zlacker

>>kotaKa+(OP)
The problem here is that the EU, which would normally be the only hope to put a stop to bullshit like this, seems to like this.

>>tgsovl+Hz
It's easy. For the average user, device integrity is more valuable (by a lot) than side loading.

People that think this is unacceptable are not remotely average users. Average users benefit greatly from their pocket appliance not being a full fledged computer.

>>maxeri+8C
Agreed. Most people don't care that they can't run "unauthorized app XYZ", as long as their bank account / vacation pics / texts don't leak.

Now, that may happen anyway, but they'll give up a TON to avoid that.

Me, I try to avoid using my phone for anything important, use a VPN under Linux at home whenever possible, ad blockers, privacy guard, etc, etc. I can't expect my non-technical family members to do that.

Bad car analogy coming up: MOST drivers benefit more from ABS than the few really, really good race car drivers who can do threshold braking and outbrake ABS - and even then, I doubt it's true for anything but the earliest ABS systems. I'll bet the newest ABS systems are better than almost any human - because they don't have an off day, don't get distracted, etc.

And I get the anger - I'm an old school Atari 800xl / ST / DOS / Linux user who tries to ditch Windows where possible. Restricting things seems heavy-handed - and I don't trust Google in the least. But I would NEVER tell anyone in my family to sideload an app, even though they're all Android users - I don't want that support burden.