zlacker

>>kotaKa+(OP)
> Google will begin to verify the identities of developers distributing their apps on Android devices, not just those who distribute via the Play Store

This is absolutely unacceptable. That's like you having to submit your personal details to Microsoft in order to just run a program on Windows. Absolutely nuts and it will not go as they think it will.

>>gethly+Ux
> will not go as they think it will.

How will it go? Where are people going to go? People who draw a hard line on this can’t go to iOS for more freedom. Linux phones aren’t ready for prime time. So what’s left? Going back to a flip phone that doesn’t even have the capability of running apps in the same class?

>>al_bor+PT
Aside from the prospect of bad press and user protest - There are still non Play Protect certified Android phones being released, including a few rare phones that skip the Play Store altogether (including the Fire phones). So they could lose at least a little bit of ground in this area. In a sense, they are in competition with their open source offering, even though they have a lot of control over it these days.

It could also make jailbreaking more commonplace, which on the Android side has died down in recent years because sideloading is enough for most users.

>>creato+Ok1
What is the killer app people are sideloading these days? For people to get onboard they need to feel like they are really missing out on something they find valuable. iOS doesn't have sideloading (outside of some TestFlight loopholes), and I don't see anyone is real life talking about it. It's just activists for this kind of thing online.

I don't think the average user feels like they are really missing anything, which makes it a hard sell.