So long Google, and thanks for all the nudes
Mounting friction in Google Play’s app review and publishing process is pushing some developers—especially hobbyists and small teams—toward alternatives like F-Droid, web apps, or abandoning mobile development altogether. Commenters describe opaque rejections, long review delays, new testing requirements, and the risk of account bans as symptoms of a system optimized for large commercial publishers, not individuals. Many argue that because mobile app stores now function as essential infrastructure, they should face stronger antitrust action, enforceable appeal rights, and clearer rules, or be opened up to real competition in app distribution.
Play Store review process & developer experience
- Many describe the review process as “broken”: opaque rejections, long delays, inconsistent decisions, and fear of permanent account bans.
- Volume is cited as a key issue (claims of tens of thousands of submissions per day); some argue Google could afford more staff or better tools but chooses not to.
- Some suggest AI/LLM-based static analysis and tiered review by install count; others note Google already automates heavily and still struggles.
- The “unsolicited nudes screenshot” case is seen by most as emblematic of chaos; a few call for more evidence and warn against overgeneralizing from one anecdote.
- Several report similar mis-attributed screenshots or unexplained rejections in their own experience.
Hobbyist vs corporate developers
- New requirements (e.g., 12 testers for 14 days on new personal accounts) are viewed as shutting out hobby devs and favoring funded companies.
- Some argue that if you can’t find 12 testers, your app isn’t ready and gatekeeping reduces “slop.”
- Others counter that such rules are trivial to game (buy testers, publishing services), so they mainly exclude honest hobbyists.
Monopoly power, app stores, and antitrust
- Strong sentiment that Google and Apple’s control over mobile distribution is monopolistic, with side-loading hurdles and default-store power locking in dominance.
- Some argue competition from third‑party stores (Steam, Epic, F‑Droid, etc.) is possible; others insist meaningful share shifts are unrealistic without regulation.
- Proposed remedies include forced “choose your app store” screens, lower fees, and even corporate breakups and leadership bans.
Gatekeeping rationale and app safety
- One side sees strict review as necessary to prevent scams, malware, and tragedies of the commons.
- Another questions why apps need gatekept stores when websites don’t, and notes that many scams still pass review.
Regulation, due process, and platform power
- Calls for legally enforced appeal/due‑process mechanisms for app rejections and account bans, possibly via paid arbitration.
- Broader view: key digital platforms function like infrastructure, so users should have rights comparable to dealing with governments.
Alternatives & coping strategies
- Some are shifting to F‑Droid, itch.io, or web apps; others look to projects like GrapheneOS or future Linux phones.
- Practical coping: separate Google accounts for Play publishing to avoid losing personal data if banned.