One of them was requiring a privacy policy, even for a fully offline game that doesn't even have the internet permission. The other one was having to update the target platform version if I remember correctly.
Giving users true recovery mechanisms, means possible removal of all or part of the collected data. Where sudden or out of the blue seizure and complete removal of the user's ability to access or recover, means it's now all their data.
They do! They just hate it.
By mandating a yearly effort the number of apps will fall through attrition and your app stands a bigger chance to get noticed.
You don't need to add features if you don't want to.
And, as history teaches us[0], not necessarily even then.
*: Conditions may apply.
By mandating a yearly punishment the number of apps will fall through attrition and your app stands a bigger chance to get noticed.
Apple does the same thing.
Alternative are having applications in 2026 that use POSIX like in UNIX System V, or Win32 like in Windows 95/NT 3.51.
If only……
For starters, there are many "done" apps that are like Swiss cheese in terms of security.
And that would have been fine, if Google hadn't tried to shove the Google Play Store ecosystem down everyone's throat by throwing up barriers for side-loading apps and such.
People love to bash how Microsoft manages Windows, yet they keep forgetting that Microsoft is one of the few OS vendors that actually keeps the APIs around, instead of having a deprecation process, finalised by actually removing the APIs, or hard forcing the new behaviour.
Sounds like a perfect job to automate by an always-on LLM.