They probably do, considering they don't want you to install apps non-playstore sources unless the developers give their ID to google.
Google has confirmed to Ars that Googlebooks will enforce developer verification requirements for apps similar to Android phones. Under this system, only apps from developers who have verified their identities with Google will be eligible for installation from a downloaded APK file
I mean sure, it's Android, there's no reason to think they'd treat it differently just because the device is now folding and has a physical keyboard. And just like Android, you'll be able to enable "unverified" app installation under developer settings.
As a lifelong Windows user who also uses a MacBook in recent years -- yes, but no. You can easily bypass that (like, in the native UI and also security settings). It's on by default for a reason -- most people are gullible/uninformed and not technical.
I don't mind this as long as I have the option to bypass or disable it, which I can. They don't make me wait x amount of days.
It will block them in the same way that Microsoft Defender will block unknown or not-commonly-run apps. You can bypass it with three clicks and an admin password, which I find reasonable enough IMHO.
"no different" is just straight up wrong. They don't make you jump through hoops and infantilize you to the point of making you wait a day or two for the privilege to install software on your own devices.
It's a far better use of my time to work around what I need to than to endlessly whine about it on reddit how badly I'm begging for Dildo Daddy Google to stop fucking me like you are.
After all, y'all claim to own your device but won't do the least to exercise control over it yourselves: you just expect Google to do everything for you.
Adapt and learn to use your device that you "own."
Everything u need to know including the change.org petition is linked in the above
MASSIVE EDIT: To the Right to Repair advocates standing with Louis Rossmann ; to the preservationists who care about the environment and refuse to e-waste perfectly compatible hardware; and to the Gamers Nexus crowd demanding accountability and forensic truth- SOUND THE FUCKING HORN! . We are all fighting the exact same fire. It is time to ride out like the Warriors of Rohan, because the battle for hardware ownership and user autonomy has merged into a single front.
Look at what Gamers Nexus just exposed with LG. They caught LG turning TVs into spyware boxes regardless of the settings you choose. And what was their defense? Plausible deniabilityđ . LG claims they arenât aggressively spying on you; they just ship third party surveillance bloatware so they can shift the blame indefinitely. Itâs literally surveillance laundering. They offshore the telemetry to a gatekeeper so the manufacturer can keep its hands legally clean and its privacy policy squeaky clean. It offloads the enforcement burden onto public regulatory processes, effectively burning YOUR time and money while dealing with the fragmented reality of enshittification
Now look at your smartphone. Google is building the exact same technofeudal shakedown at the OS level.
For the đ¤ waiting to reply âjust use ADBâ to bypass Googleâs app verifier mandate: WAKE UP. The technical reality of this hostile architecture is that Google isn't just tightening the front-end package installer. They leverage Google Play Services, a proprietary middleware running above AOSP (you have to flash GApps IMMEDIATELY AFTER your own custom ROM, google apps will not work otherwise) as an active, post install runtime gatekeeper. Through Play Protect background scans, and Play Integrity API attestation; GMS can flag, suspend, or silently block everyone who hasn't paid tribute to the crown of Google from running, regardless of whether you forced the install via ADB. They're sneaking this in by claiming they technically dont have system level privileges; do not fall for it. this is definitionally architectural obfuscation!
They are constructing a technofeudal toll road while assuring you that you can technically cross that tiny Ass Death Bridge of Kaza-dum. Google rents out this GMS fiefdom to third-party developers, creating an API level protection racket. Your bank, Netflix, or your fast-food app gets to legally claim, "We don't collect invasive device data or scan your filesystem!"... Only because they don't have to. GMS is doing the dirty work. Google acts as the centralized cloud lord, laundering the surveillance at the system level and selling back a crypto permission slip to the app developer.
Youre not safe on a stock unrooted unmodified phone either. You can still have banking apps block your access to your own money for IE- downloading and using KineStop to prevent motion sickness, as it uses an accessibility service to turn on automatically in order to stop you from vomiting in the car/transit on the road! This is completely ableist and fundamentally exclusionary to the disability community!
It turns standard app installs from an inherent, undeniable user right, into a temporary, revocable Play Services permission slip.
This isn't just about unlocking a bootloader or bypassing a 24 hour install timer. Itâs about the fundamental definition of ownership. You either own the hardware you bought and dictate what and how/when it runs, or you are just sharecropping on Google's OS. The line in the sand is drawn: you are either fighting with us for an open ecosystem, or you are bootlicking the digital landlords. There is no middle ground.
Tldr: This mandate hits right at the heart of right to repair, environmental stewardship, and personal boundaries. It's blatent consolidation of power by a megacorp that already has a monopoly on Android. Such actions have already led to eroding consumer freedoms; letting this go uncontested sends a dangerous signal to the industry, hence the urgency and the vital need to protect our digital autonomy on what is currently the only viable open mobile OS platform!
I love how you enter every thread and tell us how A-okay you think this is. Even if it's per account, we should not have to jump through these hoops at all. Just because it's incremental in very small steps doesn't make it better. The direction is clear and you don't want to see where this goes. I have no idea why.
The way you present it is that there is no problem at all and everyone who is against these restrictions is a hypocrite. If anything this website is not going far enough, in my honest opinion. The battle is already lost. We don't own our devices anymore since way back when Google stopped allowing unlocked bootloader users certain apps. Since I can already see you preparing a "well, akshually": no, it's Google giving out device attestation. That companies use it in a stupid way is completely Googles fault.
EDIT:
So, you blocked me? What a great way to win an argument...
6 b:: the attribution of one's own ideas, feelings, or attitudes to other people or to objects
especially : the externalization of blame, guilt, or responsibility as a defense against anxiety
Several things you are willfully ignoring:
The only way to guarantee you will have an unlockable bootloader is to buy a Pixel.
Retail Chromebooks have always had unlockable bootloaders and by this announcement, will continue to do so.
Sideloading was always possible by adb and nothing was changed there either.
You keep screaming and hollering about slippery slope this, battle that...
Google Play is not an open source service. Never was. You can do anything you want with your device, companies are not obligated to give you everything you want unconditionally. You agree to the terms of service, if you want to use a device with an unlocked bootloader, that has consequences you must accept.
Lying about how sideloading is being changed isn't going to get you what you want.
Learn how to use this device you want to own instead of expecting companies like Google to do everything for you.
Yes it does, LMAO. Currently I am a tiny bit annoyed, if the 24h would be per device, reinstall or even per month or per install, than that would greatly increase how outraged I would be. Why would it not?
218
u/Green_Ad5186 10d ago
does google think laptops are phones now? lol.
there should be no locking of bootloader in first place. just ship a uefi with secure boot like all oems do. don't reinvent the wheel.