[pgeorgi]

> No one can release anything Google disagrees with on Google Play

Recent Android versions made it ever easier to install apps without using the Play Store: I have F-Droid installed and whitelisted (so no warnings every time an apk appears), which required toggling a permission switch the system pointed out to me.

As for Chrome, apparently various vendors ship their own browser as default although it seems they still have to ship Chrome as alternative.

[Dahoon]

>Recent Android versions made it ever easier to install apps without using the Play Store

Yes I'm using it myself but how is that making Google Play less of a monopoly? F-droid can't sell apps on the play store without using Google.

[pgeorgi]

> F-droid can't sell apps on the play store without using Google

"I can't sell my organic bananas at Walmart without dealing with Walmart"?

I can understand ideas that there shouldn't be a "default store" on devices. Or that Android's certification (whatever that is called) shouldn't require pre-installing the play store as only option. I may or may not agree with them.

But "I should be able to sell my wares at a store without dealing with its owner/operator" sounds strange to me.

[hedora]

Side loading is nice, but unless you can uninstall the play store and blacklist the google APIs without breaking your phone, you’re still forced to send them your data (or to switch away from Android).

So, they’re tying their market power in phone operating systems to their unrelated monopoly (duopoly?) in surveillance capitalism, and many peopfle unwillingly/unwittingly hand over their private information as a result.

If you consider the full suite of their products, you’ll find that all people that are on the internet (and some that are not) hand over such information, unwilling or not.