Google 'Experts' To Screen Android Apps For Banned Content 139
An anonymous reader writes Google has announced that it will start an official human-based screening process for all of the apps featured in its Google Play store, in a bid to "better protect the community" and "improve the app catalogue." The search giant revealed yesterday that a "team of experts" would be reviewing apps and all updates offered across the Google Play platform for those which violate Google's developer policies. The team will also give direct feedback to developers on what they need to do in order to fix their apps before they can be listed on the Store. A dedicated review page will allow developers to gain further "insight into why apps were rejected or suspended," as well as offering them the opportunity to "easily fix and resubmit their apps" for those who have violated minor regulations.
Screening (Score:2, Insightful)
So far, I'm unimpressed with their interest in explaining and allowing corrections of minor violations. The AdMob defaults include tons of offensive advertising and you're prohibited from observing them in your testing by their T.O.S. Fixing the AdMob settings is apparently not sufficient to get Google to lower your app's content rating once the mistake has been made, not that they'll actually discuss it with you.
Curated Collection (Score:5, Interesting)
Wonder where they would have gotten THAT Idea...?
Re:Curated Collection (Score:5, Insightful)
Curated software collections have been standard practise in the Linux world since debian launched in the early 1990s.
There were probably even earlier ones on other unixes and maybe even on some earlier OS's than that.
FreeBSD has repositories and macOS is based on that so apple had been working with versions of the idea for ages, many distributions have both curated and uncurated repositories (in some cases the latter is not part of or hosted by the distribution however).
The only thing Apple did was to actively prevent access to any repositories EXCEPT their own - which google is STILL not doing (nothing in here announced their imminent blocking of the amazon appstore for example).
The appstore wasn't an invention at all - it was merely an already ancient idea being added to a cellphone OS and it wasn't even the first to do THAT - blackberry had an appstore-like feature years earlier.
The only change here is the addition of curation. Now we can debate whether the nature of that curation is good or bad for consumers. Distributions usually curate as well - checking submissions for malware is common -and many have additional levels (for example checking for license compliance or limiting approval to software under a pre-chosen subset of acceptable licenses).
Some even curate content - education marketed distros for example will generally not allow adult content programs in their repositories while a distro like debian will usually let it through.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Apples users suggested it to Apple, so it is not an Apple iDea.
Honestly: Citation, please?
Re: (Score:3)
It's a little difficult to prove direct correlation, as is the usual case with Apple product releases, but if you recall the original announcements for iPhone specifically called for it to run only Web 2.0 applications through Safari. For example [apple.com]. It wasn't until after the first jailbreaks and unofficial third party apps that the App Store came along [9to5mac.com] after weathering objections from Jobs. It's hard to conclusively say whether it was directly in response to jailbreakers or not, but it's likely it sped up the
Re: (Score:2)
It's a little difficult to prove direct correlation, as is the usual case with Apple product releases, but if you recall the original announcements for iPhone specifically called for it to run only Web 2.0 applications through Safari. For example [apple.com]. It wasn't until after the first jailbreaks and unofficial third party apps that the App Store came along [9to5mac.com] after weathering objections from Jobs. It's hard to conclusively say whether it was directly in response to jailbreakers or not, but it's likely it sped up their plans.
After reading the 9 to 5 Mac article linked above, I conclude that it really wasn't USER backlash, but DEVELOPER (and Apple-internal) pressures that caused Jobs to embrace the idea of an SDK and App Store. But that article also makes it clear that forces inside Apple were trying to convince Jobs that it was a good idea even before the iPhone launch. The App Store officially launched in July, 2008; so there wasn't too much time wasted.
OTOH, Google Play was launched in March, 2012 (yeah, I was surprised, to
Re: (Score:2)
OTOH, Google Play was launched in March, 2012 (yeah, I was surprised, too!) ; so, I'd still say that Apple's App Store can safely be said to have "come first"...
Nice try there. Thanks for playing.
It may have been renamed Google Play in March 2012 but you could get Android applications from the Android Market long before that. The original Android ADP (aka HTC Dream or T-Mobile G1) had access to the marker. Our friend Wikipedia contradicts your statement and notes the Android Market had a launch date of 22 October 2008. So only July to October difference on the launch dates which more or less makes them concurrently developed.
Re: (Score:2)
So only July to October difference on the launch dates which more or less makes them concurrently developed.
Nice try yourself.
...and there were internal talks at Apple regarding the development of an App Store even before Google knew there WAS an iPhone.
Besides, first is first. Android fanbois use that against iOS features that they claim were "stolen" by Apple ALL the time, so...
That was just the re-branding (Score:2)
WebKit missing features (Score:2)
if you recall the original announcements for iPhone specifically called for it to run only Web 2.0 applications through Safari.
If Apple's original plan for iPhone resembled Mozilla's current plan for Firefox OS, then why did it take so long for Safari for iOS to support things like uploads from picture and video libraries using <input type="file">, or JavaScript access to the accelerometer, or JavaScript JIT, or WebGL?
XNA on Xbox 360 (Score:2)
The iOS developer program has a $99 per year fee plus 30 percent of sales, and only developers with a paid-up license can run code they compile on a device they own.
The Xbox Live Indie Games developer program had a $99 per year fee plus 30 percent of sales, and only developers with a paid-up license could run code they compile on a device they own. And it launched prior to the App Store.
Re: (Score:2)
The iOS developer program has a $99 per year fee plus 30 percent of sales, and only developers with a paid-up license can run code they compile on a device they own.
The Xbox Live Indie Games developer program had a $99 per year fee plus 30 percent of sales, and only developers with a paid-up license could run code they compile on a device they own. And it launched prior to the App Store.
Sorry, your calendar needs adjustment.
Community Games were introduced with the New Xbox Experience on November 19, 2008.
The iPhone App Store opened on July 10, 2008.
Now, I don't know about your calendar; but mine has July coming nearly a half year before November. In the tech universe, that's a significant difference.
Re: (Score:2)
You're right: I had some of the events out of order. But when was XNA Creators Club announced, and when was the price of the iOS Developer Program announced?
Re: (Score:3)
Hmmm. Sounds like Google is moving toward the concept of a Curated Collection.
Wonder where they would have gotten THAT Idea...?
If you want to be that nonspecific, I will point out that was making submissions to a Curated Collection [nih.gov] a decade before Apple launched their App store for any platform. So perhaps google took the idea from the National Institutes of Health?
Re: (Score:2)
So perhaps google took the idea from the National Institutes of Health?
Nice try.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple does not allow sideloading, and does not allow use of any other marketplace. Google does. .
This is simply not true. For example Apple allows many companies to have their own stores: Person App [pearsonappstore.com]. In education and business administrators can side-load their own specialty apps.
Re: (Score:1)
Are you retarded? Qualcomm, AT&T, VZW, T-mobile, Sprint, Xbox, PlayStation, Nintendo, Sega, Valve, and on, and on, and on. Do you seriously think Apple came up with a walled garden store? It's shocking how delusionional some Apple fans are. Now feel free to move the goal posts in your rebuttal.
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing has actually changed, they are just enforcing the existing rules a little more vigorously. Previously they relied on automated scanning and people reporting bad apps, as well as things like excessive refunds. Now they are having humans more involved somehow, but the rules on what is acceptable have not changed.
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing has actually changed, they are just enforcing the existing rules a little more vigorously. Previously they relied on automated scanning and people reporting bad apps, as well as things like excessive refunds. Now they are having humans more involved somehow, but the rules on what is acceptable have not changed.
Maybe not "officially"; but it is still obvious that they now see that the "Curated Collection" concept, a la Apple's App Store "acceptance" procedures, is the right way to go, moving forward; and I believe that the groundwork is being laid to eventually take away that "Allow Apps from Other Places" (paraphrasing) Option in Android.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe I'm just grumpy and old but the whole "Curated" thing is bugging me and seemingly came out of nowhere recently. It's a marketing move intended to lend an air of sophistication to stuff by making them think of museums or wine collections, but it's really all just "stuff that other people kinda like".
Now get off my lawn.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe I'm just grumpy and old but the whole "Curated" thing is bugging me and seemingly came out of nowhere recently. It's a marketing move intended to lend an air of sophistication to stuff by making them think of museums or wine collections, but it's really all just "stuff that other people kinda like".
Now get off my lawn.
Yes, "Curated" is a term that is dripping in "sophisticated" connotation. But it is also actually correctly used.
But, I must correct you when you say that, in the case of the App Store, that it actually means "stuff that other people kinda like". That is incorrect. I am SURE that there are MANY Apps that make it through the approval process that the "Curators" would NEVER load onto their PERSONAL iOS devices; rather, in Apple's case, it truly IS mostly about making sure an App isn't malicious, with a smal
Re: (Score:1)
At least, unlike certain other companies, you are free to install software from other sources (without defeating the device that's secured against its own user) if you don't like their store's policies.
For now...
Featured apps only will be analyzed? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Netflix? Pandora?
Re:Featured apps only will be analyzed? (Score:5, Informative)
So this is telling me that the apps that Google "Features" currently are not inspected or analyzed by any humans before they become featured. "Featured," to my way of thinking, means recommended. So, currently, are algorithms recommending apps, not people? And if so, how long before algorithms recommend movies, books, music? (Currently, Wikibooks notes that "Featured books are books that the Wiki community believes to be the best . . .") [wikibooks.org]
No. "Apps featured in Google Play" isn't the same as "Featured Apps in Google Play". Neither phrase was from Google, either, but from the summary.
The summary is wrong in others ways, too. It says that Google is going to begin screening apps. The actual announcement says that this has been going on for several months. It also says that the process is "human-based", which the announcement doesn't say, just that the process "involves a team of experts who are responsible for identifying violations of our developer policies earlier in the app lifecycle." This leaves open the possibility that the team in question automates the actual screening, which is obviously much more normal for Google.
Really, your best bet is to ignore the summary and the linked article and just read the post from Google: http://android-developers.blog... [blogspot.co.uk]
Permission to download ads (Score:2)
Applications need enough permissions to download and display advertisements. This is ultimately because Android devices launched in countries without Google Checkout, creating an expectation of free [stackexchange.com].
Google can't automate this (Score:1)
But we should believe they can make a driverless car.
Re: (Score:2)
Finding hidden malware is considerably harder than finding pedestrians out in the open. If pedestrians were hiding themselves from traffic the way malware distributors hide their code, then Darwin would have claimed them long before a Google car does.
Re: (Score:2)
I find it troubling that Google wants to dictate what we can and cannot install on our own portable computers. Yes, I realize we can in install things from outside their app store, but, it puts those outside apps at a huge disadvantage. Google has also, many times, showed us it will delete apps for sketchy reasons. Their more open market is the main reason I use android over apples bullshit.
Hee Hee Hee, Ha Ha Ha, Ho, ho...
Tee Hee...
This is truly priceless.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure what you find funny.
Re: (Score:3)
I find it troubling that Google wants to dictate what we can and cannot install on our own portable computers. Yes, I realize we can in install things from outside their app store, but, it puts those outside apps at a huge disadvantage. Google has also, many times, showed us it will delete apps for sketchy reasons. Their more open market is the main reason I use android over apples bullshit.
I don't get what you are complaining about. Having read TFA I did not sounds to me as if Google was planning to foist this down the throat of third party app stores. They just want to reduce the vast piles of what is quite frankly digital refuse that's cluttering up the Play Store. So even if Google turns the Play Store into 'Walled Garden Light (TM)' you can still side-load malware laden apps from questionable sources and if that doesn't float your boat any Tom, Dick and Harry can still set up an app store
Re: (Score:1)
One step at a time. You can't build the walled garden until you lay the foundation.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes !
Also I demand that LinuxMint stops restricting what goes in their official repositories ! I demand that my linux desktop gives me the same spyware experience that my windows-using friends have !
Curating software is always evil regardless of how or why it's done and whether or not I am limited to what the curators recommend.
I am not as it happens. I do sometimes go outside the official mint repositories, for example I installed VirtualBox and PlayOnLinux from their own repositories as those update fast
Re: (Score:2)
>Linux Mint is hardly the first, nor the most prominent Linux distro to do this. Debian, Ubuntu, Arch, etc... all do this.
Oh I know, I wasn't suggesting it is - I even spoke of the long history of this in another comment. I was merely using it as an example based on my day to day experience.
>The big difference is, Linux distros usually (almost always) do it for stability/security reasons,
Something google has been lax about, I hope that will improve with this.
> as a compromise distros also will host
Re: (Score:1)
Microsoft already does this (Score:2)
Could you imagine if MS introduced the 'Approved Programs You Can Install On Your Computer!' store?
Microsoft could even call it the "Windows Phone Store" or the "Windows Store for Windows RT" or the "Xbox Live Marketplace".
Re: (Score:2)
Xbox Live Marketplace is not mobile; it's XBOX HUEG. And even on desktop Windows 8.x, Microsoft requires all apps designed for the formerly-known-as-Metro environment to be obtained from the Windows Store unless you apply over the Internet for a developer license that must be renewed periodically.
Will DMCA requests affect this? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Apps in the Play Store have always been subject to DMCA takedowns, along with the shenanigans DMCA makes possible. The "legitimate apps being held hostage" scenario already happens. For example, someone ripped off the Camfrog app [camfrog.com], then filed a false DMCA complaint alleging that the real Camfrog app was infringing. Camfrog appealed the DMCA notice, and Google responded by taking down the real app for a day or two.
Re: (Score:1)
So, yeah... I read the article you linked. Camfrog took down their own app on accident:
...we did the only thing we could, and filed our first counter notice, to our own takedown request.
Seems like their initial DMCA takedown request hit the wrong target; whether that was Google's fault or Camfrog's, Camfrog sent the request.
Needed because of bad permission system? (Score:4, Interesting)
I wish Google had taken a different road:
- help users understand permissions (e.g. Internet + SDcard = app could upload your private pictures to a remote server)
- users get scared of apps with too many permissions
- apps request few permissions
Instead they entered a vicious cycle:
- apps request more permissions
- simplify the displayed permission list
- apps request even more permissions
and now we're at a stage where apps request tons of permissions they don't need, and Google needs to manually check that each app doesn't abuse the permissions that they request but don't need. Ridiculous.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Internet + SDcard = app could upload your private pictures to a remote server
Actually, for a long time now Android has not allowed apps to access the entire SD card, just their own data on it. To get at your photos an app needs permission to access your photos specifically. If users don't understand what Internet + Photos permission means...
Re: (Score:2)
Users in general are not going to understand permissions in general. In general, they won't be completely innocuous (otherwise why have them as permissions). The practice of listing the worst case with all permissions will get users in general to avoid looking at them entirely.
I far prefer the iOS approach, in which permissions are asked for at the time of use, and can be granted or denied then.
good, Google Play needs cleaned up (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So it all needs to be treated in pretty much the exact opposite way it is treated on desktops and notebooks. Basically Goggle is cashing in walled garden and the end user and the developers expense, with a horribly crap selection system for applications and providing not much in return, other than a decent phone operating system.
Google don't be dicks, give me an option for an alphabetic keyboard, seriously. what the fuck is so hard about that.
Re: (Score:2)
I will use my experience to tell me what is good or bad. JoBob's office may be malware. However, it may be the best thing since sliced bread, but by increasing barriers to entry, I may never know. Give me the choice please.
If you want someone to spo
Re: (Score:2)
If you want someone to spoonfeed you what they think is good for you, that is certainly something you can do.
The success of Wii, PlayStation 3, and Xbox 360 shows that the market is happy to let multinational conglomerates "spoonfeed you what they think is good for you".
Irrelevant, I can already install banned content (Score:5, Insightful)
I have a rooted android phone and I install programs etc on it all the time that aren't provided or approved by google.
In the long run, if android is to become a real operating system that must be a significant element of the android software ecosystem.
Walled gardens are fine for those that need them but they are of limited value to those capable of getting more from their machines.
This attempt by google to weed their garden is fine... it does not matter. So long as I can leave the garden entirely and get what I want... it matters little what is permitted inside the garden or not.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
You don't even need to root Android devices to install programs from outside Google Play. There's a check under Settings - Security to allow installation from sources other than Google's repositories.
Re: (Score:2)
I know... I just was adding that I had control over my machine and it does what I want.
That is the future of any platform of relevance.
Re: (Score:3)
there are fads... and as I said, there is value in a walled garden but it is a crutch for the ignorant. And as the OS becomes more useful and involved such things will be of diminishing relevance especially for those like myself that are required by employment to do with it things that the makers did not initially wish.
You can circumvent the protections in iOS rather easily as well.
First rule of computer security... physical security.
If I hold it in my hand then I can control it given time. And given that t
Re: (Score:2)
there is value in a walled garden but it is a crutch for the ignorant.
That is a very narrow viewpoint.
The users you dismiss with a wave of the hand as "ignorant", just so happen to comprise everyone who doesn't post regularly on places like Slashdot or Stack Overflow, etc. In other words, about 10,998,999,000 out of the 11,000 000,000 or so people on the Planet.
Re: (Score:1)
Wow! I must have overslept!
Re: (Score:2)
Wow! I must have overslept!
LOL! That's what I get for not checking, first!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder what else in your posts you've not checked and attempted to pass off as accurate...
I'm sure you will let me know...
Re: (Score:2)
your offense does not mean the statement is inaccurate...
Re: (Score:2)
It's primarily a security issue. Apple does not want malware on users' iDevices.
Blacklists don't work, because malware can appear far faster than it can be found and blacklisted. AV programs don't work. The best way found to have security is whitelisting software. If the user has an easy way of bypassing the whitelist, then the software isn't effectively whitelisted, because users can be talked into allowing things. It's been amply demonstrated that users will click through any impediment to seeing
Re: (Score:2)
I wasn't arguing against white lists. I'm a big fan of them actually. But I don't like the implementation of them through a walled garden application distribution system.
I'd prefer something that worked more like anti virus in that on execution, the program would be checked against a database of approved code, and if it was in the approved code list it would be allowed to run.
I don't think either apple or google should be in the business of saying what people should and shouldn't be doing with their devices
Re: (Score:2)
Its sloppy.
What they want are white lists given that black list based security has failed.
I appreciate their problem. But the appropriate way to deal with it is by having something very much like anti virus only instead of looking for bad software it looks for good software.
That is the security of the future.
The walled garden is a variation on that theme but not a very good one.
One of the most distasteful things about it is that it attempts to monopolize the software distribution system. And google or apple
Re: (Score:2)
Real? It's not fake. Number one OS for total users.
Re: (Score:2)
A general operating system should be more dynamic than what android is at this time.
Re: (Score:2)
It's an is for phones and at a pinch, tablets. There is nothing to be gained in making it general purpose. Jack of all trades = master of none.
Re: (Score:2)
The very nature of a smart phone or a tablet rejects this notion.
Do they come preinstalled with 4 basic functions and that is all they do?
or are they roughly as capable as similliarly powerful desktop computer?
There's no reason to limit them.
If the bumpkins only want to use one of the 4 preinstalled basic features that is fine. It is a little like only playing Microsoft Solitaire but whatever.
Re: (Score:2)
You're only considering functions and power. The limiting factors on phone OSs are UI, considering the limitations of screen size and input capabilities. And the user attachment time - Phone OSs concentrate on activities that take seconds, desktops on on activities that take minutes to hours.
There's no problem with having the kernel and lower levels general purpose. But trying to make the UI/shell that is a fools errand.
Re: (Score:2)
No, I'm considering UI as well.
As to screen size, that isn't a big problem. I have good eyes can test on remote deskop on my phone because my phone has a 1080p screen. All that you need to do is have eyes that can pick details out. And the pinch zoom feature in all such programs is entirely sufficient if I really want to get a better look at something which is rare.
I remote into machines all the time with my phone. It isn't a big deal.
The only input limitations that are irritating is that sometimes it is fa
Re: (Score:2)
...isn't a big problem. I have good eyes...have eyes that can pick details out....pinch zoom...input limitations...irritating...sometimes it is faster and more accurate to have a mouse and typing with a keyboard is always faster... it is annoying to interface with it... I have a tiny bluetooth keyboard and mouse... I want my keyboard out because typing it all out using the onscreen keyboard is a pain in the ass... I need a bit more dexterity...
Take out the excuses, and you do see all the problems.
These little computers are quite capable.
They are absolutely amazing. And part of that amazingness is they have UIs tailored to the size and the I/O available. As general purpose computer's they'd be crap.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. Airplanes don't work unless you design them to be aerodynamically stable.
Take that that excuse and air travel doesn't work.
Boats only work if they're buoyant. Take out that excuse and they don't work.
I see the problem. It however has solutions. It isn't an "excuse" an excuse is an attempt to shift blame. I am not shifting anything. I am solving it.
A solution is not an excuse.
You don't like my perspective on the matter? That is fine. Don't straw man me or attempt to twist my position. I am as rationa
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not clueless, I'm indifferent.
I said it didn't matter. I don't care. You say their walled garden is very hard to manage and maintain? Okay... but why do I care? I don't stay in the garden.
I am largely disinterested in the whole concept of it actually. It is unmanagable...
Because one is ignorant, one must either accept only a limited selection of choices from a trusted third party or risk exposure to predators of various stripes.
On desktop operating systems it is generally understood that the price of ig
speaking of being knowledgeable vs ignorant (Score:2)
>. If one is not ignorant, then one need not concern themselves with such things.
You seem like the type of person who appreciates good information. Here's something I found interesting. It turns out that the people "ignorant" about computers are at significantly LOWER risk of exploits than those who work in IT, and the highest risk are programmers.
The highest amount of _damage_ is executives, but IT workers and programmers get hit more often, not less. I suspect it's because we a) install a lot mo
Re: (Score:2)
I can't speak to such statistics. I know only my own experiences.
I do not get viruses or malware. I notice that ignorant users do all the time. I know this because they ask for my help to remove it.
I would also draw your attention to all the statistics and studies that turn out to be specious. This is a very common thing in our society today. Many people do not know how to conduct statistical studies and many people do not know how to analyze statistics.
You see this in major newspapers and in peer reviewed
Re: (Score:1)
And then my provider installed a banking app (called "proximenu") as a "Service" on my new Jolla.
I feel so stupid now with my smartphone...
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone, from casual users to hardcore techies, who want to (gasp) actually use their phones instead of fucking around with rooting are just *BEGGING* for a curated app store to stem the flow of crapware and malware so that they can find good apps. The first of the phone OS giants that figures out the right balance will be rolling in (even more) obscenely ludicrous piles of money from the increase in app sales.
This. Exactly. This.
Re: (Score:3)
But that's the wrong approach.
You're a iOS users, so you're well-aware of how much absolute crap has found it's way in to the App Store. That's not to criticize Apple, there's crap in every OS's store, Google, Microsoft, BlackBerry, Amazon, even Mozilla have "curated" marketplaces full of garbage -- and the cream rarely seems to float to the top.
We've tried the monolithic do-everything marketplace. All we got was the great app-count war and more fart-apps than I can reasonably estimate. What I'd like to
Re: (Score:2)
You're a iOS users, so you're well-aware of how much absolute crap has found it's way in to the App Store. That's not to criticize Apple, there's crap in every OS's store, Google, Microsoft, BlackBerry, Amazon, even Mozilla have "curated" marketplaces full of garbage -- and the cream rarely seems to float to the top.
So now you want to somehow have a Store that only let's the "good" apps in?
Talk about a Walled Garden!!! And whose "taste" are we pleasing? The Curators'? No, that would be too restrictive. Oh wait! I know! Let's let the People who have downloaded the App "rate" it somehow!
Oh, wait...
See the problem?
Re: (Score:2)
Walled gardens, plural (Score:2)
So now you want to somehow have a Store that only let's the "good" apps in?
Talk about a Walled Garden!!!
"A walled garden" is singular. Narcc was describing "walled gardens", plural. There are multiple big-box stores that sell decorative plants; in my era, these include at least Walmart, Meijer, and Lowe's. There are also multiple locally owned greenhouses. All have walls, and all have plants. Or you can grow your own plants from seeds on your own fenced-in lot. Likewise, there are multiple app stores for Android, and you can compile your own apps from source.
Re: (Score:2)
See the problem?
Indeed I do.
What I'm advocating here is a plurality of stores, not a single store, preferably community driven.
We've tried the walled-garden approach. Both users and developers suffered. It didn't work, but that doesn't mean there isn't value in curation or in having a known, trusted, vendor. That's why I'd like to see more stores, with specialized interest. Crap app developers can still have their wal-mart style marketplaces, we'll just have other, better, options.
Re: (Score:2)
An open platform, supporting a variety of marketplaces, could be a disaster for the consumer. Right now, Apple does a good job of keeping serious malware out of the App Store, and hence people's iOS computers. A variety of marketplaces would include some that provided free malware with their apps, and they could cause a good deal of harm.
Re: (Score:2)
A store where you can find absolutely every app for the platform is far more use than having to search a multitude of competing stores.
Re: (Score:2)
Not really. It becomes difficult to find good apps, as they're lost in the flood of terrible apps. The number of so-called "zombie apps" on iOS was over 75% sometime last year. It's become a crap-shoot for both users and developers.
I'd like to see specialty stores, preferably curated by communities. Great apps are far less likely to get lost, and crap apps are far less likely find a home there at all.
Apple adds something like 60,000 apps per month, which easily explains the sever quality control issues
Re: (Score:2)
For android there exists pornographic games. To say nothing of games like Grand Thief Auto that let you go on shooting rampages after bouncing on hookers.
I really don't know what you're talking about.
Re: (Score:2)
As far as sex and violence goes in entertainment, I'd like to see more sex and less violence. I really don't like it that harming people is more offensive to a lot of people than loving them. I'd rather have an environment where a bullet hole is considered less acceptable than a nipple.
So, I'm not impressed by GTA.
Re: (Score:2)
That's your own opinion. I prefer more violence and less sex personally.
I don't like sex in my entertainment really at all. But I do like action movies.
Think of Game of Thrones for an example of why violence is often more relevant to the plot than is sex. Game of thrones has a reason for violence. There are power struggles. People die. There are battles, there are assassinations, there are duals, etc.
But what is the point of vagina, boob, dick scenes? They don't accomplish anything for the plot. It is just
Re: (Score:2)
Depends on your phone. Mine came rooted. I bought it that way from the manufacturer.
But I get your issue. I increasingly think the ROM of the phones should be removable. A micro SD card or something. That way anyone can install the desired software simply by pulling the SD card and writing directly to the card bypassing everything else.
That also would protect nicely from software attacks on the phone. Installing something wouldn't bypass the security but pulling the SD card and overwriting the rom would.
A fruitful idea. (Score:1)
Assholes (Score:1)
As a developer who has had to deal with these motherfuckers for the past 4 years... Fuck Google and their fuckwit android team.
They are evil, lying, exploitative, and incompetent shitbags.
privacy? (Score:4, Insightful)
It would be wonderful if they'd review apps for needless privacy intrusion. Why does a radio player app need to access my camera? Why does a weather app need to access my contacts? I can't count the number of apps that I uninstalled because the new update wants nonsensical accesses....
Anyway, I know that's not going to happen.
How's the weather where mom lives? (Score:2)
Why does a weather app need to access my contacts?
For the "How's the weather where mom lives?" feature.
Experts? (Score:1)
It's not for the users (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know how Google plans to implement human review, but on iOS, the standard practice is to give Apple a user account with which to test basic functionality.