In August, Google had announced that developers who distribute apps outside the Play Store need to verify their identity. This caused an uproar among fans and developers, as it could virtually kill sideloading.
A few days ago, F-Droid, a popular app store that compiles and hosts open source apps, said it could be forced to shut down due to restrictions created by Google's controversial sideloading rules. Free app distribution is facing its end.
But Google says sideloading will not be affected by its policy, it is fundamental to Android. It insists that the "developer identity requirements are designed to protect users and developers from bad actors, not to limit choice. We want to make sure that if you download an app, it’s truly from the developer it claims to be published from, regardless of where you get the app. Verified developers will have the same freedom to distribute their apps directly to users through sideloading or through any app store they prefer."
See, that's the thing, Google is explaining about the policy on the surface layer, and omitting the aftermath. If Google forces developers to submit their personal information, and charge a registration fee, there is a very good chance that many developers may choose not to. As Android Police notes, even Google's free registration for some developers won't solve this problem. Unless an app has an identifier, a sort of certificate, that is recognized by the Google Play Console, it won't be whitelisted. That would prevent the apps from being installed from third-party sources, aka sideloading. It could spell the doom of the apps, and third-party app marketplaces like F-Droid could die. So it is the ripple effect that's actually concerning, which when considered affects sideloading on the whole.
Why is Google doing this? I explained about this in a comment on another article recently. This is my speculation, Google could use this policy to target apps that affect its services. If an app blocks ads, who's to say Google will approve it? Could the app be rejected for something like "injecting scripts that alter web pages" ? That sounds like a corporate excuse to deny verification. All those apps like NewPipe, Revanced, GrayJay, etc., that let you watch YouTube without ads? Do you think Google is going to grant them permission to continue? Or will it consider the amount of revenue it could earn by blocking these apps? It would claim "they breach YouTube's terms and conditions".
Google's policy could be backed by developers/studios of apps and games that contain in-app purchases and subscriptions, as it could prevent modded apps that users may sideload to get in-app purchases for free. This may result in a significant amount of revenue for those money grabbing apps, and in turn benefit Google's revenue.
These companies will never change, tip-toeing the borders of laws and regulations, to take maximum advantage of the situation. Let's face it, users who download and install apps from third-party stores are way fewer. The average user doesn't sideload apps. That's what they are counting on, it's not about people protesting, their voices won't be heard, because power-users are in the minority, and our views don't matter. The only ones who could actually make a difference are antitrust authorities.
Thank you for being a Ghacks reader. The post Google defends its new policy, claims it will not make sideloading go away appeared first on gHacks Technology News.
0 Commentaires