Google: “Based on this feedback and our ongoing conversations with the community, we are building a new advanced flow that allows experienced users to accept the risks of installing software that isn’t verified. We are designing this flow specifically to resist coercion, ensuring that users aren’t tricked into bypassing these safety checks while under pressure from a scammer. It will also include clear warnings to ensure users fully understand the risks involved, but ultimately, it puts the choice in their hands.”
Thank god. I would’ve ditched Android for good if this went through, and while it sounds like it would be annoying for casual users to enable unverified apps, at least we can still install them.


Wait, so Google listened to our feedback, and we’re still mad? What would a positive outcome have looked like?
Because no one believes that Google (Evil Corp) did this to deteer scammers, as they claim their reasoning was. If that was the case, they would take a much better care about the virus apps that gets released on Play Store, or the phishing ads that gets served through games.
This was always about monopoly.
I genuinely believe that it was motivated by the desire to deter scammers. What leads you to believe it’s not? There are many gullible people out there who will follow, precisely as you pointed out, phishing links that encourage them to sideload an unverified app.
No system is perfect, and I also believe that Google Play does a fair job of removing malicious apps.
I’m sorry to try to bring some nuance into this thread as I know that discourse isn’t welcome on Lemmy, but I’m just trying to wrap my head around the outrage. Providing a way to let experienced users continue to sideload apps while safeguarding the more gullible seems like a good idea and I still genuinely don’t understand what your preferred solution would be.
I think it was fairly obvious that the move was going to piss people off, they just misjudged to what extent. Modern business strategy is to claim to listen to customer feedback and just quietly plan to implement it anyway, just do it more subtly, more quietly, and more slowly.
I would understand the outrage if Google didn’t stick to their word, but unless I’ve missed something, they’ve not, have they? Are we now protesting that they reversed their decision? Wasn’t this what we wanted?
…no? I’m not really protesting so much as offering what I think the other person is trying to say. I think they are saying that Google crossed a line, and walking it back doesn’t change that fact.
In my opinion, Google has crossed countless lines over the last 5-10 years. I’m looking for alternatives that meet my own needs. That search has accelerated over the last few years, when the things Google has done have been most egregious. This isn’t a protest. This is disillusionment. I’m abandoning ship.