15 years ago: "why is google putting so much effort into building a web browser? it must be because they want to see the web grow and by extension more people will use their services"
Why would it not be, "Since Google is an advertising company, it stands to reason they want to squash the open web and make it a platform for them to serve advertisement and increase their margin"?
> Starting in 2027*, a silent update, nonconsensually pushed by Google, will block every Android app whose developer hasn't registered with Google, signed their contract, paid up, and handed over government ID.
Man, all of these little steps Google is taking to take the control away from the users, not to take over the world or anything else, but to force on you more accurate advertisements. What are we even doing?
Well Google is becoming worse every year, but AOSP is way ahead of Linux on Mobile, for many reasons.
The thing is, AOSP is open source. Just like Linux is not controlled by one of the TooBigTechs, I could imagine a fork of AOSP becoming a viable alternative without depending on Google anymore.
And supporting alternative Android OSes (like GrapheneOS and LineageOS) is one way to support that vision.
Linux on Mobile is nice, but unfortunately I think it's an uphill battle because of all the proprietary firmwares?
One obstacle to making AOSP independent is the included apps. Last I knew they were overly basic and somewhat derelict because Google has long been favoring their own closed source counterparts, and third party manufacturers all ship their own (often kinda garbage) alternatives.
Not insurmountable at all, building decent apps isn’t rocket science, but a substantial investment of time and energy nonetheless.
> but unfortunately I think it's an uphill battle because of all the proprietary firmwares?
In my GNU/Linux phone, all drivers are FLOSS and all pieces of firmware are backed into the replaceable peripherals (modem M.2 card and WiFi M.2 card).
I feel like supporting Android alternatives is also fighting for my rights. Isn't it?
And again, I'm really impressed by all the work done by the Linux on Mobile projects. I'm just saying it's an uphill battle, and it's nowhere close to any AOSP-based system.
Google's upcoming change means Google Mobile Services operating systems will show a warning for apps from unverified developers. Bypassing the warning will require a one-time 24 hour wait via the regular user interface. It can be immediately bypassed using Android Debug Bridge instead.
Developers with Play Store apps are already verified. It's counterproductive for app developers with existing Play Console accounts considered verified to refuse to register their apps distributed outside of the Play Store. That would encourage users to stick to the Play Store.
The problem is for developers without a Play Console account who would need to register and verify their identify to avoid their apps showing a warning. If people are already registered, they might as well list their apps distributed outside the Play Store to avoid the warning.
> Any word as to whether this will apply to GrapheneOS? If I had to choose, I'd block apps that did comply with this BS.
I doubt it, considering Android developer verification will go through Google Play Services, which GrapheneOS has siloed off from most of the OS as far as I'm aware.
I specifically use Android because of this, among other requirements, that Apple imposes on software development on their platform.
I do not own general purpose computers that I am not allowed to develop software for without permission. I have always avoided consoles for that reason as well (Steam Machine and other similar platforms would be fine, but I've been avoiding consoles for long enough that it's not something I really look for any more).
I was a major Apple fanboy up until the iPhone. Left the ecosystem after the iPhone and macOS started moving in that direction as well.
I'm going to miss having a smartphone that I can use with my banking and EV apps, but probably for the best to get out of Google's ecosystem. Hoping that GrapheneOS will still allow me to use some of the apps that I like.
I switched to an iPhone last year, mostly because I was getting sick of Samsung’s shit, and google doesn’t sell their pixel phones locally (and I don’t like Oppo).
But the other reason is that most of Android’s openness is quickly disappearing, so my main argument against iPhone is gone. And on the topic of privacy, I actually trust Apple way more than I trust the company that makes most of their revenue via advertising.
Exactly this. Once the writing was on the wall that deGoogled / FOSS Android was on borrowed time (at best), a ton of the argument against iOS dissolved overnight. We can argue that Apple's anti-repair policies and anti-user-customization policies are their own evils, sure, but at least my phone works for its core tasks, and works phenomenally well at that. My deGoogled Android phones were mostly hobbled together piles of "it sometimes works, as long as I don't look at it too funny". This tradeoff was fine for fully owning my data and being able to install absolutely anything I wanted on my phone. With arbitrary APK installation disappearing, and unlocked bootloaders to install a less hostile fork of Android becoming such a rarity these days, I may as well at least not fear looking at my phone the wrong way when the moon is in alignment with the wrong star.
Source: about 12 years of Android usage (11 of those on unlocked bootloaders and custom ROMs, ~6? of those deGoogled) -> iPhone 16e.
For the first half, custom ROMs were a massive boost to the experience, but I never really bothered after 2018; You had to install so much of google's stuff to get anywhere near proper experience that it just wasn't worth it, and even then many apps were starting to throw a fit when they detected a rooted device.
And at the same time, the stock android experience from most vendors was now good enough. I didn't even check custom ROM compatibly for my last Android two purchases (both Samsung). But it was nice to have the option of rooting and maybe finding/making a custom ROM Samsung removed that in their last update to One UI :(
For me it's the data-hoovering. I don't want Samsung (or Google, or Xiaomi, or whoever) background services phoning home my location every few seconds, or being able to uniquely track my device across apps, etc.
Once my ability to run a "background spyware-less" Android device went away, so did my willingness to put up with the negative sides of the usability tradeoff.
Apple probably sends some telemetry home, but at least their business model doesn't depend on knowing the exact Pantone color of the food I ate for dinner to market a matching wall paint to me.
Edit to add: oh, yeah, you mentioning 3P apps complaining if they detected root or MicroG reminds me of many a horrible night of debugging. Ugh. What a mess.
> You had to install so much of google's stuff to get anywhere near proper experience that it just wasn't worth it
What was it? Personally, the only thing I miss from stock Android is the Google Wallet/Pay/Wallet. (I do use microG to get push notifications and embedded maps working.)
Apple already have a huge chunk of the ad pie and are growing all the time. Dont think Apple are keeping you safe from ads and all the profiling of your behaviour that involves.
Apple are still far less reliant on advertising than google; They take far stricter stances against apps tracking users than google; And they actually let me an Adblock extension (or any other extension) in Safari.
Apple is not some magic solution to the question of on-device privacy. But compared to Android, the improvement is night and day.
Android has been a brutal disappointment on this front since the day it launched. Sure, you could hack various devices and spend too much time on xda-developers and get custom ROMs, but if you compare that to the openness of even a stock Windows PC it's an absolute joke. Android was supposed to be the open Linux phone, when I bought my HTC G1 full of hope; turned into an inferior iPhone wannabe with worse performance and a low quality walled garden that keeps most people in without keeping the trash out.
yes and Apple does it for the 30% lock-in. Apple does it to protect their ecosystem. Apple also does not care about their customers, their developers, their suppliers or their employees. Closed systems do not help the populous. This is about money, captive audience and subscription revenues.
Yes, and this is the reason that many of us have not, and will not, ever buy an Apple product. They are the ultimate technodictators, and their products are only for people who like to trade their freedom for moderate convenience.
This may be the largest AI-generated codebase right now, by a lot. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.
Frontier AI software development still falls short in the design/architecture department, in my recent experience. Though it's pretty impressive at making "working" code.
This being a fairly direct conversion from one language to another, even keeping the same interfaces across files, means the architecture is already in place.
The detailed test coverage is also very helpful for Claude. But even detailed testing can't cover every edge case.
So my questions are:
How well did Claude do on the edge cases?
And how maintainable will this codebase be going forward?
> This may be the largest AI-generated codebase right now, by a lot.
I'm sure there's lots of other large scale applications of AI, just not many/any projects that are open source and so high profile - with the changes being done so far.
Personally, in the past 3 months I've shipped about 2.3M lines of a legacy project migration, though the new codebase is Java + Oracle ADF because of reasons™ and instead of being an interesting codebase, it's more forms heavy and essentially acts as a front end for a large Oracle instance, think more CRUD than application runtime (with an upsetting amount of XML).
The difference also is that it wasn't migrated by using AI on every file, but rather dumped the DB schema into JSON, and converted the old form contents to a YAML intermediate format that describes what's in the forms and have been iterating ever since of creating code that generates code - basically AI assisted development of a codegen solution + AI assisted sidecars that get merged with the generated code based on markers, when something can't be automated that way and often times also AI controlled browser based testing (since Playwright is in the cards for everything, but not yet).
Seems to be going pretty okay so far, will probably take months more of iteration and fixes, currently the automated testing is taking a while because let me tell you - not only Oracle ADF is shit, but so is WebLogic, like fuck I'd be so closer to being done if I was allowed to pick Python + HTMX or even Java + Thymeleaf. That's still better than a team spending a year on the migration and getting like 10% of the way there.
Obviously there's no more details to publicly share, but the overall vibe is clear: as long as you can test any changes, you can iterate faster than without AI - and the code ends up being more readable that colleagues would often write. The problem is that people would squint at the suggestion of 100% test coverage previously so most code is even written in a way that is straight up not testable (and often nothing is decoupled from the framework properly and tests take way too long, both time and resources).
Couldn't this be done on proprietary software as well? Have an agent fuzz an interface (any type) for every bit of functionality and document it. Then have it build based on the document?
