Google is systematically dismantling the open Android ecosystem: forcing all developers to register with Google, slowing AOSP releases, and effectively turning Android into a walled garden. Here is what is at stake.
For one, they’re not guaranteed to work all the time since these are closed protocols and the companies change them as they please. I’m not saying that workarounds aren’t possible, just that it’s not the same as having official clients if you actually need to use these apps reliably for work for example.
If your workplace requires proprietary slop apps and won’t offer you a phone and you’re doing your best to make it work on your phone, then it seems like their problem if it’s still an issue to them
it’s not the same as having official clients if you actually need to use these apps reliably for work for example.
The web versions are official clients though and they seem pretty reliable IMO
You do realize that most people don’t care about this sort of moralizing. A small niche of users will jump through hoops to avoid platform lock in, most will not. Shaming people for using popular tools achieves absolutely nothing.
If people aren’t going to put effort into avoiding proprietary platforms, then the duopoly won’t change and nothing gets achieved there either
EDIT: Also this is about functionality not morality, proprietary platforms are functionally restrictive which is what makes them problematic in this situation
People aren’t going to put the effort in. We have abundant evidence of that given that most people still use proprietary platforms like Facebook and Twitter while the Fediverse remains niche. Unless people building alternatives are able to match the user experience, majority of people aren’t going to bother. That’s the reality.
You don’t have to convince me that they’re problematic, I’m merely pointing out that telling people to use something with reduced functionality doesn’t generally work.
“Reduced functionality” is subjective, for the average non-tech user you’re right that they’d see it as reduced functionality, but there’s also plenty of people who want a phone that they can choose what apps they can install on it and remove tracking and bloat and ads for a large number of reasons. If Google starts doing what they say they’ll do, then using a web client/wrapper for a single app on a personal phone is a minor hoop to gain much more functionality out of their device, and if organizations use a user-respecting platform like Matrix instead they don’t have to jump through any hoops. Even among non-tech users there seems to be at least some interest in free platforms, so making them more user friendly is important but proprietary apps aren’t going to make that easy so the options to focus on are mods/wrappers or freer platforms, I find it unlikely that they will support such an OS seeing how Windows phones went and defeatism isn’t going to change anything. And if the non-tech users don’t care then they don’t care.
Facebook and Twitter
For social media those sites are such shitholes that I’m actually kindof happy their users aren’t on the fediverse
I think you might be vastly overstating the number of people who want that or even understand why it’s desirable in the first place. We do, because we’re in tech and we already use a niche social media platform because we want to get off corporate ones. There’s a lot of selection bias to be aware of. The vast majority of people aren’t technical, and they don’t even think about these issues.
And I’m not arguing against trying to make things like wrappers to bridge the gap. I’m just saying that we have to keep our expectations realistic here. Look how much use Windows still gets despite being complete dog shit, and Linux being an objectively a better operating system at this point.
I think with Windows the main situation is that there’s barely any laptops that come with Linux and most people are going to use the OS their device came with until it becomes a problem for them. Unless you’re doing software development or want to mess with the internals, Windows isn’t that restrictive either in its current state. A counterpoint is iOS vs Android, where iOS is extremely restrictive making it one of two main reasons people will choose Android. I’ve met quite a few not-very-technical users who despite using proprietary OSes hate ads enough download modded apps, or even on iOS found ways to get them. If Android becomes like iOS then that will boost interest in alternatives for these people. If Motorola starts shipping devices with a freer OS option then that would also help. There’s also the type of people who are so confused by technology that you could give them a laptop with Linux and KDE and they wouldn’t realize it’s not Windows.
For one, they’re not guaranteed to work all the time since these are closed protocols and the companies change them as they please. I’m not saying that workarounds aren’t possible, just that it’s not the same as having official clients if you actually need to use these apps reliably for work for example.
If your workplace requires proprietary slop apps and won’t offer you a phone and you’re doing your best to make it work on your phone, then it seems like their problem if it’s still an issue to them
The web versions are official clients though and they seem pretty reliable IMO
You do realize that most people don’t care about this sort of moralizing. A small niche of users will jump through hoops to avoid platform lock in, most will not. Shaming people for using popular tools achieves absolutely nothing.
If people aren’t going to put effort into avoiding proprietary platforms, then the duopoly won’t change and nothing gets achieved there either
EDIT: Also this is about functionality not morality, proprietary platforms are functionally restrictive which is what makes them problematic in this situation
People aren’t going to put the effort in. We have abundant evidence of that given that most people still use proprietary platforms like Facebook and Twitter while the Fediverse remains niche. Unless people building alternatives are able to match the user experience, majority of people aren’t going to bother. That’s the reality.
You don’t have to convince me that they’re problematic, I’m merely pointing out that telling people to use something with reduced functionality doesn’t generally work.
“Reduced functionality” is subjective, for the average non-tech user you’re right that they’d see it as reduced functionality, but there’s also plenty of people who want a phone that they can choose what apps they can install on it and remove tracking and bloat and ads for a large number of reasons. If Google starts doing what they say they’ll do, then using a web client/wrapper for a single app on a personal phone is a minor hoop to gain much more functionality out of their device, and if organizations use a user-respecting platform like Matrix instead they don’t have to jump through any hoops. Even among non-tech users there seems to be at least some interest in free platforms, so making them more user friendly is important but proprietary apps aren’t going to make that easy so the options to focus on are mods/wrappers or freer platforms, I find it unlikely that they will support such an OS seeing how Windows phones went and defeatism isn’t going to change anything. And if the non-tech users don’t care then they don’t care.
For social media those sites are such shitholes that I’m actually kindof happy their users aren’t on the fediverse
I think you might be vastly overstating the number of people who want that or even understand why it’s desirable in the first place. We do, because we’re in tech and we already use a niche social media platform because we want to get off corporate ones. There’s a lot of selection bias to be aware of. The vast majority of people aren’t technical, and they don’t even think about these issues.
And I’m not arguing against trying to make things like wrappers to bridge the gap. I’m just saying that we have to keep our expectations realistic here. Look how much use Windows still gets despite being complete dog shit, and Linux being an objectively a better operating system at this point.
I think with Windows the main situation is that there’s barely any laptops that come with Linux and most people are going to use the OS their device came with until it becomes a problem for them. Unless you’re doing software development or want to mess with the internals, Windows isn’t that restrictive either in its current state. A counterpoint is iOS vs Android, where iOS is extremely restrictive making it one of two main reasons people will choose Android. I’ve met quite a few not-very-technical users who despite using proprietary OSes hate ads enough download modded apps, or even on iOS found ways to get them. If Android becomes like iOS then that will boost interest in alternatives for these people. If Motorola starts shipping devices with a freer OS option then that would also help. There’s also the type of people who are so confused by technology that you could give them a laptop with Linux and KDE and they wouldn’t realize it’s not Windows.
You do realize that no vendor is going to sell a phone with an OS that can’t run popular apps most people expect right?
My locked down legacy device thanks you. Please buy me a better one so I can migrate.