Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.mobile.android > #143591

Re: Paid apps

From "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>
Newsgroups comp.mobile.android
Subject Re: Paid apps
Date 2024-10-02 14:51 +0200
Message-ID <v7svskx1l4.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> (permalink)
References <lm01tcFes3sU1@mid.individual.net> <ftnvskx2ho.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> <lm4s23F6khhU3@mid.individual.net>

Show all headers | View raw


On 2024-10-02 14:19, Andy Burns wrote:
> Carlos E.R. wrote:
> 
>> some of these apps have a free version in the Play Store, and some 
>> times another one in F-Droid; but they are not the exact same one.
> 
> I gather google is moving to enforce install of apps from the play store 
> if you try to sideload them, or load them from alternate stores?

Not exactly. What I read is that you can not install one way and update 
the other. And developers can choose to block different install methods.

<https://www.xataka.com/aplicaciones/nuevo-android-duro-golpe-a-apks-instalas-app-google-play-store-no-usas>

It is in Spanish, so you need a translator tool.


*The new thing about Android is a hard blow to APKs: either you install 
the app from the Google Play Store or you don't use it*

     Play Integrity will allow the developer to verify whether or not 
the app has been installed from the Google Play Store
     The system allows you to block the use of the app until it has been 
updated from the official Android store

One of the things that has characterized, and characterizes, Android has 
been the possibility of installing applications from third-party sources 
. Simply install the APK file to have an application like WhatsApp 
working normally. But like everything in this life, there are sources 
and sources. Some are legitimate, others are not so much. An APK of 
uncertain origins can work against both the user and the developer, so 
Google Play has launched a function to put a stop to it.

The problem . There are several reasons why a user may prefer to install 
an app via APK instead of through the Google Play Store. There are as 
many reasons as there are reasons a developer can have for not doing so. 
Let's think, for example, that an installation made via APK does not 
count for the metrics in Google Play. Perhaps the user is installing an 
outdated version, not optimized for their device or, why not, a modified 
version to offer functions that, in another context, would be paid for. 
This can harm both parties involved, user and developer.

... continues on link.

> 
> Not seen it in practice, because pixels haven't been given Android 15 
> upgrades yet :-(
> 

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

Back to comp.mobile.android | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Paid apps Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2024-09-30 17:28 +0100
  Re: Paid apps Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-09-30 20:17 +0000
  Re: Paid apps VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-09-30 18:23 -0500
    Re: Paid apps Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2024-10-01 07:07 +0100
      Re: Paid apps VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-10-01 02:06 -0500
        Re: Paid apps Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-10-01 21:21 +0000
          Re: Paid apps "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-10-01 23:31 +0200
            Re: Paid apps Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-10-02 01:49 +0000
              Re: Paid apps "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-10-02 13:22 +0200
              Re: Paid apps micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2024-10-17 11:58 -0400
            Re: Paid apps Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2024-10-02 05:06 +0100
              Re: Paid apps "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-10-02 13:07 +0200
              Re: Paid apps Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-10-02 18:52 +0000
                Re: Paid apps Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2024-10-02 20:04 +0100
        Re: Paid apps Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2024-10-02 19:58 +0100
  Re: Paid apps "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-10-02 13:37 +0200
    Re: Paid apps Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2024-10-02 13:19 +0100
      Re: Paid apps "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-10-02 14:51 +0200
        Re: Paid apps Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-10-02 19:08 +0000
          Re: Paid apps Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2024-10-02 20:32 +0100
            Re: Paid apps Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-10-02 19:46 +0000
        Re: Paid apps micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2024-10-16 01:31 -0400
      Re: Paid apps Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-10-02 19:03 +0000
    Re: Paid apps VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-10-02 07:31 -0500
      Re: Paid apps "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-10-02 14:59 +0200
      Re: Paid apps Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2024-10-02 13:43 +0000
        Re: Paid apps "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-10-02 18:39 +0200
          Re: Paid apps Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-10-02 19:27 +0000
        Re: Paid apps Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-10-02 19:27 +0000
      Re: Paid apps Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-10-02 19:11 +0000
    Re: Paid apps Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-10-02 18:58 +0000
    Re: Paid apps sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2024-10-17 21:14 -0700
  Re: Paid apps Dave Royal <dave@dave123royal.com> - 2024-10-02 14:09 +0100
    Re: Paid apps "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-10-02 18:44 +0200
      Re: Paid apps Dave Royal <dave@dave123royal.com> - 2024-10-02 18:18 +0100
  Re: Paid apps Nil <rednoise9@rednoise9.invalid> - 2024-10-10 21:09 -0400

csiph-web