this post was submitted on 29 Sep 2025
753 points (90.1% liked)
memes
17561 readers
2112 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Agreed, but is a chicken and egg problem. People won't use Linux because the apps they want don't support it and apps won't support it because most people don't use Linux. Someone will have to cave in if we want to break this stupid proprietary duopoly.
The best way is freeing Android. Android should be the "Mobile Linux". What should happen is that EU should ensure that people are allowed to side load and unlock bootloaders and that all apps are compatible with alternative ROMs. All dependencies on google play services should simply be made illegal and all apps should be fully compatible with AOSP.
If we can't get this we will spend the next 10-15 years in mobile dark ages. Mobile Linux may never get enough tracking to be supported the way desktop Linux is.
I don’t think it’ll play out that way. Manufacturers aren’t going to ditch Google. Play Store and Google certification are too valuable for them. And for small developers, most of them rely on Google’s infrastructure. If the EU decides to take that away, only big players with resources could handle their own systems, which ironically makes things less open because indies get squeezed out.
If we skip the Play Services part, the EU might push for sideloading and more openness, but realistically Play Services will remain dominant simply because it’s the easiest and most convenient option for developers. So we’ll probably end up with a halfway solution: technically more open, but practically still dependent on Google.
If we really want change, proper GNU/Linux phones need to catch up or at least run Android apps (APKs) reliably. That alone would solve 70% of the problem. The remaining 30% comes down to infrastructure and right now Google Play Services is just too polished and convenient (especially for indies who don’t care about FOSS ideals) for devs to walk away from.
If legislation is made such that eg.: in the EU phones can not be registered in the cellular network unless they are open to both normal installation of apps (sIdElOaDiNg) and being able to fully install or remove Google Services, then Google will have to deal with who would want to work and pay to get a certification that effectively blocks you from selling and operating in one or more continents.
And such legislation would be not without precedent: open phones and custom ROMs are already suffering from it.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
I will admit I'm ignorant here. What do companies use Google Play Services for? I developed some Android app and I never had to rely on Google. I just used F-Droid. Other than play store for distribution, which services provided by Google would be so hard to replace?
Location services, geofencing, connectivity sign in, banking services... basically the walls of the garden
Honestly that's not a chicken-and-egg problem. Only one party of the two in this example has the power to create or change apps, whereas people in this example, even if they would use Linux, they effectively are prevented from.
The "someone" who has to cave in is obvious.