Hacker News Reader

Comment by pasta | Hacker News Reader

What is driving me away from Google's Android is that they keep asking me to turn stuff on I don't want to turn on.

I know that "when it's free I am the product" but the problem is that this is not very obvious when you buy a device.

My $100,- Motorola Moto C plus is great but I can't remove the Google search box from my home screen for example.

What would be great is that producers would tell how much I am the product because Google sponsored X, Y and Z to make the phone cheaper. Then a consumer can make the choice to buy a more expensive one or just accept that "you are the product".

View on HN

My $100,- Motorola Moto C plus is great but I can't remove the Google search box from my home screen for example.

This was one of the grounds for the EU's recent antitrust action. If Google don't want to face another multibillion dollar fine in the very near future, we should see far more choice over whether to use Google services on Android.

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-18-4581_en.htm

Correct me if I'm wrong, but these rulings would only hold power in the EU though, no? That's great for the EU, but that means we've still got to fix the problem everywhere else.

As long as it's more expensive for these companies to maintain 2 frameworks then it will be beneficial for everyone. This of course might not be the case.

Yes, but it'll affect the whole market. The EU is a wealthy market with 510 million consumers - if Google's stranglehold on Android is broken there, then it is profoundly undermined internationally. Google might continue with anti-competitive practices outside the EU, but non-EU citizens will be free to import a device that is compliant with the EU ruling. In many cases, it will be possible to install an EU-compliant ROM on devices bought elsewhere. Some non-EU countries may decide to follow the lead of the European Commission and pass similar antitrust rulings.

Given the EU doesn’t affect the rest of the world like they think they do (see GDPR) and also given that I can already install a ROM on just about any Android phone, nothing will change for the rest of us.

But doesn't this end up sending the message that you shouldn't share your OS and software with other companies? Keep everything proprietary like Apple and make your own phones.

Because Apple seems to get away with everything. They basically removed the ability to have other browsers on iOS by restricting the performance of other browsers, so all the other browsers became reskins of Safari. And nothing happened to them.

It is about monopoly abuse, an OS vendor should not abuse it's market share to get more web search market share.

If Apple would have a monopoly in EU and forced it's other services then I think Apple will have same issue Google and Microsoft had.

My opinion is that Apple should be forced to be repair friendly and give the user full control of his hardware(let me install what I want like in OSX) , so I am not an Apple fan.

I'm an Apple fan because I don't need to repair the device, nor do I require full control in order to use it.

Android is fun to tinker on but when I'm stuck on the side of the road needing help, I'm sure glad I don't have a hacking project in my pocket.

I have an apple laptop and an android based phone (from One Plus).

One has a broken keyboard that I'm desperately trying to hold together with tape and one hasn't. Hint: the not broken device was a third of the price of a new iPhone X, while the broken one is more than 3 times as expensive. I want you to be right so bad..

Just sticking to phones: I switched from iPhone to android years ago and honestly things are more stable over here (the legacy iOS I used back than VS any android version I tried).

> I'm an Apple fan because I don't need to repair the device

Given that Apple has no data recovery service for any of their products (even if you tell them that you'll give them a limitless pile of cash) and that they solder storage into most of their devices (that is paired to the CPU -- so you cannot remove the flash chip and put it onto a working board to recover data), this is a very bold claim.

Maybe you don't need your phone to be repaired when it is water damaged and you can no longer get photos of your children (that you should've backed up, but didn't). Maybe you want to pay US$300 to replace an out-of-warranty phone when the only thing wrong with it is that a headphone jack got stuck inside the port[1]. Maybe you don't want to pay more than the device is worth to fix a brand-new device[2].

Apple devices aren't just hard to repair, Apple as a company is anti-repair -- and defending this practice is not a reasonable position to hold. I understand arguing that Apple products are easier to use, or that they are more consumer-friendly, or that consumers shouldn't have full control over their devices because they'll probably brick them, and so on. But arguing that them being irreparable is a good thing is not justifiable (even if you don't need your device repaired, someone else will, and out-right ignoring that is misinformed).

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OR5ZUl0Q-NI [2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-NU7yOSElE

Apple has had iCloud backup for some time now, including cloud camera rolls. For your second source there, this is pretty common practice. You take the device apart and damage it in the process then why should the company stand by that? They have to worry about legal issues because the fine consumers sue them for every little thing they do, therefore as a result they cover their own ass. Sony is also a big offender here, they won’t repair a playstation that you’ve attempted to mod. Your first source is just some guy talking and nobody has the time to watch that BS

> Apple has had iCloud backup for some time now, including cloud camera rolls.

I believe Apple have the ability to read any data in an iCloud backup. The data on my phone include my password file, encrypted with an easy-to-type-on-a-screen-keyboard password, which means that it's not a high-entropy password. There's no way that I would allow a cloud provider access to that file.

Note, Apple do say on https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202303 that it's all end-to-end encrypted and they cannot read the backup, but they also say 'To access your data on a new device, you might have to enter the passcode for an existing or former device,' which implies that if one loses a device then one can buy a new device and enter the old device's passcode — which means that Apple themselves could just try passcodes iteratively.

If it's possible for you to restore data from a lost device without typing in a high-entropy password, then it's possible for Apple to read the data without guessing a high-entropy password.

Total 100% nonsense.

Apple's not going to violate the trust of all of its users by iteratively guessing each user's passcodes. Don't be silly.

Apple can't read your data even if they want to and the device itself is programmatically locked after a set number of attempts and wipes itself after several more. Stop spreading FUD.

I use iPhone SE and my fingers are relatively fat. Yet I have no troubles to enter the strong password on the phone. Or do you mean that you do not use Touch ID?

> Apple has had iCloud backup for some time now, including cloud camera rolls.

This doesn't help someone who never set up iCloud, has forgotten their password and/or methods of recovery, or any other list of problems. iCloud is a form of backup, by the way, and I specifically mentioned people that didn't set up backups. If you think I'm cherry-picking or coming up with some imaginary position, watch some of Jessa Jones' videos[1]. Many of her customers are in a position where they need data on their phones, and it's not in iCloud.

> You take the device apart and damage it in the process then why should the company stand by that?

They wouldn't repair it at all -- they were willing and wanted to pay for the repair. There were many arguments online why they didn't want to repair it (including that the Apple store couldn't get the parts from Apple, they weren't certified to repair it because they were still on the certification waiting list, etc). And of course you can't buy replacement parts because it's Apple (though eventually they managed to get replacement parts, it definitely was not by following the rules). Other manufacturers don't act this way.

> fine consumers sue them for every little thing they do

"little things" like manufacturing defective keyboards and denying that it's defective and refusing repairs or returns until enough people get together to sue them so that they fix a defective product? Or "little things" like using the wrong kind of capacitor near a GPU, causing GPUs to fry in almost every edition of the Macbook -- prompting recalls (or as they call them: "extended warranty programs") only after lawsuits?

I can't imagine why consumers would ever sue such a lovely company. /s

> Your first source is just some guy talking and nobody has the time to watch that BS.

The tl;dr is that 3rd-party (unauthorised) repair shops appear to be far more knowledgeable and reasonable about repairing iPhones and other Apple devices than authorised repair shops. If you'd like the longer form summary, watch the video.

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCPjp41qeXe1o_lp1US9TpWA

> This doesn't help someone who never set up iCloud, has forgotten their password and/or methods of recovery, or any other list of problems. iCloud is a form of backup, by the way, and I specifically mentioned people that didn't set up backups. If you think I'm cherry-picking or coming up with some imaginary position, watch some of Jessa Jones' videos[1]. Many of her customers are in a position where they need data on their phones, and it's not in iCloud.

So if you use the device incorrectly, it doesn't work? How exactly is Android better if whatever you happen to need is stored on the device and not an SD card?

> So if you use the device incorrectly, it doesn't work?

[EDIT: Apparently iCloud backups are enabled by default since iOS 9. TIL.]

iCloud is optional, is it not? The last time I used an iDevice (maybe 6 years ago) I didn't set up iCloud and I don't remember being forced to use it -- has that changed? If it is still optional, then I don't see how not using iCloud is "using the device incorrectly". Is this the new "you're holding it wrong"? Or "you should've bought AppleCare"?

Of course people should have backups, but I'd like to see you tell someone they should've known better when they've potentially lost their child's baby photos, or photos of their recently-deceased child. I'm not sure you'd be capable of being so callous in that sort of situation.

> How exactly is Android better if whatever you happen to need is stored on the device and not an SD card?

With most Android phones (such as Samsung ones) you can desolder the flash chip from the device and solder it onto a known-working board (or place it in a device that acts as a known-good board -- those devices can be bought from China relatively cheaply).

With iPhones you cannot do this because the data is encrypted and paired with the CPU (and a few other components on the board are paired to the CPU like the SMC). Now, you could reasonably argue that this is for security, but you couldn't argue that this is not anti-repair.

In addition, the new Macbooks have their soldered-in SSDs paired to the CPU as well. So you can't do data recovery on those without fixing the board (and apparently on those devices if a single USB-C controller dies, all of the USB-C ports die -- so you have to bring the board back to a completely working state in order to do data recovery).

Ok so are you arguing to Joe Public or for Dave Hacker? You can't have it both ways. Somebody who can desolder and resolder a flash chip to a good device isn't likely to forget their freaking iCloud recovery questions or password. Conversely, someone who does or rolls without iCloud isn't likely to have the skills to recover data in this way.

> Ok so are you arguing to Joe Public or for Dave Hacker? You can't have it both ways.

I'm arguing for Joe Public. Whether or not you can desolder or resolder a flash chip impacts whether Joe Public will be able to find a repair shop (run by a Dave Hacker) that can recover his data -- I wasn't arguing that Joe Public should be desoldering chips from his phones motherboard.

There are repair shops that recover data from Apple devices, but the fact that the chip is paired to the CPU means that (in the case of water damaged devices) you need to get the board to boot successfully with a working touch-screen in order to pull the data off via USB. If the CPU is dead then your data is gone, even if the flash chip is still fully functional. If you had the same situation with a Samsung device, you can remove the flash chip and place it into an "enclosure" that pulls the data off without needing to fix the broken phone.

And I completely agree that pairing the flash chip to the CPU is more secure against attackers taking your data if they've got hold of your phone. But it does mean that the phone is inherently less repairable -- which consumers should be aware of because it does affect them (even if they are just "a user").

Since iOS 9 it continuously backs up to iCloud by default [1] so it's not true that it doesn't help someone who never set up iCloud.

As an iPhone and Macbook user I agree with you that repairability is an issue. To be honest it is something I am taking seriously in my next laptop purchase and might be the issue that tips me back over to PC/Android. I definitely will not be "upgrading" to the new touchbar, keyboard and trackpad.

[1] https://medium.com/@nweaver/the-in-security-of-icloud-backup...

> Since iOS 9 it continuously backs up to iCloud by default

Oh, I didn't know that. I haven't used an Apple device in more than half a decade.

However, there are still many people that use the data recovery service offered by people like Jessa Jones -- so I imagine that this is still an issue people have even with newer devices.

> If Apple would have a monopoly in EU and forced it's other services then I think Apple will have same issue Google and Microsoft had.

I think that’s an accurate description of how Apple became a big phone company in the first place: Exploiting their monopoly of the MP3 player market.

First, I question your premise: did Apple, in fact, have a commanding share of the MP3 player market in 2007? (Not trying to claim you're lying here; I genuinely don't know offhand.)

Second, I question the mechanism by which Apple parlayed this into making the iPhone as strong a player in the cell phone market as it is (and it is certainly not in anything like a commanding position). Buying an iPhone would pretty much mean replacing your iPod. It wasn't a situation where having an iPod meant you would only be able to effectively use them together by buying an iPhone.

The only part of the puzzle I could see even remotely contributing to a "lock-in" factor was the DRM on the iTunes store. But by the time that was removed, in 2009, Apple still hadn't had a single quarter where they sold more than 8 million iPhones.

No; I dispute your conclusion entirely.

Apple became a big phone company by making a phone that people actually enjoyed using. It was the user-friendliness of the capacitive touchscreen and the overall iOS UI that made the difference, and continues to do so, not the long-since-defunct iTunes Store DRM or some other handwavy effect of their "monopoly of the MP3 player market".

First: http://fortune.com/2008/01/29/how-to-grow-the-ipod-as-the-mp...

Second: Good argument! :)

My line of reasoning was: iPod+iTunes -> lots of people with big music collections tied into iTunes -> release of iPhone, which requires iTunes to sync with desktop -> iPhone becoming a major player in phone world.

From what I remember all sorts of iPods were available for years (close to a decade?) after the iPhone was released, so I don't think that kind of lock-in played that much of a role.

There was a point where I got a Touch version of the iPod because it was much cheaper (thinner) than the equivalent iPhone at that time, and I was fine with whatever other phone I had. I'm pretty sure this was at a time when the iPhone was already extremely popular.

Does Google have a monopoly though? What's the percentages of Android vs Apple use in Europe?

According to StatCounter, Android has 74.2%, while iOS has 24.15% of the European market.

For comparison, in the USA, from the same source: Android 47.39%, iOS 52.19%.

Apple don't have anything like a dominant position in the smartphone market, with about 15% global market share. The European Commission's ruling was strongly influenced by the fact that Android devices represent the majority of the market and that the Android OS is really the only choice for device manufacturers. Android has become the Windows of mobile, so it's inevitable that Google will face far more scrutiny than Apple. The greatest single issue in the Google antitrust case was that Google were found to be using their dominance in one area (mobile operating systems) to support their dominance in another area (search).

There are serious antitrust concerns about the iTunes Store, with a relevant case due to be heard by the US Supreme Court.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc._v._Pepper

> 15% global market share

Maybe that's true globally, but it's not true of first world countries.

iPhone's market-share is over 40% in the USA, for instance. https://www.statista.com/statistics/266572/

Because Apple seems to get away with everything.

It's funny how in a different discussion, it will be crowed that Android runs on 84% of smartphones world-wide. But when it's time to pull out the whataboutisms, Apple is first against the wall as a monopolist, while poor, beleaguered Android tries to fight them off.

I just pulled that number out my arse, but Apple has nowhere a monopoly on smartphone operating systems, so they can do what ever they please. Don't like it? They have competitors that would love for you to buy one of their phones.

It's also funny how all criticism of apple are deflected as "but they don't have a monopoly so its okay, use something else if you don't like it."

They basically removed the ability to have other browsers on iOS by restricting the performance of other browsers, so all the other browsers became reskins of Safari. And nothing happened to them.

This isn't accurate, and Chrome and Firefox are viable, performant, alternatives to Safari. All browsers are using WKWebView engine, and at least for the last 2.5 years, all have access to Nitro JS engine, so there is no performance penalty for third party browsers.

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016/01/new-chrome-for-ios-i...

> All browsers are using WKWebView engine

> all the other browsers became reskins of Safari.

That's what he's saying. You can't implement your own JIT on iOS. Even if you have a better idea/algorithm than Nitro JS, you're limited to how fast safari is.

To me "restricting performance" reads to mean they are slower than Safari, which is not true (though it had been during the initial Nitro rollout, which only Safari had access to). At this point, core engine speed isn't what is distinguishing browsers, they are all fast.

>> so all the other browsers became reskins of Safari.

really? didn't know that. and I've been using Chrome thinking it's better than Safari. Little did I know...

>But doesn't this end up sending the message that you shouldn't share your OS and software with other companies? Keep everything proprietary like Apple and make your own phones.

Sharing Android with other manufacturers is absolutely ok, that's not what the EU fined them for. It was the anti-competitive contractual clauses they used to strong-arm licensees on order to get preferential treatment in other ways that were deemed illegal.

Apple isn't using it's market position to coerce anybody though. There's no law telling Apple that they have to provide an App Store at all. The equivalent case would be if Apple were to make approving a company's App on the App Store conditional on the company agreeing to some other contractual conditions preferential to Apple, using app store approval to hold companies ransom. That sort of extortion would clearly be an abuse. For example Apple only approving App Store apps showing ads if they used Apple's own ad network might be a step too far.

In the case of browsers, Apple isn't using approval of other browsers on the App Store as leverage to extort anything out of anyone. They are simply selling a product that has this feature (a browser) and not this other feature (the ability to install browsers based on a different rendering engine). It's the extortion that's the problem.

I was fed up with Google increasing insistence on pushing crap onto my home screen. The unavoidable news feed was the last straw. I have now installed Nova Launcher and it's made my phone great again. No Google crap on the home screen at all.

I also highly recommend nova launcher. I've been using it for years and honestly forgot that Google forces you to have a searchbar on the home screen.

is just second nature at this stage that nova launcher gets installed straight away. export/import the settings and you're all set to go

ADW Launcher is another, minimalist good alternative.

I switched to Lawnchair. It feels close to Google Launcher, but with just enough customization to be super easy to setup yet flexible enough.

I sometimes wonder if HN is just another conspiracy-theorists forum.

You can disable Google News feed, you can remove Google Search from home screen, you can even use Bing as Assist app (long press on Home icon) in place of Google. Everything on stock Android Oreo on Sony Xperia.

Hey, you can even disable location services. Use VPN with split tunelling for Google Play Services.

Google is no saint but it ain't a devil either.

Nova Launcher persisted in keeping that Do Evil search box out of sight, despite my upgrade to Android 9 two days ago. I'm very happy with Nova.

Did you manage to fix Android's Chrome homescreen to remove the feed there?

Yes! By using Firefox.

While your complaint is valid, replacing the launcher on your phone will remove the Google bar. (Nova launcher is very popular alternative to the built in ones and gives you quite a few options for customisation.)

The constant nagging to enable Location History is the worst though.

Strange, I keep location services off all the time unless I am actively using Maps navigation. Location history is off also. I don't receive "nags" excepting when I start Maps, I get a request to turn on location services.

> I can't remove the Google search box from my home screen for example.

You can remove it if you disable "Google Play Services" in Settings -> Apps. Of course if you do then can't use the android store or most apps.

I use the alternative fdroid repository and it works fine.

>I use the alternative fdroid repository and it works fine.

F-Droid doesn't have Signal, Whatsapp, Firefox and VLC. No one can seriously expect a normal user to do without Google Play Services (I checked F-Droid every week to, one day, hopefully, turn Google Play Service off. Forever).

So 99.9% of Android users are forced to feed Google with all their location data. And the .1% who resists have very little influence on the surveillance state. That's infuriating.

> F-Droid doesn't have Signal, Whatsapp, Firefox and VLC. No one can seriously expect a normal user to do without Google Play Services

Not sure about the other 3, but I use firefox just fine on my phone without google play services. I use aptoide as my appstore in the absence of google play, and while it does have stuff in there that don't work without GPS anyway (Uber, for instance), it's been a decent replacement for me for quite a while, containing most of the stuff that f-droid doesn't have (because they're not open source) without forcing me to taint my phone with google's crap.

No argument on your 2nd point though, it's the unfortunate truth. Which is why it infuriates me a bit when the technical .1% who could actually do it the other way still don't bother and just follow the herd. I know not every hill is worth dying on, but still.

> Signal

You can sideload signal and it works without google cloud messaging. I use signal every day. It works fine.

> Firefox

You can sideload Firefox or use Fennec from fdroid, a firefox rebuild without proprietary software.

> Whatsapp

Yep that probably won't work. Most proprietary android applications use google play framework. This will only get worse. "Android" is less and less free with every release. Google keeps adding functionality to the proprietary libraries on top of the free base.

> VLC

It used to be in fdroid but is a nightmare to build so it was removed.

> No one can seriously expect a normal user to do without Google Play Services

Probably. I was just sharing my personal experience.

> very little influence on the surveillance state

Ha! Most HN readers are enthusiastically building the surveillance state.

VLC is currently in FDroid, though perhaps there was a time when it had been removed.

Thanks, I was unaware.

Doesn't seem so. Link?

https://www.whatsapp.com/android/

Whatsapp distribute the apk directly from their site if you want it, and have done for years. My MiL uses it on a 2013 Nexus7 as she doesn't want a smartphone (even though they say tablets aren't supported)

FWIW, Whatsapp works on my Blackberry OS 10 device, which has an Android compatibility layer. I don't know the details, but I'm fairly sure Google Play Services isn't included.

i have phone with LOS15.1 without gapps, both Signal and WhatsApp work just fine actually WhatsApp even better without nagging permanent notification like signal (though you can disable and enable it to hide it)

i update apps through Yalp store

only app i really lost it's Google photos, sharing photos through 1TB Flickr or WhatsApp it's not exactly ideal compared to workflow with Google photos but i @willing to pay this price for not having Google in my life

> Whatsapp

Sideloaded whatsapp works fine.

Also F-Droid has Yalp now which lets you download APKs directly from the play store without running play/play services.

Just use Yalp Store. You can get all those apps without having Google Services (and without google play service, which is part of Google Services.)

You can try https://microg.org/ which stubs out or replaces the Play Services with FLOSS alternatives.

But I agree that's impractical for the average user.

Same age-old argument as Linux.

You're perpetuating their control over you.

Sorry to be the messenger.

Yes, how dare they want to run the applications they have chosen to use.

F-Droid is also vulnerable to signing key compromise. All apps in F-Droid are signed by F-Droid keys. Ifwhen those are compromised, you could be backdoored. (Play Store apps are signed by each individual developer’s keys.)

Also: That’s not what “forced” means at all.

all those apps you mentioned work just fine on phone without gapps

You're probably use a GOOGLE launcher. Of course they would not allow you to remove the search bar. Just use another launcher.

The company seems to have turned into a creepy controlling auntie that always needs to be informed and is nosy about everybody's life.

so much for "Don't Be Evil" huh

> I know that "when it's free I am the product" but the problem is that this is not very obvious when you buy a device.

If you buy a device, then it's not free!

LineageOS supports Moto C. You can easily take control of your phone and lock down any and all Google services.

There might be unofficial builds, but it's not included in their official list of supported devices: https://wiki.lineageos.org/devices/

> My $100,- Motorola Moto C plus is great but I can't remove the Google search box from my home screen for example.

I isnt googles fault. Ive not seen any naked android release where the user is forced to use the google search box from home screen or not able to remove it. Thats some 3rd party layer.

For what it is worth, I cant remove the google search box on the Google Pixel 1 phone, (plus a permanent date and weather widget at the top) so now I have both Google and DuckDuckGo search boxes on my homescreen...

You can, you just need to install an alternative launcher. The pixel launcher has those things, but you are more than free to replace it.

Try the Nova Launcher. I used it on my Pixel 1. It worked pretty well. Crashed a few times, but then I just had to reset it as the main launcher.

Ideally I would get an iPhone, but they are just way over my budget and I don't do contracts.

Google can also your location on your iPhone, you aren't free if you use any google service with location data.

Try a different launcher app.

Evie is the one I am using, and my searches go to duck duck go / firefox.

>My $100,- Motorola Moto C plus is great but I can't remove the Google search box from my home screen for example.

It's quite annoying and show how far Google goes to shove their data collection tools down our throats.

I recommend this free and independent launcher: https://f-droid.org/en/packages/ch.deletescape.lawnchair.pla...

It is not free.

Advertising is a $600+ billion industry worldwide market, about $200 billion online. Largely borne by the ~1 billion population of the G-20.

This is costing your household $125/yr per person.

http://www.bandt.com.au/advertising/global-online-ad-spend-s...

I just want root on my blackberry. I only use fdroid apps, disable permissions, etc, but I can't even uninstall the Facebook app, because, what, Facebook payed blackberry or google?

Has everyone forgotten the principle of first sale?

Google really ruined our opportunity to have linux mobile devices. Purism some type phones that are truly user controlled can't come soon enough.

I personally think it's a national security issue it's so bad.

If you are concerned about security, F-Droid is not the installer for you.

F-Droid is secure. IIRC there's never been any issue with malware on F-Droid, ever.

By only using gpl apps at least I can take a look at the source code.

> What is driving me away from Google's Android is that they keep asking me to turn stuff on I don't want to turn on.

Hey, that's exactly what drove me away from Facebook, 9 years ago ...

> My $100,- Motorola Moto C plus is great but I can't remove the Google search box from my home screen for example.

Can't you get around this with a 3rd party launcher like Nova?

You can return it if it doesn't match what was advertised.

I believe if you disable the Google app the search box will go away. This is just the app that handles searches, you can keep Google Play Services and other things.

> I can't remove the Google search box from my home screen for example.

Or the new tab page in Chrome. (I haven't been able to find it, at least.)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com