HN in general has completely misunderstood app verification. App verification is what allows rival app stores to be installed without a warning, even if they aren't installed from a system app store. It is a direct result of this ruling.

It's still possible to install any app with a warning. A future Google Android build will require developer mode to be enabled to install those apps. That is the problem to address, not app verification, which will be rolled out as a Google Play Services update to existing Google Android builds and makes it strictly easier to install apps than before.

▲

crote 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Before app verification any app store could install any app without having the user jump through crazy hoops. After app verification any app store can only install Google-blessed apps without having the user jump through crazy hoops.

App verification does not "allow" anything. Its only purpose is to block non-blessed apps through third-party stores and extracting an additional bribe from developers. You cannot view app verification's existence without considering the broader environment it was created for.

▲

lern_too_spel a day ago | parent [-]

> Before app verification any app store could install any app without having the user jump through crazy hoops

After app verification, exactly the same. Nothing changes about what app stores can do.

> App verification does not "allow" anything

It allows installing apps outside a system app store without the user having to enable installing from the app that triggered the install. Prior to app verification , the user had to click through a dialog to go to settings to allow installation from the app that triggered the install.

> You cannot view app verification's existence without considering the broader environment it was created for.

Exactly right. The broader environment was that Google was forced to allow installation of apps outside of system app stores without the user having to tap through a warning dialog. This is the solution to that problem.

▲

crote a day ago | parent [-]

> After app verification, exactly the same.

No, because to install unverified apps the user has to 1) enable developer mode, 2) confirm you aren't being guided, 3) reboot the device, 4) wait 24 hours, 5) enable unverified app installation. You also have to confirm that you are really-really sure with every install. Oh, and that step 5? Google explicitly recommends turning it on for 7 days only.

> It allows installing apps outside a system app store without the user having to enable installing from the app that triggered the install.

... which was already possible, so it is not enabled by app verification.

> You are confusing app verification with a change in how to install unverified apps.

It is two parts of the same thing. App verification exists only to make installing unverified apps difficult. App verification has no reason to exist if installing unverified apps is not restricted.

	▲	lern_too_spel a day ago \| parent [-]
		> No, because to install unverified apps the user has to 1) enable developer mode, As I said in my first comment, that change is separate from app verification. > which was already possible, so it is not enabled by app verification It was not. Read the rest of that sentence beginning with "without." > App verification has no reason to exist if installing unverified apps is not restricted. App verification is required to allow installing apps outside a system app store without any warning to the user, as required by the ruling.

▲

chapz 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

App verification means, Google can deny apps entry into Android for whatever reason Google comes up with. There are no clear and objective rules nor are there any real options to object.

And that is the problem. Google can just deny anything that does stuff in a creative new way or that poses a competitive risk.

And, if Google decides you are not comming in, there is no warning you can click to go around that.

▲

ColdStream a day ago | parent | next [-]

I do fear for all these youtube alternative app developers. If I was building them, no way am I handing over my personal ID to Google. They would leverage that almost immediately.

	▲	lern_too_spel a day ago \| parent [-]
		They will continue to not verify their identity with Google, the same as they do now. This is where the new unknown sources installation flow comes in. In the future, their users on Google Android devices will have to enable developer mode in order to install these apps. On the plus side, this setting will persist when users migrate to new devices, unlike now. On the minus side, there is no reason this should require enabling developer mode. This is what people should be complaining about.

▲

lern_too_spel a day ago | parent | prev [-]

>App verification means, Google can deny apps entry into Android for whatever reason Google comes up with.

Two errors:

1. Google only gets to determine what app verification allows without warning on Google builds of Android.

2. You can still install unverified apps.

▲

skeledrew 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> App verification is what allows rival app stores to be installed without a warning, even if they aren't installed from a system app store

Wrong. That's what the company wants. App verification isn't needed for anything, and a "rival app store" is just another app store and should be treated as such.

▲

NewJazz 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

What does app verification mean to you? Does it involve sending a copy of your ID to google? Because imho that alone is a problem.

▲

lern_too_spel a day ago | parent [-]

> Because imho that alone is a problem.

That is already required to list an app on the Play Store. What app verification means is that if you've done that, you don't have to distribute through the play store. People can install your app (or app store) from your website and not get a scary warning about whether to allow installs for apps downloaded from your browser, as required by the judge's ruling. Nothing else changes. People who complain to their legislators about app verification will get laughed at. I already explained what they should complain about instead.

▲

NewJazz a day ago | parent [-]

Why do you think it is your place to tell people where to prioritize their personal lobbying efforts?

Btw very few of the apps on my phone are from the play store, so not sure what you're on about.

▲

lern_too_spel a day ago | parent [-]

> Why do you think it is your place to tell people where to prioritize their personal lobbying efforts?

If you lobby for something that is obviously nonsensical, you are wasting your time. I am educating people in order to prevent them from wasting their time and hopefully accomplish something useful instead.

> Btw very few of the apps on my phone are from the play store, so not sure what you're on about.

If you use a Google Android build, your life gets strictly easier because of app verification. That's what I'm on about.

▲

NewJazz a day ago | parent [-]

I am educating people

You didn't even provide a reason why it is "obviously nonsensical".

	▲	lern_too_spel 20 hours ago \| parent [-]
		See my original comment. To repeat, app verification makes it strictly easier to install apps as required by the judge's ruling. Asking your legislator to stop app verification will get you laughed at. My original comment also explains what you should complain about instead to not get laughed at and to fix something that actually needs fixing.

▲

graceful6800 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Sure, just like age verification is what allows governments to protect children, right?

	▲	lern_too_spel a day ago \| parent [-]
		HN in general gets AB 1043 wrong as well, so that's kind of similar. There is no verification of age involved.

▲

em-bee a day ago | parent | prev [-]

the whole point of using an alternative app store is to be able to install apps that are NOT approved by google. if google is the only allowed arbiter of what may be installed then we are no better off then using the google play store, because i find it highly unlikely that google would approve an app that it would not allow on the play store as well. (ok, sure, an alternate app store would also get around google taking a 30% cut, but that's less important for me)

▲

lern_too_spel a day ago | parent | next [-]

> the whole point of using an alternative app store is to be able to install apps that are NOT approved by google

No, the whole point of using an alternative app store is to get better deals for developers or end users. Apps that are not approved by Google can still be installed. The whole point of app verification is to allow installation outside a system app store (e.g., directly from a website or from another app store) without any scary warnings, as required by the judge's ruling.

▲

rcxdude a day ago | parent [-]

You say this like the scary warnings aren't an entirely artificial barrier by google. Before the app verification, I could install apps from freedroid just fine without any scary warnings.

▲

lern_too_spel a day ago | parent [-]

> Before the app verification, I could install apps from freedroid just fine without any scary warnings.

All Google Android builds show a scary warning before you can install apps outside the system app stores. That's why the judge's ruling required Google to do away with the scary warning, leading to app verification, which accomplishes what the judge required. If you don't use a Google Android build, neither app verification nor the new unknown source installation flow affect you.

▲

rcxdude 16 hours ago | parent [-]

They showed one warning once when I installed Freedroid, and that's it. There was no extra steps needed on each install from Freedroid.

▲

lern_too_spel 9 hours ago | parent [-]

It was one warning to install F-Droid (to allow installs from the app that downloaded it) and another warning to install your first app from F-Droid (to allow installs from F-Droid). The judge said those warnings were unacceptable. Hence, app verification.

	▲	rcxdude 9 hours ago \| parent [-]
		And not, hence, getting rid of the warnings? Because F-droid is going to have even more warnings now.

▲

a day ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]