. It will also include clear warnings to ensure users fully understand the risks involved, but ultimately, it puts the choice in their hands. We are gathering early feedback on the design of this feature now and will share more details in the coming months.

It is also true that they have not updated their developer documentation site and still assert that developer verification will be "required" in September 2026 [1]. Which might be true by some nonsensical definition of "required" if installing unverified apps requires an "advanced flow", but let's not give too much benefit of the doubt here.

0: https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/11/android-de...

1: https://developer.android.com/developer-verification

by tadfisher1771611273
I remember not long ago arguing that having Chromium become a monopoly was a bad thing, as it would mean Google could totally twist the web standard in something much more closed. I think this is a prime example.
by quentindanjou1771627253
This isnt going to be a popular post because the HN crowd is very much a "China bad" crowd but I hypothesize China will likely step in and offer a fork that's compatible with open ecosystems not under the direct control of the us state department. This might be in the form of commits and investment in fdroid and pinephone, or a tiktok like alternative to the wests walled garden.

Edit: this will likely exist "uncensored" in other markets but conform to the PRCs standards and practices domestically, similarly to how tiktok operated prior to selling a version specifically taylored to US censorship and propaganda.

by nimbius1771612627
The judge told Google that Apple is not anti-competitive because Apple has no competitors on it's platform (this all stemming from the Epic lawsuits).

Google listened.

Blame the judge for one of the worst legal calls in recent history. Google is a monopoly and Apple is not. Simple fix for Google...

by WarmWash1771614782
The link is to the f-droid blog. The official "Keep Android Open" site is at https://keepandroidopen.org/, and contains good information on how you can contribute by contacting regulators.
by boberoni1771613965
We ("you") have no power to keep android open. Unfortunately it is in the hands of a company that is building it for profit, in a way or the other.

It's been our choice to drink this glass of wishful thinking while giving that company a solid dominant position in the market.

We ("you") can only make choices that will overturn that trend.

Fully opensource hardware with fully opensource software? Maybe, but also this is wishful thinking.

by notorandit1771611384
Since smartphone apps are often times required to do banking or identifying yourself now and there's tons of special apps in order to use appliances, and by that I mean really the only way to use modern appliances is by a smartphone app, emulating an Android environment on a laptop or PC with a bluetooth dongle is essential if you want to leave that smartphone era behind you for good, but still be able to function in this society.
by emsign1771624386
I would caution the decision makers on this. The line between a secure device and a useless toy is perforated and hard to see.
by hparadiz1771611142
The biggest surprise I had in attempting to distribute my first Android app is how difficult it is to get beta-testers through the "standard" channels. It requires a 1 week review and 25 beta-users invited by email addresses

In contrast, Apple has a ~48 hour turnaround for reviews before you can upload to TestFlight and distribute a beta with a link

Not sure if I am in some "trusted developer" cohort on iOS but not Android - but the difference was enough for me to stop trying on Android

by DesaiAshu1771623878
The relative openness is the reason I gravitated towards Android and Google. I've never really taken advantage of it, but it's nice knowing it's there and that my phone (a Google Pixel) is something I have more control over than with other vendors.
by davidw1771623850
I question whether an OS that has always been controlled by Google has ever been open.

Sure parts of it were, but Google has always remained in control of Android. Anyone who expected that to change (in favor of more openness) hasn't been paying attention to the actions of tech companies for the past several decades.

by hungryhobbit1771623258
This is where I wish someone like MKBHD and others with big Android followings would speak up and say they will both blast this practice and not review any new Android phones/(Google) apps unless there's a full walk-back of this position.
by aagha1771623844
Amusingly, if Microsfot didn't have a such an awful reputation ( both recent and old ), their newly announced phones could have actually been a viable competitor.
by iugtmkbdfil8341771619631
The number one problem is locked hardware
by qiine1771625048
Should device manufacturers be worried about this direction? Could they eventually be locked out too?
by Seattle35031771622266
What would it take for Linux phones to gain the ability to run Android apps?
by cadamsdotcom1771622637
EU should fork Android
by dvh1771615407
Crazy idea: when companies change their product, they have to change the name.

Do you ever feel like the same food item doesn't taste the same it did 10 years ago? Maybe it's your memory being faulty or maybe the company got new management which decided to cut costs while keeping prices, extract the differential value from customer inertia and move on when the product stops being profitable.

Android is the same. Certain freedoms were a part of the offering - a part of the brand name. They no longer are. Not only should lose their trademark[0], they should be legally forced to change the name.

[0]: The purpose of which is to identify genuine product from counterfeits - in this case, the counterfeit just happens to be by the same company which released the original product.

by martin-t1771624593
What people forget is that the real monopoly is in how the AOSP hardware OEM contract is written....

Remember how hard Amazon had it to attempt an Android fork?

I was due to OEM SOC access being locked out due to those contracts....

Any open source mobile OS attempting to complete with AOSP needs access to mobile OEM soc providers not touched by AOSP contracts and currently that is somewhat hard.

by fredgrott1771615347
The Control Society is way lamer than I could have imagined. Deleuze! I demand a refund!
by b00ty4breakfast1771612638
>But Google said… Said what? That there’s a magical “advanced flow”? Did you see it? Did anyone experience it? When is it scheduled to be released? Was it part of Android 16 QPR2 in December? Of 16 QPR3 Beta 2.1 last week? Of Android 17 Beta 1? No? That’s the issue

A bit ironic to not believe Google is doing this. The same questions have same answers when asked about when Google is locking down side loading. A bit self-serving to pick and choose which things you want to believe are happening.

by jajuuka1771621852
Good thing
by CodeBit261771620501
Android was never open. User apps are limited, only system apps can do X which means third party apps can't compete with Google and this is not a coincidence.

Let's focus on making it possible to use really open Linux systems on smartphones.

by zb31771611159
Just like Microsoft screwed up Windows, Google will screw up Android and people will move to Linux on PCs and some open version of Android, or Harmony, or whatever new mobile system comes up, on their phones.

Nothing lasts for ever. The sooner you make the switch, the better off you will be.

by gethly1771617540
> We see a battle of PR campaigns and whomever has the last post out remains in the media memory as the truth

You must find truth. Lies will find you.

by 01HNNWZ0MV43FF1771614283
Capitalism is the privatization of human needs. As long as these tech platforms are owned privately they will be used to police and make money.

This view NEEDS to be central to the tech freedom rhetoric, else the whole movement is literally just begging politicians and hoping corporations do the right thing... useless.

by Atlas6671771613280
From a marketing standpoint it seems like a baffling decision on Google's part.

I own a Pixel and while the hardware seems decent, I've had a buggy and annoying experience with Android, and it's been getting worse lately.

Are Google so high on their own supply that they think people use their phones out of preference for the OS? Because frankly it's not very good. That's like Microsoft thinking people use Teams because of its merits.

People buy Android phones because they can be had cheaper than an equivalent iPhone and because in spite of the buggy and inconsistent mess of an OS, you aren't beholden to Apple's regimented UX. Locking down Android will not give it a "premium experience"... It'll always just be "Temu iOS" at best.

by stackghost1771610955
[dead]
by Nugfle1771620432
by 1771620364
https://postmarketos.org/

It's time to say goodbye.

by mistercheph1771615568
>F-Droid Basic Great, now they can spread themselves even thinner. Just revert the entire trash rewrite from years ago. Problem solved
by oybng1771612777