The key question for me is whether this "advanced flow" will allow the practical use of entirely separate app stores (like F-Droid) or if they're going to throw up tons of barriers for every individual app install.
There's a second path, whereby F-Droid registers as an "alternative app store", which is a new category of app created in the fallout of Epic Games v. Google [0]. This is interesting because it applies to all regions and will necessarily need more elevated permissions than the typical REQUEST_INSTALL_PACKAGES permission used today. No idea what requirements Google will impose on such apps.
Up to what a committee of 3 people (or in the alternate district court judge James Donato) believes this means, assuming the judge approves the proposed modification to the injunction in the first place
> Google may create reasonable requirements for certification as a Registered App
Store, including but not limited to review of the app store by Google’s Android
team and the payment of reasonable fees to cover the operational costs
associated with the review and certification process. Such fees may not be
revenue proportionate.
One appointed by Google, one by Epic, one appointed by the other two. All three will be barred from private communications about any of this with any parties.
Considering this is an anti-trust suit I suspect the judge would be extremely unamused if the committee members found that "must ban NewPipe" was a reasonable requirement.
That sounds reasonable, but I doubt F-Droid can cough up the required US$1 million to pay 12 Google L7 SWEs to spend a month reviewing F-Droid once they get enough free time. I wonder if they'd require F-Droid to comply with PCI-DSS? That seems to be the trendy thing in review and certification processes, and naturally it's important for an "App Store" to have secure payments, isn't it? (Never mind that F-Droid doesn't accept payment except donations via liberapay.)
If I were designing the advanced flow, I'd require the decision to be made at phone setup time. Changing your mind later requires a factory reset.
Real sideloaders (F-Droid users, etc.) know at setup time that that's how they'll be using their phone, so it works for them. But ordinary users who are targets for sideloading malware will become a lot less attractive if attackers must convince them to wipe their phone to complete the coercive instructions.
Aliexpress has a similar approach to protect their accounts from takeovers. If you change or forget your password, all your saved payment methods are erased. This makes the account less valuable to an attacker, at the cost of a little pain to authentic account holders.
No, that's ridiculous. If I want to send an app to someone, now they have to wipe their phone to install it? That would kill installing non-Play apps far more than Google's original proposal.
I hadn't installed a non-Play Store app for something like 5 years until this year. I don't see why I should have been forced to factory reset my phone then.
Forgive my bluntness, but I hope you are never allowed on the Android team or near any significant UX decisions on any devices or apps I use or will use.
When using F-Droid, I don't think of myself as a "sideloader". I'm using an app store (F-Droid), not installing some random APKs.
(Yes, the F-Droid store app had to be "sideloaded". Once. It updates itself. If or when Google allows alternate store apps in their store app, even that would no longer be necessary.)
EU digital markets mandates that you can install apps through f-droid... but doesn't mandate that those apps don't to comply with Google's signing policy.
