Are there any alternative mobile OSes actively developed? I remember Ubuntu Touch was the thing and something from Firefox, but not sure if they are continued?

A year ago I built a React Native Android app for my wife called "Pimp daddy", which she uses to track her earnings as an independent contractor.

The whole concept is meant to poke fun at the idea of me "checking up on her" (I file her tax returns) and the entire theme is 80s pimp styled.

Every time she submits something, she'll get a random pimp remark, like "Go get that money for me, girl!". She just rolls her eyes and ignores it, but it's what made it fun for me to work on it.

Edgy stuff like that could jeopardize my account in the near future. It might just be security now, but an automated "naughty words detector" will be an obvious next step.

I doubt I will invest any more time in hobby app development if I have to deal with some humorless overbearing watchdog telling me what I can and cannot install on my own device. Very sad to see Android following Microsofts anti power user direction.

If you leave under a dictatorship you definitely don't want to reveal your identity to develop and distribute an app that fights the government.

Given the apple v epic ruling about in payment commision outside the app store, I don't understand this. I assume Google would get the same ruling if they tried what apple did, so why bother with walling off if you can't get paid?

At least with 3p app stores they could have Gpay if the app developer wanted to, but now they will be pissed and can't build a 3p app anyway since users can't install it via 3p app stores.

I think the main ask should not be limited to android/ios but similarly to the rules and regs of previous decades around agressive interop and standardisation. Asks for piecemeal carveouts whenever a monopoliist tightens the noose allows the can to be kicked downn the road when the outrage has subsided and allows for entrenchment of the status quo by stealth. Chipping away until the stated goal is reached. Just like the car/gas monopolies were not alowed to get away with locking users into their own cartels - similar efforts should (but probably wont) be taken to preserve the ability of users to do with their devices as they see fit.

Please, just give users the ability to say whether they want this "extra safety" control on. (If it even is extra safety, but whatever.)

If they don't, they can sideload, and use F-Droid, and etc.

And then we can debate whether it should be default on, or default off, and how hard it should be to turn off.

Remember when Apple removed the signature of the dev of iTorrent, distributed via an 'alternative' app store?

Exactly the same.

GAFAM are controlling what you can and cannot install on your computer.

It's time for a broader law that goes beyond what is in the DMA (bootloader, OS, etc...).

in https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/09/lets-talk-... install an app via adb is not affected, seems that means the wrapper software of adb will prosper.

It is a story I heard way too often. Big Tech creates something which is so convenient, you don't want to miss it. Then Big Tech breaks that something, makes it more expensive or uses any other means of rent-seeking just pissing of its customers. We as consumers are by far the biggest lobbying-group, but nobody really gives an f. I'm trying my way with /e/OS but thats not for everybody. It also shows me how deeply dependencies on google services are woven into the whole ecosystem - even on open source apps.

The idea of offering something for free then later deliberately restricting and or reducing its scope after securing enough takers to maximize benefits and advantages for those making the offer ought to be unlawful as they are knowingly and deliberately manipulating human nature. Those who accept such seemingly appealing offers often end up disadvantaged or harmed. And here with Google's latest Android edict we have yet another instance.

Manipulation and deception tactics are particularly relevant in internet age and they are Big Tech's standard modus operandi because its found them to be such financially successful business models. Laws need to enacted to prevent such exploitation as it is unreasonable and unacceptable for the psyche/reasoning of ordinary citizens to be pitched against such psychological might.

As so often happens with such authoritarian and manipulative dictates, this Google edict comes wrapped in the usual paltry excuse of security. Even Blind Freddy knows this excuse to be bullshit and that the real beneficiary is Google. The time has come for Android to be decoupled completely from Google.

It's tragic that despite a monopolistic finding against Google the Law didn't recognize the fact.