Slashdot Mirror
Google 'Experts' To Screen Android Apps For Banned Content
An anonymous reader writes Google has announced that it will start an official human-based screening process for all of the apps featured in its Google Play store, in a bid to "better protect the community" and "improve the app catalogue." The search giant revealed yesterday that a "team of experts" would be reviewing apps and all updates offered across the Google Play platform for those which violate Google's developer policies. The team will also give direct feedback to developers on what they need to do in order to fix their apps before they can be listed on the Store. A dedicated review page will allow developers to gain further "insight into why apps were rejected or suspended," as well as offering them the opportunity to "easily fix and resubmit their apps" for those who have violated minor regulations.
So far, I'm unimpressed with their interest in explaining and allowing corrections of minor violations. The AdMob defaults include tons of offensive advertising and you're prohibited from observing them in your testing by their T.O.S. Fixing the AdMob settings is apparently not sufficient to get Google to lower your app's content rating once the mistake has been made, not that they'll actually discuss it with you.
Hmmm. Sounds like Google is moving toward the concept of a Curated Collection.
Wonder where they would have gotten THAT Idea...?
So this is telling me that the apps that Google "Features" currently are not inspected or analyzed by any humans before they become featured. "Featured," to my way of thinking, means recommended. So, currently, are algorithms recommending apps, not people? And if so, how long before algorithms recommend movies, books, music? (Currently, Wikibooks notes that "Featured books are books that the Wiki community believes to be the best . . .")
Might as well face it I'm addicted to data.
But we should believe they can make a driverless car.
So will alleged conent owners begin sending DMCA requests now, and hold Google responsible? This is a two way street, it could end in a lot of legitimate apps being held hostage.
Twinstiq, game news
I wish Google had taken a different road:
- help users understand permissions (e.g. Internet + SDcard = app could upload your private pictures to a remote server)
- users get scared of apps with too many permissions
- apps request few permissions
Instead they entered a vicious cycle:
- apps request more permissions
- simplify the displayed permission list
- apps request even more permissions
and now we're at a stage where apps request tons of permissions they don't need, and Google needs to manually check that each app doesn't abuse the permissions that they request but don't need. Ridiculous.
there is a lot of crap software that is really low quality that could possibly be spyware malware, trojans for data-mining for identity theft for credit card fraud, i really dont trust google android because of the low quality crapware on Google Play, it all needs to be filtered for quality and malware and signed so every consumer will know it has not been tampered with
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
I have a rooted android phone and I install programs etc on it all the time that aren't provided or approved by google.
In the long run, if android is to become a real operating system that must be a significant element of the android software ecosystem.
Walled gardens are fine for those that need them but they are of limited value to those capable of getting more from their machines.
This attempt by google to weed their garden is fine... it does not matter. So long as I can leave the garden entirely and get what I want... it matters little what is permitted inside the garden or not.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
Indubitably.
You don't even need to root Android devices to install programs from outside Google Play. There's a check under Settings - Security to allow installation from sources other than Google's repositories.
I find it troubling that Google wants to dictate what we can and cannot install on our own portable computers. Yes, I realize we can in install things from outside their app store, but, it puts those outside apps at a huge disadvantage. Google has also, many times, showed us it will delete apps for sketchy reasons. Their more open market is the main reason I use android over apples bullshit.
Hee Hee Hee, Ha Ha Ha, Ho, ho...
Tee Hee...
This is truly priceless.
I find it troubling that Google wants to dictate what we can and cannot install on our own portable computers. Yes, I realize we can in install things from outside their app store, but, it puts those outside apps at a huge disadvantage. Google has also, many times, showed us it will delete apps for sketchy reasons. Their more open market is the main reason I use android over apples bullshit.
I don't get what you are complaining about. Having read TFA I did not sounds to me as if Google was planning to foist this down the throat of third party app stores. They just want to reduce the vast piles of what is quite frankly digital refuse that's cluttering up the Play Store. So even if Google turns the Play Store into 'Walled Garden Light (TM)' you can still side-load malware laden apps from questionable sources and if that doesn't float your boat any Tom, Dick and Harry can still set up an app store of their own with no walls and no quality checking (but hopefully at least a basic attempt at filtering out malware). Isn't that the great advantage of Android? Even with a fence around the Play Store it's still an open market, you can always go somewhere else.
I know... I just was adding that I had control over my machine and it does what I want.
That is the future of any platform of relevance.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
there are fads... and as I said, there is value in a walled garden but it is a crutch for the ignorant. And as the OS becomes more useful and involved such things will be of diminishing relevance especially for those like myself that are required by employment to do with it things that the makers did not initially wish.
You can circumvent the protections in iOS rather easily as well.
First rule of computer security... physical security.
If I hold it in my hand then I can control it given time. And given that the machines are the same and that others work with the same problem, all that need happen is that one of us break through and then share the solution.
Most security systems fall in this way in mere hours after release. The only ones that last longer only do so because no one really cares.
I have some experience with it. You can value my opinion as you will. We're all equals on the internet after all.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
I'm not clueless, I'm indifferent.
I said it didn't matter. I don't care. You say their walled garden is very hard to manage and maintain? Okay... but why do I care? I don't stay in the garden.
I am largely disinterested in the whole concept of it actually. It is unmanagable...
Because one is ignorant, one must either accept only a limited selection of choices from a trusted third party or risk exposure to predators of various stripes.
On desktop operating systems it is generally understood that the price of ignorance is risk. That is why they get viruses and malware and their identities stolen.
On the smartphones the understanding is that the price of ignorance is limited choices.
If one is not ignorant, then one need not concern themselves with such things.
So you see... I said "it is irrelevant"... Such things are imaginary barriers that have no material existence.
This is nothing.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
As a developer who has had to deal with these motherfuckers for the past 4 years... Fuck Google and their fuckwit android team.
They are evil, lying, exploitative, and incompetent shitbags.
there is value in a walled garden but it is a crutch for the ignorant.
That is a very narrow viewpoint.
The users you dismiss with a wave of the hand as "ignorant", just so happen to comprise everyone who doesn't post regularly on places like Slashdot or Stack Overflow, etc. In other words, about 10,998,999,000 out of the 11,000 000,000 or so people on the Planet.
Anyone, from casual users to hardcore techies, who want to (gasp) actually use their phones instead of fucking around with rooting are just *BEGGING* for a curated app store to stem the flow of crapware and malware so that they can find good apps. The first of the phone OS giants that figures out the right balance will be rolling in (even more) obscenely ludicrous piles of money from the increase in app sales.
This. Exactly. This.
One step at a time. You can't build the walled garden until you lay the foundation.
Wow! I must have overslept!
I'm not sure what you find funny.
Required reading for internet skeptics
But that's the wrong approach.
You're a iOS users, so you're well-aware of how much absolute crap has found it's way in to the App Store. That's not to criticize Apple, there's crap in every OS's store, Google, Microsoft, BlackBerry, Amazon, even Mozilla have "curated" marketplaces full of garbage -- and the cream rarely seems to float to the top.
We've tried the monolithic do-everything marketplace. All we got was the great app-count war and more fart-apps than I can reasonably estimate. What I'd like to see is a lot of smaller, preferably community-driven, stores. If I have a special interest in waffles, I could use the Waffle Aficionado's store to find a small selection of highly-recommended waffle apps. If I like candy-themed match-three games, I could use the Triple Candy Club's store to fuel my addiction.
An open platform, supporting a variety of marketplaces, would be a huge win for the consumer. This is possible on Android, if you change a setting, BB is a bit more locked down, as you need to have your apps signed and connected to your computer even after switching to developer mode, but it's still a possibility. It's obviously seamless on FirefoxOS (like it used to be on BB). Vendors can even distribute their apps directly from their website.
So why aren't we doing this? There are already alternative app stores for Android, why haven't we seen any specialty stores?
Required reading for internet skeptics
>. If one is not ignorant, then one need not concern themselves with such things.
You seem like the type of person who appreciates good information. Here's something I found interesting. It turns out that the people "ignorant" about computers are at significantly LOWER risk of exploits than those who work in IT, and the highest risk are programmers.
The highest amount of _damage_ is executives, but IT workers and programmers get hit more often, not less. I suspect it's because we a) install a lot more software, like VNC, open source stuff that occasionally is distributed with trojan attached, etc. b) muck about with admin privileges, allowing exceptions in our firewalls and such, and possibly c) have an inflated sense of security we attribute to our knowledge. I'm not sure of those reasons are correct, but statistically we do get exploited more often.
Wow! I must have overslept!
LOL! That's what I get for not checking, first!
You're a iOS users, so you're well-aware of how much absolute crap has found it's way in to the App Store. That's not to criticize Apple, there's crap in every OS's store, Google, Microsoft, BlackBerry, Amazon, even Mozilla have "curated" marketplaces full of garbage -- and the cream rarely seems to float to the top.
So now you want to somehow have a Store that only let's the "good" apps in?
Talk about a Walled Garden!!! And whose "taste" are we pleasing? The Curators'? No, that would be too restrictive. Oh wait! I know! Let's let the People who have downloaded the App "rate" it somehow!
Oh, wait...
See the problem?
Real? It's not fake. Number one OS for total users.
Yes !
Also I demand that LinuxMint stops restricting what goes in their official repositories ! I demand that my linux desktop gives me the same spyware experience that my windows-using friends have !
Curating software is always evil regardless of how or why it's done and whether or not I am limited to what the curators recommend.
I am not as it happens. I do sometimes go outside the official mint repositories, for example I installed VirtualBox and PlayOnLinux from their own repositories as those update faster and since I use these programs so heavily I want them to always be on bleeding edge releases.
But I knew the risks doing so, I know that a release there hasn't been tested on my distro - might break something.
Google is just starting to do the same thing LinuxMint does. Their version of PoL is often a few releases behind - because they test it specifically against their software set on more hardware for a purpose.
I have the means to get it sooner elsewhere.
I have access to any program that runs on the OS regardless of the fact that Mint devs don't host all of them.
Google does not, to my mind,appear to be doing anything differently here. Other app stores exist, you can still get an entirely custom built version of the OS from third-parties like cyanogenmod. You can get one with no google apps at all (including no playstore).
Nothing is restricting what users can do, google is ONLY limiting what google does here.
That's not a bad thing, and it's nothing like what the apple appstore does.
The summary is a bit sensationalist and trying to make it sound similar but it really isn't.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
I'm with you.
And then my provider installed a banking app (called "proximenu") as a "Service" on my new Jolla.
I feel so stupid now with my smartphone...
>Linux Mint is hardly the first, nor the most prominent Linux distro to do this. Debian, Ubuntu, Arch, etc... all do this.
Oh I know, I wasn't suggesting it is - I even spoke of the long history of this in another comment. I was merely using it as an example based on my day to day experience.
>The big difference is, Linux distros usually (almost always) do it for stability/security reasons,
Something google has been lax about, I hope that will improve with this.
> as a compromise distros also will host and maintain unofficial repos, AUR on Arch, testing/unstable on Debian, etc...
I mentioned that in my other comment as well - not all of them do, but even if they don't nothing stops you from using third-party repos or even compiling from source or even installing binaries yourself.
>Google has a well known, highly publicized history of pulling apps for terribly sketchy reasons
True, though it's better than apple's (by a long margin) but again - the fact is, they may control their appstore but they don't prevent sideloading or other marketplaces from operating. It would take a massive redesign to try to do so - including removing the ability to root phones by any means (which even apple couldn't manage) and to install custom android builds - many of the phone companies have tried to make that hard (but with limited success) and google has, so far at least, actively encouraged it. The licensing of the large amount of non-google code in android would make such a change very difficult and there is almost no profit potential there - it's rarely wise to remove the major thing differentiating your product from competitors. I'm not saying it never happens or can't happen - I was a happy Playstation customer before the combined rootkit scandal and removing the linux support feature from the PS3s which shipped with it - it drove me to become an xbox customer instead. Sometimes companies do evil and stupid things, but I am saying we have no evidence that, that is what's happening HERE.
> One well known example is Adblock.
Which proves my point - I am running the latest adblock on my cyanogenmod phone right now. Removing it from the playstore had zero impact on my ability to do so.
>You can't compare OSS projects -- which go out of their way to make sure unapproved software is easily accessible -- with Google who is leveraging its position as the pre-bundled app market.
I think I can. Being the preloaded default isn't a limitation, adding limitations would upset me - making it hard to do so would upset me. There was a lot MORE than merely preloading IE wrong with microsoft during the antitrust case. It was preloading IE AND corrupting java AND making IE capable of features that other companies were blocked from adding to their browsers and..and..and..
Now does this have potential to be abused ? Sure, but we haven't got any evidence it's BEING abused - at least not yet. This has apparently been in place for months and I've seen no difference in my playstore line up. Like most people these days, I also only run a very small selection of apps in practice. The days when we loaded lots of them are over, these days people install things they use and only things they use.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
It baffles me that we allow these things to happen on phones. This would be almost unthinkable in the Windows or Linux environments. Is it because we use 'app' and 'market'? Does that somehow make it ok? Could you imagine if MS introduced the 'Approved Programs You Can Install On Your Computer!' store? Would be laughed/sued out of existence.
It would be wonderful if they'd review apps for needless privacy intrusion. Why does a radio player app need to access my camera? Why does a weather app need to access my contacts? I can't count the number of apps that I uninstalled because the new update wants nonsensical accesses....
Anyway, I know that's not going to happen.
-Styopa
I wonder what else in your posts you've not checked and attempted to pass off as accurate...
Being able to move from store to store and install what you want, or even install from no store at all, is not a walled garden by any definition.
For android there exists pornographic games. To say nothing of games like Grand Thief Auto that let you go on shooting rampages after bouncing on hookers.
I really don't know what you're talking about.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
A general operating system should be more dynamic than what android is at this time.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
I wonder what else in your posts you've not checked and attempted to pass off as accurate...
I'm sure you will let me know...
The iOS developer program has a $99 per year fee plus 30 percent of sales, and only developers with a paid-up license can run code they compile on a device they own.
The Xbox Live Indie Games developer program had a $99 per year fee plus 30 percent of sales, and only developers with a paid-up license could run code they compile on a device they own. And it launched prior to the App Store.
Depends on your phone. Mine came rooted. I bought it that way from the manufacturer.
But I get your issue. I increasingly think the ROM of the phones should be removable. A micro SD card or something. That way anyone can install the desired software simply by pulling the SD card and writing directly to the card bypassing everything else.
That also would protect nicely from software attacks on the phone. Installing something wouldn't bypass the security but pulling the SD card and overwriting the rom would.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
if you recall the original announcements for iPhone specifically called for it to run only Web 2.0 applications through Safari.
If Apple's original plan for iPhone resembled Mozilla's current plan for Firefox OS, then why did it take so long for Safari for iOS to support things like uploads from picture and video libraries using <input type="file">, or JavaScript access to the accelerometer, or JavaScript JIT, or WebGL?
Its sloppy.
What they want are white lists given that black list based security has failed.
I appreciate their problem. But the appropriate way to deal with it is by having something very much like anti virus only instead of looking for bad software it looks for good software.
That is the security of the future.
The walled garden is a variation on that theme but not a very good one.
One of the most distasteful things about it is that it attempts to monopolize the software distribution system. And google or apple presumes to say what is and is not acceptable software.
If you want horse porn simulators that contain no malware or viruses then who is Apple or google to say you can't have it?
They only do that because they are monopolizing the distribution system and in doing that they become embarrassed when children type in something for "horsies" and get horse porn. That is an argument for google to not monopolize the distribution system.
By all means, verify if given APK's are valid etc. But don't be the one and only source for such things.
In any case, you say you like it?
I wouldn't take it away from you. Where did I say that I would take it away from you?
I said it was irrelevant. To you... you may love it... but it still doesn't matter. The evolution of the system is going to come outside that garden. It already is as we speak. Most of the really cool programs for android cannot be found in the marketplace. And the remaining cool apps tend to get banned by google. I can give you a list if you like.
But it doesn't matter. Those that know... know. And those that don't know have opinions based on ignorance... and so their opinions aren't especially meaningful. Are there great numbers of these people? Sure... who said that mattered?
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
Applications need enough permissions to download and display advertisements. This is ultimately because Android devices launched in countries without Google Checkout, creating an expectation of free.
Could you imagine if MS introduced the 'Approved Programs You Can Install On Your Computer!' store?
Microsoft could even call it the "Windows Phone Store" or the "Windows Store for Windows RT" or the "Xbox Live Marketplace".
So now you want to somehow have a Store that only let's the "good" apps in?
Talk about a Walled Garden!!!
"A walled garden" is singular. Narcc was describing "walled gardens", plural. There are multiple big-box stores that sell decorative plants; in my era, these include at least Walmart, Meijer, and Lowe's. There are also multiple locally owned greenhouses. All have walls, and all have plants. Or you can grow your own plants from seeds on your own fenced-in lot. Likewise, there are multiple app stores for Android, and you can compile your own apps from source.
I don't know how Google plans to implement human review, but on iOS, the standard practice is to give Apple a user account with which to test basic functionality.
Why does a weather app need to access my contacts?
For the "How's the weather where mom lives?" feature.
Google Play's origins were the Android Market, which was announced in August 2008 and launched in October 2008 , but that doesn't preclude your statement that the Apple App Store came first.
your offense does not mean the statement is inaccurate...
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
See the problem?
Indeed I do.
What I'm advocating here is a plurality of stores, not a single store, preferably community driven.
We've tried the walled-garden approach. Both users and developers suffered. It didn't work, but that doesn't mean there isn't value in curation or in having a known, trusted, vendor. That's why I'd like to see more stores, with specialized interest. Crap app developers can still have their wal-mart style marketplaces, we'll just have other, better, options.
Required reading for internet skeptics
This isn't about app curation or walled gardens. For a long time Google has been removing apps from the app store, flagging developer accounts, and in some cases killing entire developer accounts. The process has been completely one sided with small developers having little recourse and very little understanding as to why their app was banned. They're only recourse was to guess as to what was wrong, make a change to the app, and upload it under a new id (losing all the comments, ratings, history, users) of the app. This all at the risk they they were wrong about why the app was banned in which case it would just get banned again bringing them closer to having their developer account shut down. This appears to be a move to help those developers, who have been really screaming about this for some time. I hope that's what this is.
It's primarily a security issue. Apple does not want malware on users' iDevices.
Blacklists don't work, because malware can appear far faster than it can be found and blacklisted. AV programs don't work. The best way found to have security is whitelisting software. If the user has an easy way of bypassing the whitelist, then the software isn't effectively whitelisted, because users can be talked into allowing things. It's been amply demonstrated that users will click through any impediment to seeing the dancing pigs.
The whitelist doesn't have to hold against people like you and me. It has to hold in general, for people who are not all that knowledgeable about computers.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
An open platform, supporting a variety of marketplaces, could be a disaster for the consumer. Right now, Apple does a good job of keeping serious malware out of the App Store, and hence people's iOS computers. A variety of marketplaces would include some that provided free malware with their apps, and they could cause a good deal of harm.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
As far as sex and violence goes in entertainment, I'd like to see more sex and less violence. I really don't like it that harming people is more offensive to a lot of people than loving them. I'd rather have an environment where a bullet hole is considered less acceptable than a nipple.
So, I'm not impressed by GTA.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
It's an is for phones and at a pinch, tablets. There is nothing to be gained in making it general purpose. Jack of all trades = master of none.
A store where you can find absolutely every app for the platform is far more use than having to search a multitude of competing stores.
Not really. It becomes difficult to find good apps, as they're lost in the flood of terrible apps. The number of so-called "zombie apps" on iOS was over 75% sometime last year. It's become a crap-shoot for both users and developers.
I'd like to see specialty stores, preferably curated by communities. Great apps are far less likely to get lost, and crap apps are far less likely find a home there at all.
Apple adds something like 60,000 apps per month, which easily explains the sever quality control issues and persistent discoverability problems. Smaller, community driven, specialty stores won't have that problem
.
Besides, competition is always good for consumers.
Required reading for internet skeptics
The very nature of a smart phone or a tablet rejects this notion.
Do they come preinstalled with 4 basic functions and that is all they do?
or are they roughly as capable as similliarly powerful desktop computer?
There's no reason to limit them.
If the bumpkins only want to use one of the 4 preinstalled basic features that is fine. It is a little like only playing Microsoft Solitaire but whatever.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
That's your own opinion. I prefer more violence and less sex personally.
I don't like sex in my entertainment really at all. But I do like action movies.
Think of Game of Thrones for an example of why violence is often more relevant to the plot than is sex. Game of thrones has a reason for violence. There are power struggles. People die. There are battles, there are assassinations, there are duals, etc.
But what is the point of vagina, boob, dick scenes? They don't accomplish anything for the plot. It is just HBO's way of saying "hey we can show naughty bits on our network!"
And it doesn't really accomplish anything besides that.
Which is in many cases the issue with sex in media in general. It isn't relevant to the plot unless the plot is about sex for some reason.
violence is a much more interesting plot device. violence is much more useful as a dramatic element.
So for my money... less sex and more violence. Sex just isn't interesting IN A STORY. Sex is a fun thing to participate in but its less fun to hear about.
Where as violence is not so fun to be involved in but it is very entertaining to hear about it.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
I wasn't arguing against white lists. I'm a big fan of them actually. But I don't like the implementation of them through a walled garden application distribution system.
I'd prefer something that worked more like anti virus in that on execution, the program would be checked against a database of approved code, and if it was in the approved code list it would be allowed to run.
I don't think either apple or google should be in the business of saying what people should and shouldn't be doing with their devices.
Let anyone release software for the platforms and distribute it on their own websites or where ever. All they have to do is submit their software to apple or google to be checked for security compliance.
Have different grades of checking. Have a free automated check that most applications will get. And then have a more exhaustive human eye ball check that costs some money to get the company to actually do.
So users can decide how dangerously they want to live.
There's no need for the files to be hosted on google or apple's servers.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
You're only considering functions and power. The limiting factors on phone OSs are UI, considering the limitations of screen size and input capabilities. And the user attachment time - Phone OSs concentrate on activities that take seconds, desktops on on activities that take minutes to hours.
There's no problem with having the kernel and lower levels general purpose. But trying to make the UI/shell that is a fools errand.
No, I'm considering UI as well.
As to screen size, that isn't a big problem. I have good eyes can test on remote deskop on my phone because my phone has a 1080p screen. All that you need to do is have eyes that can pick details out. And the pinch zoom feature in all such programs is entirely sufficient if I really want to get a better look at something which is rare.
I remote into machines all the time with my phone. It isn't a big deal.
The only input limitations that are irritating is that sometimes it is faster and more accurate to have a mouse and typing with a keyboard is always faster. However, that doesn't mean the programs on the phone have to be simplistic. It merely means it is annoying to interface with it sometimes. I have a tiny bluetooth keyboard and mouse. I prefer to keep them with me instead of a laptop.
If I need to write some long emails for example, then I want my keyboard out because typing it all out using the onscreen keyboard is a pain in the ass. I only use the bluetooth mouse sometimes when I'm remoting into a machine and I need a bit more dexterity.
Anyway, those work perfectly and instantly on android.
You connect a mouse through bluetooth or an OTG cable and you instantly have a mouse. Same thing with a keyboard. Both run on rechargable AAA batteries. I keep a little pouch of them in my backpack and when I've used them up, I put the spent ones in a recharger. It is more convenient then using the ones that recharge in the devices.
Anyway, I've run some pretty sophisticated programs on my phone. I've run some corporate databases. I've run some pretty impressive emulators.
One thing that always annoyed me about my phone was how shitty the games are for it. I'm a gamer. I know what a shitty game is and all the android AND iOS games are bullshit. So I use emulators.
I play PS1 games, old PC games, SNES, NeoGeo, N64 games. Basically anything you can emulate on a PC is something I play on my phone. Obviously you need a gamepad to do that properly. I just use a cheapo USB gamepad and an OTG cable. Instant gamestation.
These little computers are quite capable. See them for what they can do not for what lay people use them for. They don't know any better.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
...isn't a big problem. I have good eyes...have eyes that can pick details out....pinch zoom...input limitations...irritating...sometimes it is faster and more accurate to have a mouse and typing with a keyboard is always faster... it is annoying to interface with it... I have a tiny bluetooth keyboard and mouse... I want my keyboard out because typing it all out using the onscreen keyboard is a pain in the ass... I need a bit more dexterity...
Take out the excuses, and you do see all the problems.
These little computers are quite capable.
They are absolutely amazing. And part of that amazingness is they have UIs tailored to the size and the I/O available. As general purpose computer's they'd be crap.
Indeed. Airplanes don't work unless you design them to be aerodynamically stable.
Take that that excuse and air travel doesn't work.
Boats only work if they're buoyant. Take out that excuse and they don't work.
I see the problem. It however has solutions. It isn't an "excuse" an excuse is an attempt to shift blame. I am not shifting anything. I am solving it.
A solution is not an excuse.
You don't like my perspective on the matter? That is fine. Don't straw man me or attempt to twist my position. I am as rational as a slide rule. Fallacies do not work on me. At all. Attempting them is like trying to play tricks on a man that can see that would only work on a blind man. I'm not blind. I see what you're doing.
Good day.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.