*Moderator(s) I m sorry if this doesn't belong to this section ..please move it if u want ( and inform me please)
Guys I was just wondering why Google releases updates every year ...it doesn't bring any notable new features sometimes ( like froyo to gb = nothing new) sometimes some phones take a whole year to get the update and in the meantime a new update is announced
And then we have our manufacturers who refuse to update our phones( if u r looking at my signature and want to tell me that I should buy a high end phone lets talk about what happened to SGS 1 first ) and make the whole update sick
I think Google should convince the manufacturers to update all devices and Google itself should annonce less updates( less quality updates >>>> more quantity updates)
Or can someone explain Google 's strategy to me???? It sure doesn't make sense to me
Kind of agree with what you have to say.
In my opinion many people have low end devices, which don't really get the latest os updates anyway, thanks to the phone manufacturers. So you'll have a large chunk of the user base using the older versions. Which in turn results in a large amount of applications targeting the older versions too.
The_R said:
Kind of agree with what you have to say.
In my opinion many people have low end devices, which don't really get the latest os updates anyway, thanks to the phone manufacturers. So you'll have a large chunk of the user base using the older versions. Which in turn results in a large amount of applications targeting the older versions too.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1 ...I just can't see why Google makes the fuss about updates ??? I mean "update " by its very definition means improving I.e. older phones getting newer os but android phones hardly get more than 2 updates! !!! Even if the hardware supports the new software! !!!
What do you mean no changes between Froyo and GB? From Wikipedia here are some:
v2.3
On 6 December 2010, the Android 2.3 (Gingerbread) SDK was released, based on Linux kernel 2.6.35. Changes included:
Updated user interface design with increased simplicity and speed
Support for extra-large screen sizes and resolutions (WXGA and higher)
Native support for SIP VoIP internet telephony
Faster, more intuitive text input in virtual keyboard, with improved accuracy, better suggested text and voice input mode
Enhanced copy/paste functionality, allowing users to select a word by press-hold, copy, and paste
Support for Near Field Communication (NFC), allowing the user to read an NFC tag embedded in a poster, sticker, or advertisement
New audio effects such as reverb, equalization, headphone virtualization, and bass boost
New Download Manager, giving users easy access to any file downloaded from the browser, email, or another application
Support for multiple cameras on the device, including a front-facing camera, if available
Support for WebM/VP8 video playback, and AAC audio encoding
Improved power management with a more active role in managing apps that are keeping the device awake for too long
Enhanced support for native code development
Switched from YAFFS to ext4 on newer devices
Audio, graphical, and input enhancements for game developers
Concurrent garbage collection for increased performance
Native support for more sensors (such as gyroscopes and barometers)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A lot of it is new hardware support to keep up with technology. The new audio effects it talks about make it possible for system wide EQ apps without root like Equalizer, before GB IIRC this was not possible. They've also made multitasking better so that task killers shouldn't be needed.
Their update strategy is to debut the new OS on a Nexus device and then release the source so others can use it. Personally I would like to see Google let developers in earlier in development so they can get drivers and upgrades done quicker. This is how Microsoft does things and is why OEMs can have the new OS ready on hardware on its debut day. But Google's strategy is quite a bit different.
spunker88 said:
What do you mean no changes between Froyo and GB? From Wikipedia here are some:
A lot of it is new hardware support to keep up with technology. The new audio effects it talks about make it possible for system wide EQ apps without root like Equalizer, before GB IIRC this was not possible. They've also made multitasking better so that task killers shouldn't be needed.
Their update strategy is to debut the new OS on a Nexus device and then release the source so others can use it. Personally I would like to see Google let developers in earlier in development so they can get drivers and upgrades done quicker. This is how Microsoft does things and is why OEMs can have the new OS ready on hardware on its debut day. But Google's strategy is quite a bit different.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Even I was thinking about your last point u know, when the update gets announced it should be released simultaneously ......waiting a whole year ( or 5-6months) sucks
That's why there's great community(s) like xda forums and projects like cyanogenmod. Linux is open. Android is based on Linux. Android isn't AS opem.
The developers are here to help remedy some of that.
Nice article to read.. Just thought I would share.. MODS PLEASE DELETE IN CASE THIS IS A DUPLICATE.
http://news.yahoo.com/theres-zombie-...013019842.html
There's a Zombie-like Security Flaw in Almost Every Android Phone
LikeDislike
Abby Ohlheiser 56 minutes ago
Technology & Electronics
.
View gallery
There's a Zombie-like Security Flaw in Almost Every Android Phone
Almost every Android phone has a big, gaping security weakness, according to the security startup who discovered the vulnerability. Essentially, according to BlueBox, almost every Android phone made in the past four years (or, since Android "Donut," version 1.6) is just a few steps away from becoming a virtual George Romero film, thanks to a weakness that can "turn any legitimate application into a malicious Trojan."
While news of a security vulnerability in Android might not exactly be surprising to users, the scope of the vulnerability does give one pause: "99 percent" of Android mobiles, or just under 900 million phones, are potentially vulnerable, according to the company. All hackers have to do to get in is modify an existing, legitimate app, which they're apparently able to do without breaking the application's security signature. Then, distribute the app and convince users to install it.
Google, who hasn't commented on the vulnerability yet, has known about the weakness since February, and they've already patched the Samsung Galaxy S4, according to CIO. And they've also made it impossible for the malicious apps to to install through Google Play. But the evil apps could still get onto a device via email, a third-party store, or basically any website. Here's the worst-case scenario for exploitation of the vulnerability, or what could potentially happen to an infected phone accessed via an application developed by a device manufacturer, which generally come with elevated access, according to BlueBox:
Installation of a Trojan application from the device manufacturer can grant the application full access to Android system and all applications (and their data) currently installed. The application then not only has the ability to read arbitrary application data on the device (email, SMS messages, documents, etc.), retrieve all stored account & service passwords, it can essentially take over the normal functioning of the phone and control any function thereof (make arbitrary phone calls, send arbitrary SMS messages, turn on the camera, and record calls). Finally, and most unsettling, is the potential for a hacker to take advantage of the always-on, always-connected, and always-moving (therefore hard-to-detect) nature of these “zombie” mobile devices to create a botnet.
The company recommends users of basically every Android phone double check the source of any apps they install, keep their devices updated, and take their own precautions to protect their data. But as TechCrunch notes, Android users really should be doing this anyway, as the devices tend to come with a " general low-level risk" from malware. That risk, however, is elevated for users who venture outside of the Google Play store for their apps.
So while the actual impact of the vulnerability is not known, neither is the timeline for fixing it. Manufacturers will have to release their own patches for the problem in order to fix it, something that happens notoriously slowly among Android devices.
Mr_Jay_jay said:
/snip
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As always, this really boils down to the same thing: don't be a fool in the most non-pejorative way possible. With the exception of the Syrian Electronic Army fiasco awhile back, secured and verified app vendors like Google Play (or Apple's App Store) continue to provide all the services most users will need without exposing the end-user to this kind of vulnerability. If you don't expose yourself, you're not at risk.
That said, this all relies on the notion of the end-user being at least somewhat vigilant, which can be quite dangerous.
Rirere said:
As always, this really boils down to the same thing: don't be a fool in the most non-pejorative way possible. With the exception of the Syrian Electronic Army fiasco awhile back, secured and verified app vendors like Google Play (or Apple's App Store) continue to provide all the services most users will need without exposing the end-user to this kind of vulnerability. If you don't expose yourself, you're not at risk.
That said, this all relies on the notion of the end-user being at least somewhat vigilant, which can be quite dangerous.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not every Android device has access to Play Store though, by-default. I have a tablet now that doesn't have access. If a normal user had such a device, they wouldn't likely go through the process needed to get Play Store, and would just deal with whatever marketplace app existed.
This exploit will likely only ever affect users that by default use devices that do not have Google support. Many of these are distributed among 3rd world nations and are typically a hot bed of illicit activities anyways. Of the first worlders that would be affected, it would be those using black market apps without knowing the risks involved in doing so. Most black market users are knowledgeable enough to know to check their sources and compare file sizes before installing apk's.
Also the notion that 99% of devices being affected has nothing with the OS being flawed (Google reportedly fixed the flaw in March), but rather the OEMs being slow in pushing out (or not pushing out at all) the patched hole.
Also I would be weary of a security outfit that has been around since 'mid-2012' and continues to pride themselves as a start-up mobile security firm.
espionage724 said:
Not every Android device has access to Play Store though, by-default. I have a tablet now that doesn't have access. If a normal user had such a device, they wouldn't likely go through the process needed to get Play Store, and would just deal with whatever marketplace app existed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Granted, but the Play Store reduces the attack surface by a considerable margin. Right now, I consider non-Google blessed Android to be something akin to stock Windows 7 with Defender and Firewall turned off-- you can do just about anything with it, but you're running at a risk by not deploying some vendor-based add-ons (in this case, choosing to use the unit available).
I do understand that many devices sell outside of the Google world, before anyone jumps on me, but it doesn't change how the vulnerabilities play out.
This boils down to:
If users install a virus then they get a virus!!! This affects all Android phones!!!!!!!! Oh Nos!
Sucks that this is being patched. Guess there will be no more modding games for me.
Like many other developers, I also received the 30-days deadline warning email from Google Play team about the potential "misuse" of accessibility service in Greenify.
As the very first developer who introduced this trick of "misusing" accessibility to achieve UI automation years ago, I'm very proud that many more creative tool apps followed this approach to enable fantastic functionality beyond the imagination of the creator of Android, without root. It's a miracle bred from the openness and flexibility of Android.
Unfortunately, the supervisor of the dominant app market is now declaring its right of final interpretation, to judge the proper use of Android API and claim that this whole idea is unacceptable. At this point, I feel I have to say something.
Why accessibility service?
As we all know, root is the ultimate playground of super users in the Android community. But it also has its inconvenience and grey side, so I decided to make Greenify work for users with non-root device. I had been experimenting with many approaches for this purpose in almost the whole year 2013. Finally I found the magic of UI automation driven by accessibility service. With this approach, many more users now enjoy the improved battery life and smoothness brought by Greenify.
I know that accessibility service is not a perfect solution, considering the overall UI performance degradation involved (explained below). So I never gave up seeking alternative approaches ever since, (many of which might also be considered API "misusing" in strict speaking) but still no better approach found. If Android could provide any alternative solution, I would never prefer accessibility service in the first place.
The Good
Accessibility service is so powerful, that I have to admit it's some kind of Pandora's box.
With accessibility, developers could not only help people with disabled abilities, but also greatly benefit the general users with wonderful use cases, including:
• Remote assistant via touch interaction, without root. (seems like no such apps yet?)
• Automate the tedious operations inside not-well-designed apps, even possibly driven by Tasker or IFTTT, without root.
• Programatically trigger global actions (e.g. Back, Home).
• Overlay the whole screen including the notification shade on Android O.
• ……
I even wrote a small app with accessibility service to "fix" the bottom navigation bar of my wife's Moto X Style, whose touch screen is not reading touches any more in bottommost rows of pixels.
The Bad
With such power, accessibility service is also becoming the trending target of malware, endangering average users world-wide. A typical malware could deceive user to enable its accessibility service and then perform many dangerous actions without user consent, including gaining other sensitive privileges.
Together with screen overlay, this could even hide from average user's observation, effectively making it a seductive approach, thus highly dangerous in the wild.
The Ugly
The dangers above may not be a thread to advanced users, but the overall UI lag caused by accessibility service could be a real hurt.
Android delivers accessibility events to active accessibility service in two phases. Events are first generated in the current interacting app and immediately sent to system process, then dispatched to separate accessibility services, each in its own process.
If no accessibility services enabled, both phases are shutdown, thus no performance affection at all. If at least one accessibility service is enabled, the first phase is turned on, in full power, no matter which types of events are interested (declared by accessibility service). The second phase is taking that into consideration and only delivers the interested events to each accessibility service.
The performance lag comes mostly out of the first phase because some types of accessibility events are so heavy, considering how frequently they are triggered. For example, TYPE_WINDOW_CONTENT_CHANGED is generated and sent every tiny bit of UI content changes and TYPE_VIEW_SCROLLED is generated and sent every pixel your finger is moved across during scrolling, even if no accessibility services are interested in them.
Sounds crazy? Unfortunately that's the current situation. Although Android O took a step to address that, the situation is still not changed fundamentally. Maybe in Google's view, accessibility service is not intended for general users, so performance optimization is never in the priority.
How is Greenify doing
Performance is always Greenify's priority since it’s one of the purposes defining Greenify. So I took all the possibilities to improve that in the past years, even greatly pulled-back by Android system itself.
First of all, Greenify declares no interest of events at all at most of the time and only declares minimal interest of events (all are trivial to generate) and specific target (system settings app) required during the short period of on-going hibernation operation. This is implemented by dynamic registration, cutting the cost of the second phase to almost zero.
Due to the inefficient implementation in Android system, the first phase is still the bottleneck of UI performance. After a long time of trial and failure, I finally managed to eliminate that cost, in a tricky way. With necessary permission granted via ADB, Greenify only enables its accessibility service during the hibernation operation and disable it immediately afterwards. That means, if no other accessibility service enabled, you will have no performance problem of accessibility service at all while still enjoy the power of Greenify.
With above optimization, Greenify limited the events it could receive to the minimal, thus also effectively keeps the privacy of users in safety. I'm planning to bring this optimization to broader users who has little knowledge about ADB, and even to other apps with accessibility service hopefully.
My Concern
Accessibility service is a yard full of potential creativity and magic. It should never be a Pandora's Box if Android itself implement it with caution in the first place. I understand the complexity and historical reasons that lead to the current situation, but feel sorry and sad about how Google deals with this situation, by banishing popular tool apps. Will that make Android users more secure? I highly doubt.
I don't know if Google Play team represents the atitude of Android team at Google. If so, it will then be the breaking day for all Android developers, when Google starts to use its power to judge the "proper use" of Android API, even if it's not used by malware.
Will it come a day that the use of screen overlay besides showing information will be banned?
Will it come a day that the use of content provider not for providing data will be banned?
Will it come a day that the use of internal APIs will be banned?
oasisfeng said:
Like many other developers, I also received the 30-days deadline warning email from Google Play team about the potential "misuse" of accessibility service in Greenify.
As the very first developer who introduced this trick of "misusing" accessibility to achieve UI automation years ago, I'm very proud that many more creative tool apps followed this approach to enable fantastic functionality beyond the imagination of the creator of Android, without root. It's a miracle bred from the openness and flexibility of Android.
Unfortunately, the supervisor of the dominant app market is now declaring its right of final interpretation, to judge the proper use of Android API and claim that this whole idea is unacceptable. At this point, I feel I have to say something.
Why accessibility service?
As we all know, root is the ultimate playground of super users in the Android community. But it also has its inconvenience and grey side, so I decided to make Greenify work for users with non-root device. I had been experimenting with many approaches for this purpose in almost the whole year 2013. Finally I found the magic of UI automation driven by accessibility service. With this approach, many more users now enjoy the improved battery life and smoothness brought by Greenify.
I know that accessibility service is not a perfect solution, considering the overall UI performance degradation involved (explained below). So I never gave up seeking alternative approaches ever since, (many of which might also be considered API "misusing" in strict speaking) but still no better approach found. If Android could provide any alternative solution, I would never prefer accessibility service in the first place.
The Good
Accessibility service is so powerful, that I have to admit it's some kind of Pandora's box.
With accessibility, developers could not only help people with disabled abilities, but also greatly benefit the general users with wonderful use cases, including:
• Remote assistant via touch interaction, without root. (seems like no such apps yet?)
• Automate the tedious operations inside not-well-designed apps, even possibly driven by Tasker or IFTTT, without root.
• Programatically trigger global actions (e.g. Back, Home).
• Overlay the whole screen including the notification shade on Android O.
• ……
I even wrote a small app with accessibility service to "fix" the bottom navigation bar of my wife's Moto X Style, whose touch screen is not reading touches any more in bottommost rows of pixels.
The Bad
With such power, accessibility service is also becoming the trending target of malware, endangering average users world-wide. A typical malware could deceive user to enable its accessibility service and then perform many dangerous actions without user consent, including gaining other sensitive privileges.
Together with screen overlay, this could even hide from average user's observation, effectively making it a seductive approach, thus highly dangerous in the wild.
The Ugly
The dangers above may not be a thread to advanced users, but the overall UI lag caused by accessibility service could be a real hurt.
Android delivers accessibility events to active accessibility service in two phases. Events are first generated in the current interacting app and immediately sent to system process, then dispatched to separate accessibility services, each in its own process.
If no accessibility services enabled, both phases are shutdown, thus no performance affection at all. If at least one accessibility service is enabled, the first phase is turned on, in full power, no matter which types of events are interested (declared by accessibility service). The second phase is taking that into consideration and only delivers the interested events to each accessibility service.
The performance lag comes mostly out of the first phase because some types of accessibility events are so heavy, considering how frequently they are triggered. For example, TYPE_WINDOW_CONTENT_CHANGED is generated and sent every tiny bit of UI content changes and TYPE_VIEW_SCROLLED is generated and sent every pixel your finger is moved across during scrolling, even if no accessibility services are interested in them.
Sounds crazy? Unfortunately that's the current situation. Although Android O took a step to address that, the situation is still not changed fundamentally. Maybe in Google's view, accessibility service is not intended for general users, so performance optimization is never in the priority.
How is Greenify doing
Performance is always Greenify's priority since it’s one of the purposes defining Greenify. So I took all the possibilities to improve that in the past years, even greatly pulled-back by Android system itself.
First of all, Greenify declares no interest of events at all at most of the time and only declares minimal interest of events (all are trivial to generate) and specific target (system settings app) required during the short period of on-going hibernation operation. This is implemented by dynamic registration, cutting the cost of the second phase to almost zero.
Due to the inefficient implementation in Android system, the first phase is still the bottleneck of UI performance. After a long time of trial and failure, I finally managed to eliminate that cost, in a tricky way. With necessary permission granted via ADB, Greenify only enables its accessibility service during the hibernation operation and disable it immediately afterwards. That means, if no other accessibility service enabled, you will have no performance problem of accessibility service at all while still enjoy the power of Greenify.
With above optimization, Greenify limited the events it could receive to the minimal, thus also effectively keeps the privacy of users in safety. I'm planning to bring this optimization to broader users who has little knowledge about ADB, and even to other apps with accessibility service hopefully.
My Concern
Accessibility service is a yard full of potential creativity and magic. It should never be a Pandora's Box if Android itself implement it with caution in the first place. I understand the complexity and historical reasons that lead to the current situation, but feel sorry and sad about how Google deals with this situation, by banishing popular tool apps. Will that make Android users more secure? I highly doubt.
I don't know if Google Play team represents the atitude of Android team at Google. If so, it will then be the breaking day for all Android developers, when Google starts to use its power to judge the "proper use" of Android API, even if it's not used by malware.
Will it come a day that the use of screen overlay besides showing information will be banned?
Will it come a day that the use of content provider not for providing data will be banned?
Will it come a day that the use of internal APIs will be banned?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well thanks for all you've done for the Android community!
Perhaps you and many other devs should just pull away from Google and switch to a different market like FDroid.
Google has done this sort of thing in the past, like with SCR Pro (screen recording software with internal audio support) because it changed SELinux Policy. If Google loses their cut money, maybe they would rethink that decision. Personally if I was Google, I'd just add a "Potential Security Issue" or a "Modifies Critical Security Settings" indicator to apps on the Play Store that use the Accessibility Services or change SELinux Policy, or other security related settings. Give the users the option of what they choose or not choose to run on their phones! They already have some sort of a system in place that already does this with the "Play Protect" system. Slowly but surely, Android is becoming more like iOS with less freedom.
Interesting update to original article on XDA
https://www.xda-developers.com/google-threatening-removal-accessibility-services-play-store/
"Update: LastPass has just responded to this news and states that there will be “no immediate impact” for their Android apps. Whether or not this means that other applications will be given leniency remains to be seen."
Accessibility Service options
If I may ask -- what are you going to do? Are you going to pre-emptively unpublish the app before the 30 day limit is up? Are you going to try to reach out to Google and ask them to clarify whether there is any changes / clarifications? (LastPass implies they have gotten some kind of assurance, but they don't directly state that). Or, are you going to try to get as compliant as possible (put the appropriate language in the appropriate places), and hope for the best?
As far as I'm concerned your app is one of the few mission critical apps in the android ecosystem. So I can only hope that this can be resolved amicably.
I think this change is aimed solely at Substratum, as I have heard (not confirmed) than in Android 8.1 without root/unlocking and only using accessibility services, OMS can be exploited for theming. So Google is using a shotgun to kill all apps using this service rather than narrow their focus.
@oasisfeng
An insightful, deliberate and extremely well written post! ?
Sent from my SM-G955W ??
I think its time of the developers make a big migration of the apps to the XDA store to save the lagacy of the -7.0
Sent from my Asus ZenFone 3 Deluxe using XDA Labs
divineBliss said:
Interesting update to original article on XDA
https://www.xda-developers.com/google-threatening-removal-accessibility-services-play-store/
"Update: LastPass has just responded to this news and states that there will be “no immediate impact” for their Android apps. Whether or not this means that other applications will be given leniency remains to be seen."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LastPass and Chrome enjoyed a cozy relationship in the past. That said I'm almost surprised at the news given Google could easily incorporate similar functionality into Android. Maybe Google and LogMeIn have something going on the side (new rumor...lol).
As much as i like to sympathize with developers using Accessibility to improve functionality of Android, I can't.
Because in last couple of months i have seen many crappy apps (cleaners n all) also start asking for same permission, and average user don't really understand or even care to read what impact or access they are giving and more than 95% of Android user falls in this category. We at XDA or other nerdy site don't like this fact but it's bare truth.
And from Google perspective, They can't monitor each and every App for eternity that which one is using this permission for good and which one isn't. So hammer of Banning all of it seems only solution for now on their part. especially considering Accessibility service was never meant to use for improving "Device Functionality" (Button Mapper, Battery Saver) it was always meant for "helping hand" in case normal functionally can't be used, not as "Replacement".
Also in my personal option, i think this ban is more due to App developers are trying to bypass each and every thing device manufacturers put (Bexby & Assistant Button) than apps trying to help with routine task (LastPass, Greenify).
Though they may not say explicitly OEM are not happy with their excursive feature are ruined by apps using accessibility as bypass and they (including Google in this case) can force Play Store to make restriction on this. (whether it's is Good practice or not is entire different topic so don't dwell into that debate in replies)
So in conclusion, Till Google come up with better solution (and i think they will, People working there are not fools they understand good that this access can do for Android as whole) , banning seems fair to me because security & stability of 95% users comes above 5% demanding modification & features.
Nerdy will always find a way but it's extremely difficultly to help understand average user why their phone suddenly start behaving abnormally
and that's what Google & OEM face daily.
jineshpatel30 said:
As much as i like to sympathize with developers using Accessibility to improve functionality of Android, I can't.
Because in last couple of months i have seen many crappy apps (cleaners n all) also start asking for same permission, and average user don't really understand or even care to read what impact or access they are giving and more than 95% of Android user falls in this category. We at XDA or other nerdy site don't like this fact but it's bare truth.
And from Google perspective, They can't monitor each and every App for eternity that which one is using this permission for good and which one isn't. So hammer of Banning all of it seems only solution for now on their part. especially considering Accessibility service was never meant to use for improving "Device Functionality" (Button Mapper, Battery Saver) it was always meant for "helping hand" in case normal functionally can't be used, not as "Replacement".
Also in my personal option, i think this ban is more due to App developers are trying to bypass each and every thing device manufacturers put (Bexby & Assistant Button) than apps trying to help with routine task (LastPass, Greenify).
Though they may not say explicitly OEM are not happy with their excursive feature are ruined by apps using accessibility as bypass and they (including Google in this case) can force Play Store to make restriction on this. (whether it's is Good practice or not is entire different topic so don't dwell into that debate in replies)
So in conclusion, Till Google come up with better solution (and i think they will, People working there are not fools they understand good that this access can do for Android as whole) , banning seems fair to me because security & stability of 95% users comes above 5% demanding modification & features.
Nerdy will always find a way but it's extremely difficultly to help understand average user why their phone suddenly start behaving abnormally
and that's what Google & OEM face daily.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually Google has fairly simple way to provide a solution, for example, Play services API to provide similar functionality with refined security and proper restriction. The new SMS verification API is a good example for app to avoid requesting SMS permission. Fairly speaking, SMS too was not designed for verification purpose.
They did nothing for a long time, but rush to ban all these apps in just 30 days. I think they just don't care that much about advanced user like the old days when Android was competing with iOS fiercely.
I’m the developer of Battery Overlay Percent. Not one of the big apps out there but it does got 500,000 downloads and about 30,000 active users.
I use accessibility services for hiding overlay when user pull status bar or on later release to resolve overlay breaking permission.
I’m quite sad with Google closing down on legitimate use cases. Personally from an open source OS we now live in a world of 2 pretty closed mobile environments.
And who’s collecting most data? Play Services of course.
Hope there will be a shift from this centerlized dark state we’re in.
oasisfeng said:
Actually Google has fairly simple way to provide a solution, for example, Play services API to provide similar functionality with refined security and proper restriction. The new SMS verification API is a good example for app to avoid requesting SMS permission. Fairly speaking, SMS too was not designed for verification purpose.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I thought something similar and i still think they will implement it but not before 30day timeline.
They did nothing for a long time, but rush to ban all these apps in just 30 days. I think they just don't care that much about advanced user like the old days when Android was competing with iOS fiercely.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True that. When you have 90% of market you don't need to expand it any more you just need to control it.
I don't mean to sound like I'm supporting them, but this what people do in general, when they have control on almost entire market.
Luckily for now (and unlike with ios) Android can still and probaly can always exist without the Google Play Store and Google Play Services and thats still a big win over ios! And as much as I hate this news, this is something I think will ultimately lead advanced users and advanced developers to become less dependant upon Google Play Store and Google Play Services.... and for users/devs like us, thats actually a good thing!
Maybe now Google Play Store will finally get some real competition!! Google has certainly with their actions have now got a significant chunk of users and devs properly motivated to look or create healthy alternatives for app licensing and license management on Android, thats for sure and to also kick it off with a healthly sample of some of the most prized apps android has ever seen, yikes!! Greenify is amazing but Tasker too; bigger yikes!!!
cantenna said:
Luckily for now (and unlike with ios) Android can still and probaly can always exist without the Google Play Store and Google Play Services and thats still a big win over ios! And as much as I hate this news, this is something I think will ultimately lead advanced users and advanced developers to become less dependant upon Google Play Store and Google Play Services.... and for users/devs like us, thats actually a good thing!
Maybe now Google Play Store will finally get some real competition!! Google has certainly with their actions have now got a significant chunk of users and devs properly motivated to look or create healthy alternatives for app licensing and license management on Android, thats for sure and to also kick it off with a healthly sample of some of the most prized apps android has ever seen, yikes!! Greenify is amazing but Tasker too; bigger yikes!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly.
We need to stand our ground.
I have a feeling that alternate app stores are about to see a huge boost in users. Google is going to sorely regret their decisions.
betatest3 said:
Exactly.
We need to stand our ground.
I have a feeling that alternate app stores are about to see a huge boost in users. Google is going to sorely regret their decisions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I admire your optimistic attitude - But... Alphabet is a Juggernaut and if it suits them - They'd probably just buy any potential problem ?
Sent from my SM-G955W ??
shaggyskunk said:
I admire your optimistic attitude - But... Alphabet is a Juggernaut and if it suits them - They'd probably just buy any potential problem ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not to mention the relatively small number of individuals that will be adversely impacted when all is said and done. Bigger players (eg: LastPass) will likely receive some form of dispensation. Niche tools like Greenify might take a hit but that is not where the revenue stream resides. Google ain't catering to the Android enthusiast community.
shaggyskunk said:
I admire your optimistic attitude - But... Alphabet is a Juggernaut and if it suits them - They'd probably just buy any potential problem ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I dont think they'll be buying the amazon app store any time soon.
but to the point of the other user you quoted, you'll likely see the accessibility needing market move to another app store.
cantenna said:
I dont think they'll be buying the amazon app store any time soon.
but to the point of the other user you quoted, you'll likely see the accessibility needing market move to another app store.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sure. There are a handful of reputable alternative app stores that cater to small communities that dare to venture off the beaten path. Niche market; don't think Google is worried. Nor is it likely Amazon will cater to Android enthusiasts.
If Alphabet/Google is serious about reining in potential abuses look for further adjustments in the successor to Android 8.
Can you on XDA Dev put an parallel market on the XDA Labs with PayPal account with less taxes (good for all) to maintaining and update webpage to conventional user going fu*k up the Google to the apps then will not survive on the Google rules on the market?
Put and good design market to the conventional use on XDA please.
Sent from my Asus ZenFone 3 Deluxe using XDA Labs
---------- Post added at 05:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:20 PM ----------
If you on XDA Labs put a inner market in the app with an Market safe with PayPal the developers can update the Apps on the Market with no acessibility but make an link to be updated on the XDA Labs with a plugin or a new full version, we can free more people with xposed solutions to defeat Google Policy
Sent from my Asus ZenFone 3 Deluxe using XDA Labs
---------- Post added at 05:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:31 PM ----------
Dev can update your apps and redirect to the external link in XDA Labs without violated google policy.
Sent from my Asus ZenFone 3 Deluxe using XDA Labs
---------- Post added at 05:50 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:37 PM ----------
XDA Labs have power with an safe and free market scanning and checking malicious new apps to be so respected and Xposed so popular then I believed on the futere ASUS and Samsung make the ZenFone Deluxes and Galaxy S with Xposed on stock on the most expansive "and free" devices, absolutely. Please think renew the XDA webpage and XDA Labs to defeat the enemies of the freedom on coding.
Sent from my Asus ZenFone 3 Deluxe using XDA Labs
---------- Post added at 05:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:50 PM ----------
Its time of the XDA webpage be more like Facebook on design and XDA Labs more like market on the safe and design to receive more redirected links to update and pay by apps on the XDA Labs with PayPal an Google Account if I like. Well if that happen we really will see if Google support free coding on open source.
Sent from my Asus ZenFone 3 Deluxe using XDA Labs
Interesting/digestible read; nothing new if you have been keeping up with the news on this topic.
https://www.howtogeek.com/333365/android-apps-using-accessibility-services-could-disappear/
I have moaned in the past about the rapid pace of Android OS development, and the usual implication of buying a new phone is you forced to upgrade android, but going from Android 6 to 8, looks like its going to be brutal for me, and hard decisions to be made.
On my old S7 phone running Android6, I have the following working reasonably well.
Xposed
Instagram made useable by xposed (app without it is horrible)
Same with snapchat
Various privacy enhancements thanks to xposed
Anag app works perfectly.
Apps mostly honour auto sync setting
However titanium backup only barely functions, it seems it only works properly with supersu which is considered obsolete these days, this app last worked properly on my s5.
Using android 9, there is no xposed at all, to me having no xposed on android is like going out in the street naked.
Using android 8, xposed is in beta, initially it seemed stable, but I have noticed the contacts app goes crazy and unstable as well as phone app after 2-3 days uptime if xposed is enabled on phone.
Some xposed modules have become abandonware and no longer work on Android 8
Some apps including Anag which has no alternative app have become abandonware and dont work properly or at all on Android 8.
Auto sync is disabled on the phone yet I keep getting notifications from apps, related to background sync activity they are doing, e.g. dominoes apps downloads an advert, and sends me a notification asking me if I am hungry to order some pizzas (never ever seen it do this on android 6), various other apps having similar type behaviours, just 10 mins ago backgrounds hd sent me a notification to inform me its downloaded new backgrounds, how has it done this when I havent gave it permission to background sync? ,either the auto sync setting is broken or there is some new feature in newer android that allows apps to spam you. I suspect its the latter, as I think even with auto sync enabled on android 6 I wasnt getting all this app spam.
The problem is this, new phone hardware is nice, my newest phone is lightning fast compared to my s7. But ultimately its the software that makes the phone. Sadly there is no Android 6 for the oneplus6, I dont expect much sympathy on the XDA community as the majority of people here seem happy to always jump on the latest builds of android without a second thought, often beta/alpha builds to boot. But felt like I needed to rant.
I dont know what I am going to do moving forward, I will probably test OOS 8.x, just to rule out custom rom issues, and if issues persist I can forsee myself selling the phone and buying an older model that still is faster (but wont be as fast) just so I can run android 6. I wonder if anyone else has ever deliberately avoided latest model phones to keep old android.
Its becoming evident to me, that many developers cannot keep up with the pace of android updates, so we get this happening, apps becoming abandonware, and users like myself either have to find replacement apps or accept to lose features on their phone. I wonder if IOS has these issues or if that has full backward compatibility that keeps old apps working. I wouldnt be unhappy if e.g. new android major releases were every 2 years with 5 years security support for each release as well. But a sane software support policy goes against google's policies.
Its kind of interesting as we have many news articles about the problem of android fragmentation as such, and often these articles blame everyone except google, they blame end users, they blame phone manufacturers, and they blame mobile carriers, but they never consider the problem might be google simply releasing new versions of android too rapidly.