Answering questions about Android developer verification

Perceived loss of device ownership and openness

• Many see verification as Google asserting the right to decide what runs on user hardware, even outside Play Store.
• Strong sentiment that this erodes the core differentiator of Android vs iOS: the ability for owners to run arbitrary code.
• Some argue that for average users this freedom was never a conscious factor, but power users consider it fundamental.

ADB sideloading exception and fears of future lock‑down

• Blog post clarifies: building from source and installing via adb remains allowed without verification.
• Several commenters view this as a temporary loophole and expect adb installation to be restricted or policed by Play Protect later.
• Others push back that there’s no explicit evidence of such plans, accusing “slippery slope” arguments of being speculative.

Impact on third‑party app stores and alternative channels

• Big concern for F-Droid and other independent stores that sign apps themselves; verification and Play Protect could effectively block them.
• Non‑Play AOSP devices and custom ROMs may technically sidestep Google’s policy, but commenters note:
  • Google can still pressure OEMs via Play certification requirements.
  • Banking/DRM apps already use integrity APIs to exclude such devices.

Security rationale vs centralization of power

• Supportive voices frame ID verification as analogous to professional licensing (drivers, doctors, engineers) and necessary for malware deterrence.
• Critics reply that:
  • Google’s own store is still full of harmful apps, so this looks more like control than safety.
  • “Malicious” can be stretched to include politically or commercially unwanted apps.
• Debate over a neutral umbrella org to certify/sign apps instead of Google, with concerns about revocation risk and resourcing.

Comparisons with other platforms

• Opponents argue this moves Android toward iOS‑style control, making it the second major platform where users can’t simply “run what they want.”
• Some note Windows/macOS use warnings and notarization, but still ultimately allow unsigned apps; Android’s new approach is viewed as a harder block.

Developer reactions and shifts to alternatives

• Multiple long‑time Android developers say this “killed” their interest in handset/app development, pushing them toward Linux, drivers, or alternative OSes.
• Alternative ecosystems mentioned: GrapheneOS, Lineage, postmarketOS, Sailfish, Linux phones—though many concede none are yet mainstream‑viable.
• Some argue this change mostly formalizes what “professional” Android devs already do (Play accounts, real IDs) and mainly affects hobbyist and niche distribution.

Regulation, antitrust, and power concentration

• Comments link this to broader worries about Google’s dominance (Android, Chrome, YouTube) and call for structural separation or forced divestitures.
• Others note EU/DMA‑style regulation likely won’t stop this, since “security” is an acceptable justification under current rules.