Samsung Phone Users Perturbed To Find They Can't Delete Facebook (bloomberg.com)

Don't sugarcoat the turd by Opportunist · 2019-01-09 01:03 · Score: 5, Insightful

The best user experience is by definition that which is what the user wants to do. And this is obviously not it.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.

Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by grep+-v+'.*'+* · 2019-01-09 01:18 · Score: 4, Interesting

True, but like the article said, hit DISABLE not DELETE. You have a complicated device that only looks simple -- if you don't understand something, RTFM (but like where?) until you're comfortable with things.

The FB app is being kept there for your own safety and convenience -- why if it's *not* there you'd soon be ostracised by your friends. That is, the few you might have left.

Of course this is all bogus -- it takes up "zero" user space since it's kept in ROM space, and that's of course why it's unable to be deleted. (Unless you root.) But the day after the phone's released it'll need an update that lives in user data space, so all they're doing of course it forcing the app available if you would like to click on it, on purpose or by mistake. Besides, FB pays the vendor/provider so you've saved Big Bucks (entire tenths of pennies!) by having it there.

That's a really nice phone you've got there, shame if something wereN'T to happen to it.

And honest, have you talked to users? They want WHAT they want WHEN they want it HOW they want it, and when you give it to them When they want How they wanted it oops they've changed their mind and now want something else.

--
If the universe is someone's simulation -- does that mean the stars are just stuck pixels?
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-09 01:29 · Score: 5, Insightful

This is wrong at multiple levels. If it transmits anything back to FB then that is a violation.
Its stealing space/memory and the OS must be crippled in some way to prevent file by file deletion. Any services running in the background?
It cant update if it does not know the revision or language settings
Lets hope the EU stomps on yet another secret agreement where no anti-compeditive documentation has been lodged. FB shareholders should be upset too. Number of disabled images needs to go into the annual report.
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by JaredOfEuropa · 2019-01-09 01:31 · Score: 5, Insightful

If a company mentions "best experience", run like hell from their products. Little known fact: "best experience" is Mandarin for "your data is ours".

I wish these companies would behave like in the old days, when manufacturing consumer electronics meant just that: creating the best device in a certain price range, and making your money by selling it to consumers on its own merits. Sure, even back then companies tried to create silos, and some built tech into their devices to protect their other interests in the content business, but that's nothing like today. The other day I read an article on LinkedIn about data being the new gold, and boy they weren't kidding: everyone seems to want to get in on the game these days. And if FB has to pay Samsung to make their data harvesting apps preinstalled and indelible, then you can be sure that Samsung do not have your best interests in mind by allowing this.

--
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
Re: Don't sugarcoat the turd by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-09 01:48 · Score: 1, Informative

I very much doubt that the Facebook app is istored in ROM.
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-09 01:49 · Score: 1

Lots of people wants facebook, so it makes sense to sell phones with a facebook app preinstalled. There is no need to make removal impossible though. If I want to get rid of apps entirely, I should be able to. Facebook can be reinstated anytime by re-installing that app - nothing is lost in case I change my mind or sell the phone to a second hand user.
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by Ol+Olsoc · 2019-01-09 02:23 · Score: 1

The best user experience is by definition that which is what the user wants to do. And this is obviously not it.
At least the phone has a headphone jack, so no problem........
I'll just show myself out...

--
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Re: Don't sugarcoat the turd by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-09 02:23 · Score: 1

Right; he meant to say the system partition. This is the partition that Samsung controls (on Samsung devices). He was correct though that updates to the app that come from Google Play end up taking up space in the user partition. Only when Samsung issues a system update that includes a newer version of Facebook will the version in the system partition get updated.
Re: Don't sugarcoat the turd by Zontar+The+Mindless · 2019-01-09 02:27 · Score: 4, Insightful

You can have a tiny little Facebook app installed with no account.
Wanna bet?

--
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by drinkypoo · 2019-01-09 02:28 · Score: 5, Informative

Of course this is all bogus -- it takes up "zero" user space since it's kept in ROM space,
No, it is NOT. It is kept in Flash. Part of the flash is desigated as belonging to the system, and it is kept there. But that flash partition is like any other partition, it can be of arbitrary size. And it has to be bigger to accommodate additional apps, and that means there's less space available in the user partition.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re: Don't sugarcoat the turd by Ol+Olsoc · 2019-01-09 02:36 · Score: 2

It is funny that people act like you are either agreeing to share and sharing all your data with a company or nothing at all. So predictable. You can have a Facebook account and not share data with Facebook. You can have a tiny little Facebook app installed with no account.
Does Facebook have paid shills now?
Facebook is tracking you even if you don't have an account or an application.
Don't believe me? Try this:
Have a fresh shiny new account with no memberships anywhere.
Install a script blocker. One that you can look up which scripts are being blocked
Go to some popular website
Now take that list and see just who is being blocked. You'll have to look them up. Google has the decency to identify themselves, Facebook hides multiple cryptically named trackers, often several to a page. Whois is your friend. Or not.
Enjoy.

--
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by Tomahawk · 2019-01-09 02:43 · Score: 1

The best user experience is the one that generates more revenue for the company.
Unfortunately it has very little to do with the people who are using the products.
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-09 02:58 · Score: 1, Informative

It's not just FB, my Samsung S9 came preloaded with 'undeletable' Microsoft apps too. But this is nothing new, Samsung phones have came preloaded with bloat since forever.
When buying a new phone I always spend some time deleting all Samsung, Microsoft, Facebook and carrier related apps. Yes, you can delete 'undeletable' apps through ADB, without rooting the device.
pm uninstall -k --user 0
**Note** If you restore the device to factory settings all preloaded bloat comes back this only effects the user profile.
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by Opportunist · 2019-01-09 03:00 · Score: 4, Insightful

The friends I have don't have Facebook. That's one of the reasons they are my friends.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by Shotgun · 2019-01-09 03:03 · Score: 1

Huh? 1777 wasn't all that long ago.

--
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by Opportunist · 2019-01-09 03:04 · Score: 1

The only reason he's still alive is that he's not worth a second of jail time.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by Z00L00K · 2019-01-09 03:11 · Score: 5, Insightful

No, the OS isn't "enhanced", it's "bloated" with unnecessary software that may even be a security hazard.

--
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
Re: Don't sugarcoat the turd by JackieBrown · 2019-01-09 03:17 · Score: 2

Yes - because anyone that has a different viewpoint must be a paid shill.
And the topic was about the Facebook app. Not sure how your script blocker and going to the web app has anything to do with the discussion.
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by weeboo0104 · 2019-01-09 03:18 · Score: 1

True. Here is my personal experience with a Samsung Galaxy S6.
I've known social media is a sewer of personal information for a long time now, but kept using Facebook because our families are separated by Continents and my closest direct family members are 4 hours away. We post things on our Facebook walls and accepted that anything posted was public knowledge, even when restricting posts to friends and family. In December, I received a mobile data alert from Verizon that we only had 1 GB left on my data plan. This wasn't surprising since I had been commuting via train to downtown Chicago and had spent about an hour each way on YouTube for a week. What WAS surprising was when I checked what had been using the data, Facebook had used more than DOUBLE the amount of data than ALL OTHER APPS COMBINED, including YouTube. I don't check Facebook during the workday either.
My next step was to attempt to uninstall Facebook from my phone, but I was only able to disable the app. Upon doing that, the app was disabled but all updates to the app had been removed as well, so if I ever enable the app again, it will be running without any updates initially.
I'll never use Facebook again on a mobile device.

--
It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men. -Frederick Douglass
Re: Don't sugarcoat the turd by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-09 03:26 · Score: 1

Disabled apps are not a security issue as they can't run.
On the flip side, the mfg is paid to include the app and reduces the end user cost \ includes more features per dollar spent.
Considering how most consumers are price sensitive AND use Facebook (or can disable), I'm not complaining
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by chrish · 2019-01-09 03:45 · Score: 1

The 'ROM' space is just a read-only (ish) partition in the storage, so that cuts into your on-device storage space whether you're using it or not.
Are vendor updates (hahahaha, on Android?!) going to un-Disable these bundled apps for us? Nobody knows.

--
- chrish
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by ctilsie242 · 2019-01-09 04:05 · Score: 4, Informative

If you can get a Samsung phone with an unlockable bootloader (Sorry, no Snapdragon CPU phones, the main ones in the US are unlockable), the best thing to do is unlock the bootloader, and install a custom ROM or LineageOS. From there, you don't need to worry.
At the minimum, a rooted OS, so you can have a Linux firewall block all outgoing crap from junkware apps is a must.
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by Gr8Apes · 2019-01-09 04:16 · Score: 2, Informative

or just buy an iPhone, and don't worry about all this FB crap.

--
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
Re: Don't sugarcoat the turd by Gr8Apes · 2019-01-09 04:20 · Score: 1

Yes - because anyone that has a different viewpoint must be a paid shill.
And the topic was about the Facebook app. Not sure how your script blocker and going to the web app has anything to do with the discussion.
Given FBs history and Zuck's anti-social tendencies (irony...) I wouldn't put anything past FB on Android. Let's just say fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice.... FB has a long long long way to go to get back in the trusted space, and it won't happen as long as any of their C-levels are still involved
TL;DR: FB is an untrustworthy entity and Android has too many holes to trust anything installed is not behaving badly.

--
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
Re: Don't sugarcoat the turd by Ol+Olsoc · 2019-01-09 04:40 · Score: 1

Yes - because anyone that has a different viewpoint must be a paid shill.
And the topic was about the Facebook app. Not sure how your script blocker and going to the web app has anything to do with the discussion.
Well, if you aren't sure how that is applicable, allow me to explain.
AC very distinctly posted "You can have a Facebook account and not share data with Facebook. You can have a tiny little Facebook app installed with no account."
That is wrong - that is not even wrong, it's the opposite of right.
Which is why I very distinctly posted: "Facebook is tracking you even if you don't have an account or an application."
And since some folks do not understand or believe that, I offered, very distinctly, a way to prove that very fact. A fact it is.
Summary of all of this - the aarticle we are talking about is how Facebook is not removeable from smartphones - AC incorrectly posted that having no account is not sharing data. This is completely and demonstrably wrong, and I simply noted that you are sharing personal data with Facebook if you do not have an account with them.
Back to your statement:

Yes - because anyone that has a different viewpoint must be a paid shill.
Viewpoints, friend, do not invalidate facts. I'll believe his "Viewpoint" as a fact when he offers a way to prove that his phone never offers any data to Facebook. It takes some serious effort to block data sharing with them, and not having an account does not block them, and disabled FB app does not either.
Me? I can prove it does if you go to many pages on the internet, unless you kill the tracking scripts. No Facebook App needed, and no Facebook account needed. FB is tracking you You can prove it too, my example uses a laptop/desktop example, but the fundamentals apply. About the best you can do for a phone is disable javascript.

--
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Re: Don't sugarcoat the turd by JackieBrown · 2019-01-09 05:04 · Score: 1

The post was that the deleting or disabling the app made no difference. The app was the entire point of the article.
The person you accused of being a shill was not stating that Facebook doesn't track you through other means.
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by fahrbot-bot · 2019-01-09 05:04 · Score: 1

The best user experience is by definition that which is what the user wants to do. And this is obviously not it.
Furthermore, how does being unable to delete (uninstall) the Facebook app, "give the consumer 'the best' phone experience right after opening the box."? That logic may have some weight arguing for it to be pre-installed, but none with regard to being able to uninstall it.

--
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by fahrbot-bot · 2019-01-09 05:19 · Score: 4, Informative

In December, I received a mobile data alert from Verizon that we only had 1 GB left on my data plan. This wasn't surprising since I had been commuting via train to downtown Chicago and had spent about an hour each way on YouTube for a week. What WAS surprising was when I checked what had been using the data, Facebook had used more than DOUBLE the amount of data than ALL OTHER APPS COMBINED, including YouTube. I don't check Facebook during the workday either.
There's a per-app setting, (under Settings->Apps->Data Usage->[app] -- on Kit Kat anyway) to "Restrict Background Data" that disables background data on mobile networks for that app. The app can then only use mobile networks for data while running in the foreground (ie: you're actively using it) or when connected via WiFi. It's an OS setting so the app can't ignore it.

--
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by rnturn · 2019-01-09 05:31 · Score: 1

"best experience" seems to be the new "rich experience".

--
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by srmalloy · 2019-01-09 05:46 · Score: 2

In some sense, it's the opposite; the OS is, in fact, enhanced. Preinstalled apps are included in the system image.
"Enhancing" the OS is like Microsoft making the Windows help functionality use the IE rendering engine to display help files, making it necessary to have IE installed as part of the operating system. Nothing about Facebook is integrated into Android, such that removing Facebook breaks Android. It's a standalone app that is pre-installed on your device because Samsung made a deal with Facebook.
Re: Don't sugarcoat the turd by zilym · 2019-01-09 06:15 · Score: 2

FYI, it's not just Samsung devices. My Sprint Slate 8" tablets don't let me completely delete Facebook either. I've removed it as far as possible and then disabled it, but even still, somehow sometimes Facebook manages to re-enable and update itself later on from time to time. Very irritating!
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-09 06:22 · Score: 1

Yes, not just FB or Microsoft, but Google apps too. I want to disable and uninstall "Google Play services" since it uses up SO MUCH RAM and flash, but then that causes so many problems with other apps that it's pretty much impossible to do. Why do I need Google Play anyway? I don't want to buy anything from their store.
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by srmalloy · 2019-01-09 06:38 · Score: 1

It didn't have the force of law until July 30, 1947 but 1 U.S.C. 1 states:

In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, unless the context indicates otherwise---
the words "person" and "whoever" include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals.
The issues that have been thrashed out in the courts have been determining where the limits on treating corporations as individuals lie. For example, corporations don't have the franchise, and are not permitted to vote in elections. The Tillman Act of 1907 prohibited corporate contributions to national campaigns, and Chief Justice Rehnquist repeatedly criticized the Court's invention of corporate constitutional "rights", particularly in his dissent in First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti in 1978, although he endorsed the right of corporations to spend in elections in his dissent in McConnell v. FEC in 2003.
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by ConceptJunkie · 2019-01-09 06:39 · Score: 1

In capitalist America, you are the product and the vendor is the user.
That said, I still think we're better off.

--
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
Re: Don't sugarcoat the turd by WaffleMonster · 2019-01-09 07:15 · Score: 1

Disabled apps are not a security issue as they can't run.
Yes they can run.
Re: Don't sugarcoat the turd by Ol+Olsoc · 2019-01-09 07:21 · Score: 1

Temporary Container Tabs + Cookie Autodelete + uBlock.
Enjoy.
That would be okay. Be sure to verify it.

--
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Re: Don't sugarcoat the turd by Mister+Transistor · 2019-01-09 07:38 · Score: 1

How do you know?
For SURE?

--
-- You are in a maze of little, twisty passages, all different... --
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by kingbilly · 2019-01-09 07:56 · Score: 1

Good god, I hate that. Similar word play ahead.

The interface for Hulu on my LG tv is SHIT compared to what it used to be (or could be). I can only access More Episodes/Seasons via a button on my remote that will only function if I am already in the place it wants me to be. In other words, there aren't enough places to launch a context menu. And we need to do this a lot, because 3-4 times a week, Hulu incorrectly picks up an entire episode ahead of where we left off.

So, when I had to update my credit card 2 weeks ago, I tried accessing Hulu from Chromium web browser and it wouldn't let me login. Because, for the "best user experience", I needed to use the latest browser. What experience? The experience of entering a credit card number? I used the user agent switcher to trick the system and continue on.

Funny how they don't give a shit about the user experience on a smart tv, or Roku (it started getting bad there too), but they outright restrict me from accessing the billing area of the website if they think my experience will be less than best.
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by Aighearach · 2019-01-09 08:07 · Score: 1

Of course this is all bogus -- it takes up "zero" user space since it's kept in ROM space, and that's of course why it's unable to be deleted. (Unless you root.)

You seem really confused about the technical details. If it can't be deleted because it in "ROM" space, you wouldn't be able to delete it at all ever, including if you root, including even if you unlocked the bootloader and installed a new OS.
The reality is that there is no ROM at all; the flash storage, which is read/write, is colloquially referred to as "ROM" when discussing certain types of binary images. But it isn't actually ROM, and therefore "because it is kept in ROM" won't actually be an answer to anything on a smart phone, ever. And if it was, how would you update?!
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by Darinbob · 2019-01-09 09:18 · Score: 1

This has been this way on Android forever. The applications that are built-in cannot be removed, they can only be disabled. They will remain even after doing a full system wipe and reset, only reverted back to the version that originally shipped.
So basically the story is that some Samsung models are including Facebook into their ROM image.
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by Darinbob · 2019-01-09 09:20 · Score: 1

Right, but it's essentially a read-only region of flash. Even if you update the built-in applications, it will revert back to the original version if you do a system wipe.
Re: Don't sugarcoat the turd by reboot246 · 2019-01-09 10:18 · Score: 1

No, normal.
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by danlip · 2019-01-09 11:15 · Score: 1

It's an OS setting so the app can't ignore it.
Unless the phone manufacturer colludes with the app creator to circumvent the setting. But don't worry, there is clearly no collusion between Samsung and Facebook here.
Re: Don't sugarcoat the turd by quenda · 2019-01-09 11:57 · Score: 1

I very much doubt that the Facebook app is istored in ROM.
It is stored in the READ-ONLY system partition. It is ROM. Which is why it cannot be deleted. Not just Samsung. Sony too, for example.
That is what ROM has meant for decades now. Non-volatile flash memory that is only written in a firmware upgrade.
Were you expecting hand-woven core memory, or factory mask ROM?
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by quenda · 2019-01-09 12:04 · Score: 1

thing to do is unlock the bootloader, and install a custom ROM

Just beware you can lose features that way.
e.g. Google Pay, Camera image-processing features, ...
DRM'ed streaming apps like Netflix may refuse to install or reduce features.
There are workarounds, but they can be time consuming.
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by drinkypoo · 2019-01-09 12:46 · Score: 2

Right, but it's essentially a read-only region of flash. Even if you update the built-in applications, it will revert back to the original version if you do a system wipe.
I have yet to meet an Android device that uses an inherently ro filesystem, they just mount ro. If you root, you can remount rw and make changes. This may have become more fiddly in recent Android versions, I haven't checked in.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by Cardcaptor_RLH85 · 2019-01-09 18:42 · Score: 1

Google moved a not-insignificant amount of the core Android OS's services into the Google Play Services framework so that it could be updated regularly without requiring vendors to push device OS updates. Most of the resources that you see Google Play Services using on your device is attributable to some other application that is actually calling part of its API. And since most apps call some part of that massive API, it shows up as using a HUGE amount of resources.
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by Waccoon · 2019-01-09 20:46 · Score: 1

The only read-only memory is mask ROM. The Facebook app needs to be updated occasionally, and that process isn't magic.
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by Waccoon · 2019-01-09 20:53 · Score: 1

It's an OS setting so the app can't ignore it.
If there's one thing we should have learned from the Internet Explorer days...
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by Opportunist · 2019-01-09 20:58 · Score: 1

This is wrong at multiple levels. If it transmits anything back to FB then that is a violation.
Here's a ... oh, you already have a phone. Call someone who cares.
You really think FB gives a shit about "violating" someone's rights?

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by Opportunist · 2019-01-09 20:59 · Score: 1

Oh, so it's a bit like "Value edition"?

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by Opportunist · 2019-01-09 21:00 · Score: 1

So this is where Trump got the idea from that he could make someone pay for something he neither owns nor benefits him?

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd by Darinbob · 2019-01-10 08:51 · Score: 1

It's a region of flash that by default can't be easily modified without getting root access. When these apps are updated you get a new copy of the app but the original one still exists and will resurface if you do a full system reset.
Re: Don't sugarcoat the turd by kaatochacha · 2019-01-10 12:30 · Score: 1

This is the 2010s version of "I don't even have a TV..."

Not even close to a new issue by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-09 01:04 · Score: 1

Not new. Not news. Not just a Samsung issue.

Re:Not even close to a new issue by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-09 01:10 · Score: 1

My feelings exactly. I have had a Galaxy S6 since it was first released (nearly 4 years ago) and have never been able to delete the Facebook app (or some other apps, for that matter). Not sure why this is somehow news now.
Re:Not even close to a new issue by Iwastheone · 2019-01-09 01:11 · Score: 5, Interesting

My MotoE4 came preloaded with FB App Installer, FB App Manager, Messenger, Snapchat, Amazon, Amazon Prime, Amazon Music & NativeDropboxAgent. All get disabled/Force Stopped, then after a reboot or a few months go by and they all become magically enabled again
Re:Not even close to a new issue by doubledown00 · 2019-01-09 01:51 · Score: 1

Yup. Same for the Blackberry Keyone I had in 2017. Very annoying.
Re:Not even close to a new issue by war4peace · 2019-01-09 02:03 · Score: 1

Exactly. I've been mentioning this very issue since 2015 at least. What the article failed to mention (or maybe my reading skills suck) is that on older phones which hadn't had Facebook embedded, the app will come bundled with a "security update" which installs it in such a way it can't be uninstalled. Now THAT is fucked up.
Bundled shit out-of-the-box? OK, yeah, contracts and whatnot. Forcefully bundling shit as part of a "security update"? That's LOW.

--
...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
Re:Not even close to a new issue by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-09 02:25 · Score: 3, Insightful

It is only "news" now because there is an active movement to "delete Facebook" and some normal users who don't know about Android system partition vs, user partition and don't understand how Samsung craps up the system partition with undeletable apps have now discovered that they cannot participate in the "delete Facebook" movement.
Re:Not even close to a new issue by _merlin · 2019-01-09 02:35 · Score: 1

I've had an S3 and S8, and neither has re-activated the apps unless I install updates for them via Galaxy Apps. Threre's apparently no way to disable apps unless no updates are installed.
Re:Not even close to a new issue by Zocalo · 2019-01-09 02:37 · Score: 1

Nor is the fix, at least without rooting the phone. You can "uninstall" these bundled apps without root via ADB (ideally having removed any app data via the normal Settings, Apps option first):

pm uninstall -k --user 0 <name of package>

Although it's still only faking it; it's just removing it for the default user (user 0) so the stub remains on the phone's system partition - a full uninstall does require that you root the phone. You won't see it in the app list or be prompted for any further Store updates though, although it may get re-instated after a full OTA update.

--
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
Re:Not even close to a new issue by Ol+Olsoc · 2019-01-09 02:48 · Score: 3, Insightful

My feelings exactly. I have had a Galaxy S6 since it was first released (nearly 4 years ago) and have never been able to delete the Facebook app (or some other apps, for that matter). Not sure why this is somehow news now.
I see. The old" I have seen this, so it must never ever be reported ever again!" The geeks version of "Stay off my Lawn!"
Sorry Anonymous Coward, it's pretty obvious from the posts in this thread that a lot of people didn't know, and it is a good thing for them to know.
In the been there, done that category, this is not unusual on PCs either. A simple program uninstall usually leaves a hellava lot of debris behind. Uninstalling say, Microsoft Office seems just like removing the icons.
Try using a product like Revo, uninstall some program, and select deep scan for leftovers. (don't restart after the program's uninstaller finishes) then look at what the deep scan shows you. Some programs just leave registry items, some pretty much everything.
I do not know if there is a comparable product for phones. There should be.
And since you already know everything, this is not for you. It is for people who might not know yet.

--
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Re:Not even close to a new issue by Ol+Olsoc · 2019-01-09 02:50 · Score: 1

Unlucky you. I bought a Samsung note4. Came with various crap apps. I stopped & disabled them, and uninstalled their updates in order to save space.
How did you confirm that disabling them stopped them from sharing data?

--
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Re:Not even close to a new issue by Ol+Olsoc · 2019-01-09 03:03 · Score: 1

Exactly. I've been mentioning this very issue since 2015 at least. What the article failed to mention (or maybe my reading skills suck) is that on older phones which hadn't had Facebook embedded, the app will come bundled with a "security update" which installs it in such a way it can't be uninstalled. Now THAT is fucked up. Bundled shit out-of-the-box? OK, yeah, contracts and whatnot. Forcefully bundling shit as part of a "security update"? That's LOW.
Yup, it is pretty low.
I think any solution - if possible, would actually involve a Linux based phone, and an environment that allows the user to have access to tools like wireshark. A repository program environment.
There are some Linux smartphone alternatives, but I'm not certain I'd call any of them ready for prime time. And as much as I'd like that, talk about a niche market. Phones and tablets are not aimed at the power user, but more like the intellectually challenged.

--
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Re:Not even close to a new issue by dryeo · 2019-01-09 05:01 · Score: 1

My MotoE came with an FM app, a crappy file manager and an app for keeping track of the phone if lost as well as the usual Google stuff. Oh, also a phone app setup for my carrier, eg hold the one key and dial voice mail.
Perhaps it is your carrier rather then Motorola?

--
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
Re:Not even close to a new issue by rnturn · 2019-01-09 05:03 · Score: 1

Indeed.
My LG had FB on it when I got it. I immediately went to delete it and found that the best I could do was disable the "Facebook App Manager". Whatever that is. (Don't bother explaining; not interested.) No idea if that is sufficient to totally block FB from tracking my phone use but it doesn't matter---every application and web page out there has the effin' FB icon on it and that's enough for FB to track how you're using the web. When that icon shows up on my dialer app, that's when I go back to a $20 dumb-as-a-post flip phone.

--
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
Re:Not even close to a new issue by rnturn · 2019-01-09 05:28 · Score: 1

``How did you confirm that disabling them stopped them from sharing data?''

That's the question 'o' the day: I disabled the FB App Manager on Day 1 of getting my latest phone (~2 years ago) and today I note that the phone is reporting that there's been considerable--well... a few MB which I label as "considerable" for a supposedly disabled app--data usage by FB App Manager since mid-October. Did it get re-enabled by an update? Why should I need to keep checking crap like this?
Apparently, other than the wallpaper/ringtone settings, the data we decide to download onto them, and a few others, our phones have "no user serviceable parts inside" any more and everything is up for grabs by the phone vendors.

--
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
Re:Not even close to a new issue by ConceptJunkie · 2019-01-09 06:43 · Score: 1

The sad thing is not that the Samsung phones come with preinstalled apps, but that the preinstalled apps are almost always awful. I recently upgraded a Samsung Galaxy 4 Mini, and that phone when I bought it, from AT&T, was packed to the gills with a bunch of AT&T apps that were all completely useless compared to what's available on the Google Store. But you can't delete them.
I'm sure companies like Samsung and Facebook and AT&T are counting on the fact that a large number of users will just use the apps that come with the phone and don't realize there are other options, or don't bother to check them out.

--
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
Re: Not even close to a new issue by Ol+Olsoc · 2019-01-09 07:20 · Score: 1

That's some next level paranoia you have there. It's good, and i hope this paranoia extends to all platforms and not just Android.
You can be relatively sure since you can compare the AOSP version with that of your phone.
By the way - not certain who you were calling next level paranoid.
At the present time, smartphones can't really be made safe.
As for the paranoia, if you are okay with Facebook weaponizing your data, what you buy, what websites you visit, what you post, your political opinions, and selling it to groups who have agendas that might harm you or help you - I don't care. I don't care if you want to tell the three letter agencies your life history,
Perhaps you might be interested in just who is trying to access your computer devices, perhaps not.

--
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Re:Not even close to a new issue by thegarbz · 2019-01-09 08:58 · Score: 1

then after a reboot or a few months go by and they all become magically enabled again
Sounds very much like your reboot included a full system update. There's no other functionality in Android that magically causes apps to not be disabled other than a new system image.

One word: by fbobraga · 2019-01-09 01:10 · Score: 1

http://lineageos.org/

Re:Duh, another Slashdot non-story by Frederic54 · 2019-01-09 01:12 · Score: 1

Same, this is not news, I guess in Canada it is the same as in the US, when you buy a cellphone tied to a provider (especially Bell here) there is a zillions of crapware that you cannot remove/disable except if you root. It has been like that since I know smartphone. How can this be new?!?!?!?

It is also the reason I buy unlocked phones, my latest one, Nokia 6.1, is an Android One phone and no bloatware installed.

--
"Science will win because it works." - Stephen Hawking

Been like that since at least the S4... by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-09 01:12 · Score: 1

There's a process to unistall updates to the app, and then disable. But it can't be removed completely.

Re:Been like that since at least the S4... by thegarbz · 2019-01-09 01:53 · Score: 1

Nope, it was like this on my original Galaxy S.

My car's radio is always set to one channel by AynRandDuran · 2019-01-09 01:13 · Score: 2

Ford decided my best driver experience is to only listen to a pop radio station loaded with advertisements and very little music, so they actually didn't even put a tuning knob on. Imagine anyone getting to pre-determine how to use your *phone*, but you.

Re:My car's radio is always set to one channel by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-09 03:36 · Score: 2, Insightful

why does Ford get fuckall to say in my business in the first place
If I owe them money, fine. If I own something outright, guess who has say? Guess who can modify, mutate, and even destroy it as he pleases?

FacebookOS by DigiShaman · 2019-01-09 01:13 · Score: 1

Nuff said

--
Life is not for the lazy.

Dealbreaker by rlauzon · 2019-01-09 01:13 · Score: 2

I've made it clear to my phone vendor that "selling" me a phone where I can't remove the spy-ware is a dealbreaker. If they won't sell me the phone I want without the built-in spy-ware, I will take my business elsewhere.

Re: Dealbreaker by kiehlster · 2019-01-09 01:30 · Score: 1

Given that the millennial "i"-gen are quitting Facebook in droves, I think the future majority populous wants a phone without Facebook on it, so this marketing trick is only going to fall on its face in about 5-10 years. I don't think we can say that the majority wants Facebook for very much longer.
Re: Dealbreaker by Voice+of+satan · 2019-01-09 01:32 · Score: 1

It is not very far from what i have done. I do not want my phone to collect data on where i go so i do my shopping and most of my biking without it. So in affect i have zero phone under such circumstances.
And as other posters said, this is no news. My Samsung phone has lots of crud i cannot uninstall. I never had a facebook account but the SSD space wasted is annoying. One gig for microsoft stuff i will never use.
I may buy a flip phone when the need to replace it arises. Or maybe stop using a mobile phone for personal uses altogether.
Re: Dealbreaker by doubledown00 · 2019-01-09 01:56 · Score: 1

Or you can get an unlocked non-vendor supplied I-phone which doesn't do that shit (as of right now anyway).
Re:Dealbreaker by thegarbz · 2019-01-09 02:04 · Score: 1

Disabling an app in Android will uninstall the full app downloaded from the play store, revert to just he shell app that ships on the phone, and prevent it from executing.
If you're worried about spying then maybe you should look into the options that actually exist to control your phone rather than just expecting someone to ship something to suit your specific tastes out of the box.
Re: Dealbreaker by slack_justyb · 2019-01-09 03:52 · Score: 2

Given that the millennial "i"-gen are quitting Facebook in droves, I think the future majority populous wants a phone without Facebook on it
That doesn't kill Facebook. It might kill the app, but we allow these kinds of large companies to form in the US and thus, they hedge their eventual demise on whatever it was they originally started with. I cannot count the number of folks who sat there giving the middle finger to Facebook only for them to then go to something like Instagram, which is owned by Facebook. Or some people wanting to warn others about the dangers of Facebook and privacy, only to spin up a website with ad revenue sharing with Facebook or a Facebook partner.
So we kill the Facebook app from being pre-installed means insanely little. Facebook has diversified so much, that whatever their leading product de jure is, that's what will get pre-installed. And hell at this point there's a good chance they won't need anything installed. There's content sharing programs that vendors are more than happy to join in on to gain access to the vast wealth of information that Facebook has already collected. So it's just a matter of your phone maker agreeing to share SMS/Location/whatever else out the door with Facebook, no app needed of course you can opt out. But that's even less true for websites that have the Facebook pixel on them, Facebook is so interwoven in the Internet, going somewhere that doesn't have the pixel or a pixel for one of their partners is the exceptional case.
The idealism that everyone has about "let's kill Facebook" is cute, but it is woefully ignoring how absolutely massive the magnitude of wealth of information that Facebook has, that everyone on this planet wants. You can boycott Facebook till you are blue in the face and rise repeat for all 7+ billion people on this planet and Facebook will sit there and grin at you taking absolutely little to no impact on their true source of money. It is only if and when governments begins to regulate the collection of information and put people's privacy as the default legal option as opposed to opt-out BS that Facebook will ever suffer any kind of shift in their stance.
Folks thinking deleting Facebook gets rid of the problem are in for a surprise. Deleting the app just makes you less obvious of the underlying issue and solves zero percent of the problem. So let's all be honest with ourselves here. "Facebook ain't going nowhere", everyone needs to either get used to their privacy being meaningless or get serious about making governments press the ever love hell out of this and other companies that collect data on people.
Re:Dealbreaker by drinkypoo · 2019-01-10 11:16 · Score: 1

I've made it clear to my phone vendor that "selling" me a phone where I can't remove the spy-ware is a dealbreaker. If they won't sell me the phone I want without the built-in spy-ware, I will take my business elsewhere.
So if I may ask — who's your vendor, what did they sell you, and did you get it any cheaper than buying it off amazon or whatever?

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:Dealbreaker by rlauzon · 2019-01-10 23:50 · Score: 1

Right now, Verizon and that was conversation I had with them about 2 years ago when I last renewed my contract. I had to go through several of their phones before I found one that I was comfortable with (app wise). I ended up with an LG G7 that I could at least disable all the unwanted apps. But I made it clear that I was not very happy about that. I would have moved, but other pressures kept me with Verizon at that time. They will be bugging me to renew again soon and I will be looking at alternatives if they can't provide me with a "clean" phone.

Not really shocking by LubosD · 2019-01-09 01:15 · Score: 5, Interesting

This isn't really shocking. If the app is part of the system image, then the app cannot be normally deleted, because the system image is read-only and only touched during system updates. Disabling the app DOES have the same effect as deleting it, except it doesn't free up any storage space.

Re:Not really shocking by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-09 01:21 · Score: 1

So you assume...hard to say what disabled does to an app thats a read-only part of the system image where the 3rd party has paid for this.
Android is an open platfrom so you *think* you know what its doing, but once it becomes a closed platform like on a Samsung device, assumptions must be made and cannot be validated.
Re:Not really shocking by LubosD · 2019-01-09 01:27 · Score: 1

Well, Android is open source, along with the source that determines what the "Disable app" feature does.
Clearly, companies do all kinds of modifications to Android, but it's not too hard to check if a disabled app is really disabled.
Re:Not really shocking by Drethon · 2019-01-09 01:28 · Score: 2

So you assume...hard to say what disabled does to an app thats a read-only part of the system image where the 3rd party has paid for this.
Android is an open platfrom so you *think* you know what its doing, but once it becomes a closed platform like on a Samsung device, assumptions must be made and cannot be validated.
And what do you assume deleting an app where the 3rd party has paid for the app to be on the phone? Just because you *think* the app was deleted, can you truly say it was? If you want to be paranoid (or realistic, all a matter of perspective), it can be applied evenly, not just to a few cases.
Re:Not really shocking by AHuxley · 2019-01-09 01:38 · Score: 1

At what point did the user just rent the OS, social media apps and hardware?
What do they actually own when they buy a smartphone?

--
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Re:Not really shocking by 110010001000 · 2019-01-09 01:41 · Score: 1

Android is not really open source. Unless you can compile an image completely from source code and use that on your computer it isn't open. It is "fake" open. The closed binary blobs could be doing literally anything.
Re: Not really shocking by TuballoyThunder · 2019-01-09 01:46 · Score: 2

While Android is open source, there is no guarantee that Samsung has not modified the source to change the behavior on their phones. Bottom line, either you trust them or you don't.
Re:Not really shocking by LubosD · 2019-01-09 01:50 · Score: 1

You are right (sadly), they could, but that's a general issue not related to the preinstalled FB app.
Re:Not really shocking by thegarbz · 2019-01-09 01:52 · Score: 1

except it doesn't free up any storage space
That isn't entirely true. The Facebook app installed on the phone is nothing more than a small shell that triggers the actual Facebook app to download from the Playstore when you first log into your google account.
Disabling the app literally frees up hundreds of MB from your phone for this reason.
Re: Not really shocking by LubosD · 2019-01-09 01:53 · Score: 1

Disabled apps cannot receive intents, so you can check this.
If you don't trust Samsung's modified Android, then the Facebook app isn't the major concern. And this article is just about the FB app.
Re:Not really shocking by Calydor · 2019-01-09 01:55 · Score: 1

Can you prove that pressing the DISABLE button doesn't just make the overview say 'DISABLED' and the button say 'ENABLE' with no other changes made?

--
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
Re:Not really shocking by fustakrakich · 2019-01-09 01:55 · Score: 2

What do they actually own when they buy a smartphone?
The box

--
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Re:Not really shocking by Calydor · 2019-01-09 01:56 · Score: 1

If I was renting the app I could return it to the store, but I can't even do THAT.

--
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
Re:Not really shocking by LubosD · 2019-01-09 01:57 · Score: 1

Yes, disabled apps cannot receive intents, for instance. And if you don't trust the whole OS, then the Facebook app isn't really the major issue...
Re:Not really shocking by houghi · 2019-01-09 02:01 · Score: 1

So it does have the same effect, except it hasn't. Did I get that right?
Just give me all your passwords and tell me not to use them. That has the same effect as me not having them, right?

--
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
Re:Not really shocking by Tomahawk · 2019-01-09 02:38 · Score: 2

The source code for Android is available as most of it is open source. So you can download a copy and prove it for yourself.
https://source.android.com/
Re:Not really shocking by _merlin · 2019-01-09 02:43 · Score: 2

Only if you can prove that the source compiles to the image on your phone. Do any of the handset vendors have reproducible builds so you can verify that what you compile produces the same firmware image they signed? If not, and if there's any closed source "secret source", you can't completely trust it.
Re:Not really shocking by TheDarkMaster · 2019-01-09 03:42 · Score: 1

The concept of "system application" on Android is way too much abused. Every simple piece of shit programmed by Samsung is treated as if it were "an indispensable part of the operating system" and therefore irremovable.

--
Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
Re: Not really shocking by AmiMoJo · 2019-01-09 03:59 · Score: 1

Is this Samsung's fault though? They don't even bundle much of their own stuff any more, it's all an optional install from their app store (which is bundled).
Facebook sounds more like the kind of thing a third party would force on, i.e. the carrier that they bought the phone from. That's why it's usually best to buy from a third party - you get a vanilla, unmolested phone and the same contract you would have got anyway. Assuming you don't just buy the phone outright.

--
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Re: Not really shocking by dohzer · 2019-01-09 11:02 · Score: 1

Reactivating disabled apps is why I ditched Samsung phones for good.
I moved from a Google Nexus 4 to Samsung S6, and then back to a Google Pixel XL.
Never again Samsung!
Re:Not really shocking by AHuxley · 2019-01-09 11:58 · Score: 1

Time for a new smartphone OS that lets the user have more control over all apps then AC.

--
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Re:Not really shocking by drinkypoo · 2019-01-10 11:12 · Score: 1

Do any of the handset vendors have reproducible builds so you can verify that what you compile produces the same firmware image they signed?
No, but you could build AOSP and install it.

If not, and if there's any closed source "secret source", you can't completely trust it.
So far there's always binary blobs in the drivers, and you're never going to get the source for modern communications hardware's firmware as that would permit you to override radio power levels and such. Therefore you can't ultimately trust any smartphone, nor pretty much any computer made in the last couple of decades.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"

yup, i am a galaxy 9+ by FudRucker · 2019-01-09 01:21 · Score: 2

and i can not delete the Facebook and Facebook App Manager, i can only disable them, i would feel a lot better about my phone if i could completely remove all of that facebook kludge completely, if Samsung does not fix this so i can remove them i wont be buying another Samsung phone when it comes time to getting a new phone, i would research android phones and find one that is simply pure android without any third party apps welded in that can not be removed,

--
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing

Re:yup, i am a galaxy 9+ by thegarbz · 2019-01-09 01:49 · Score: 1

i would feel a lot better about my phone if i could completely remove all of that facebook kludge completely
Why would that make you feel better? The default install is nothing but a shell and doesn't do anything without an update from the play store. By disabling something in Android it is unable to perform any function including updating itself. Why would you feel differently about it not existing vs being so incredibly irrelevant?

if Samsung does not fix this so i can remove them i wont be buying another Samsung phone
Thanks for your virtue signalling. Facebook has been an irremovable app since the original Galaxy S came to the market. If you actually cared about this you wouldn't have a Samsung phone now 10 years later.
Re:yup, i am a galaxy 9+ by Tomahawk · 2019-01-09 02:36 · Score: 1

Likely the only phone you'll be able to buy, then, is the Google Pixel. The vast majority of manufacturers install Facebook and other apps as system apps.
But you can always disable them, and then they can't do anything except use up space on your system partition. And since you can't actually use the system partition yourself, this is actually fine. Disabling an app on Android is as good as deleting it.
But, yeah, I wish I could delete it too (without having to root my phone).
Re:yup, i am a galaxy 9+ by chrish · 2019-01-09 03:47 · Score: 1

LG has at least one model (G7 One) that's shipped with "Android One"... stock Android without any third-party garbage.
Still has that idiotic notch though.

--
- chrish
Re:yup, i am a galaxy 9+ by WaffleMonster · 2019-01-09 07:04 · Score: 1

Why would that make you feel better? The default install is nothing but a shell and doesn't do anything without an update from the play store. By disabling something in Android it is unable to perform any function including updating itself. Why would you feel differently about it not existing vs being so incredibly irrelevant?
This common wisdom happens to be wrong. Disabled apps can in fact continue to execute.
You can disable an app, reboot and it would still be started once whatever it has hooked generates an event / call.

Er? by cascadingstylesheet · 2019-01-09 01:22 · Score: 5, Insightful

They've just now discovered preinstalled non-removable apps??

Yes, they suck. They are also why your phone is a little cheaper (at least theoretically) than it otherwise would be.

Re:Er? by Daralantan · 2019-01-09 01:37 · Score: 1

That's what I was going to comment. I'm pretty sure facebook has been like this on several android phones for years. Along with a lot of other garbage.
Re:Er? by kalpol · 2019-01-09 01:44 · Score: 1

TONS of other garbage, and guess what, there aren't any other options from the major US carriers. You either get a phone loaded with unremovable garbage or you get an international version which works considerably better but has no warranty service.

--
12:50 - press return.
Re:Er? by Tomahawk · 2019-01-09 02:33 · Score: 1

I seem to remember it came preinstalled on my Sony Xperia X10, and that came out in 2010. And I doubt that was the first phone it, or anything else, was pre-installed on, and undeleteable from.
So, yeah, nothing new here.
Re:Er? by 93+Escort+Wagon · 2019-01-09 04:02 · Score: 1

They've just now discovered preinstalled non-removable apps??
My first smartphone was some LG device running Froyo - I remember there were a number of non-essential yet non-removable apps on that thing. That was, what, 8-9 years ago?

--
#DeleteChrome
Re:Er? by coofercat · 2019-01-09 04:18 · Score: 1

Repeat after me: Samsung can't do software.
I (mostly) can't fault their build quality and specs on their hardware, but recently design decisions are dubious (eg. bixby button) and their software is, and has always been utterly terrible.
Citation: Bixby, Samsung Push Service, any of their 'hub' apps, actually, any apps pre-installed that weren't part of the base android system.
Re:Er? by Megane · 2019-01-09 05:49 · Score: 1

One word: Tizen (which also derives much suck from the Enlightenment Foundation Libraries below it: "let's make an object-oriented UI library and pass everything around as void* !")

--
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
Re:Er? by iampiti · 2019-01-09 08:24 · Score: 1

Err, I'm pretty sure international versions also have un removable non-essential apps. My old S4 used to have Facebook and a few others. Carrier-branded phones usually do have additional non-removable crap though
Re:Er? by Waccoon · 2019-01-09 21:17 · Score: 1

Market forces determine prices. You can argue that software integration makes the hardware more powerful, but the price isn't affected.
Reminds me of all the crappy $500 laptops that flooded the market 10 years ago. The ones that would overheat and die in 10 minutes due to piss poor build quality, and were still cheaper than many of today's phones. They weren't priced that way due to the heaping piles of crapware... that's just what the average Wal-Mart patron was willing to pay.

Gotta love the doublespeak by think_nix · 2019-01-09 01:31 · Score: 1

Facebook spokesperson said the disabled version of the app acts like it's been deleted

Its either deleted or its not, disablement is not 'acting' like its deleted.

It doesn't continue collecting data or sending information back to Facebook. But there's rarely communication with the consumer about the process.

FFS, so basically Facebook and Samsung are screwing over the end user and not notifying them of anything. It's great how the service owner of said service along with the manufacturer decide that said pre-installed service is best for the end user out of the box. The only way to be 100% sure besides running the likes of strace or packet capture on the phone would be to root it and uninstall anyway. Seriously what is wrong with these people?

Re:Gotta love the doublespeak by thegarbz · 2019-01-09 02:06 · Score: 4, Informative

disablement is not 'acting' like its deleted.
Except it is in every way. Prevents the app from running, prevents it from displaying, and prevents any other app from accessing it, the app being part of a read only image and therefore unable to be physically deleted. In addition the app shipped with a phone is a non-functioning shell taking up a few MB. It is not Facebook, and Facebook itself downloads from the Play store the first time you start the phone. Using the disabling function deletes this download and prevents it from re-occuring.
So yes, it acts in every way like its deleted.
Re:Gotta love the doublespeak by Tomahawk · 2019-01-09 02:32 · Score: 1

When disabled the OS prevents it from doing anything. It's locked away unable and unallowed to run. It can't do anything, so it's as good as deleted. It's basically just data using up space on your system partition, but that's not an issue as you can't write to the system partition anyway.
So 'acts as if it's deleted' is a reasonably good description.
Re:Gotta love the doublespeak by think_nix · 2019-01-09 03:26 · Score: 1

I disagree either 1 or 0
Its either deleted or not deleted. Whats next ? Shadow delete ? Pseudo delete ?
Also reminds me of the marketing speak "speeds up to ...."
- Cheers
Re: Gotta love the doublespeak by srmalloy · 2019-01-09 06:54 · Score: 1

The problem with that is that allowing all of the preinstalled bloatware to be freely deleted opens the window for the carriers to receive the phones from the manufacturer, blow away the bloatware, and advertise that their phones have no pre-installed software except for [carrier's list of apps], and we'd see carriers competing with how much of the bloatware they remove for you -- which defeats the purpose of the companies cutting a deal with the manufacturer to preinstall their apps. There would need to be some mechanism to ensure that only the person registered to teh devlice would be able to remove the programs.
Re:Gotta love the doublespeak by WaffleMonster · 2019-01-09 07:10 · Score: 1

When disabled the OS prevents it from doing anything. It's locked away unable and unallowed to run. It can't do anything, so it's as good as deleted. It's basically just data using up space on your system partition, but that's not an issue as you can't write to the system partition anyway.
This is not true. It can't be loaded normally by user but other things/events can still trigger it.
Re:Gotta love the doublespeak by think_nix · 2019-01-09 08:00 · Score: 1

Im not a mobile developer but this indicates the app has hooks into other events, hence my original mention to strace or packet capture. Proving this would validate collusion.
I dont have a Samsung nor do I have a fb account. Dont really want to do either to validate as well.
Re:Gotta love the doublespeak by Waccoon · 2019-01-09 21:19 · Score: 1

And you actually believe it works?
Even some Linux distros have been caught "accidentally" re-enabling things the end user disabled. It's a thing.
Re:Gotta love the doublespeak by thegarbz · 2019-01-10 08:10 · Score: 1

And you actually believe it works?
Nope, I verify that it does. Belief is for religious nuts.
Re:Gotta love the doublespeak by Tomahawk · 2019-01-11 04:23 · Score: 1

It won't respond to Intents either. If something is, then something else is installed to respond to them.
Re:Gotta love the doublespeak by strikethree · 2019-01-11 10:05 · Score: 1

So yes, it acts in every way like its deleted.
Until the next update. So no, it does not act in every way like it is deleted. There are dozens of people in this thread alone who are saying that they disabled it and it keeps coming back with a vengeance.
Try again? :)

--
"Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen

Re:Does anybody sell a phone with no OS on it? by oic0 · 2019-01-09 01:34 · Score: 1

Phones require an os prebaked for their hardware :(

Difference between Google and Samsung. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · 2019-01-09 01:38 · Score: 2

You are not a user, you are the product for both Google and Samsung.

But, in the case of Samsung, you need to pay for the privilege of being their product.

--
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact

While we are looking at Samsung ... by 140Mandak262Jamuna · 2019-01-09 01:40 · Score: 1

... as the tech aware people are obsessing about the undeletability of Facebook from Samsung, billions of people are allowing Alexa to listen in, allowing "partners" of Amazon to know exactly how much they can charge you.

--
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact

This is not new by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-09 01:40 · Score: 1

Samsung/Facebook have been doing this for a while now. I'm not sure how this is news. Over the last 5 years, I've had a Galaxy S5 Active and S7 Edge. Both came with Facebook preinstalled with the intention of users not being able to remove them. The S5 was released almost 5 years ago. This practice is not new. The S7 I had was crazy with preinstalled apps, either put there by Samsung or AT&T (Uber was another major app that could not be removed). This was a major driving force for me choosing to take my cell phone business away from Samsung and AT&T.

I wonder how that plays with Not-Facebook-Members by Sique · 2019-01-09 01:41 · Score: 4, Interesting

As I am not on Facebook (never was), any enabled Facebook-App means that the phone is sending my data to a company I don't have a contract with. And I don't see that there is any agreement between the company and me signed or otherwise agreed upon, that they are entitled to my data, and they didn't present me with any list of things they are intending to do with my data.

--
.sig: Sique *sigh*

It's not just Samsung, it's the carrier image by kalpol · 2019-01-09 01:41 · Score: 1

Locked AT&T phones do the same thing - we had an LG from AT&T where Facebook can't be removed, just disabled (and I think it may re-enable on reboot but need to doublecheck that).

--
12:50 - press return.

Re:Does anybody sell a phone with no OS on it? by kalpol · 2019-01-09 01:43 · Score: 1

The unlocked international versions usually have a far more basic image on them, and I have much preferred them over the crufty and nonconfigurable versions pushed by the local US carriers. The downside is that it is considerably harder to get warranty service.

--
12:50 - press return.

Dupe by thegarbz · 2019-01-09 01:47 · Score: 2

I don't know why we are duping these articles but I'm sure this was posted in 2009 not 2019.

Like seriously: User suddenly discovers something that has been the same and unchanged for 10 years. Instant outrage!.

Just disable the app like a normal person and like every Android system has allowed since like version 5. The default "Facebook" install on these phones is a shell app that takes up almost no space. You actually need to download some +100MB from the Playstore for it to even work in the first place.

Disabling is not the same as uninstalling by Blame+The+Network · 2019-01-09 01:47 · Score: 1

After disabling Facebook I had to battle my S8+ to stop receiving notifications. A family member I wanted to keep in touch with was and is crazy. My work phone was popping up foul-mouthed rants on the screen - not ideal!

As well as disabling the app I had to dive into the menu system to disable the notifications. It wasn't obvious where to do this.

The app cannot have really been disabled if it was able to send notifications. There was obviously some component still active.

When I need to, I just access Facebook via the phone's web browser.

Re:Disabling is not the same as uninstalling by Tomahawk · 2019-01-09 02:28 · Score: 1

That's interesting... there must be another app installed, in that case. Facebook Messenger, maybe?

Not just Samsung by pezezin · 2019-01-09 01:51 · Score: 2

I recently bought an Asus Zenfone 5Q. Today I tried to uninstall Facebook, and I found out the best you can do is uninstall all the updates and disable the app, but it's impossible to fully remove it.

ORLY by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-09 01:51 · Score: 1

The best phone experience Samsung would provide is to don't have this shitty app Facebook preinstalled on their phones. Stupid people.

It's the same with ASUS ZenFones by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-09 01:59 · Score: 1

On a brand new ZenFone Max Pro M1, Facebook, Messenger and Instagram apps are not uninstallable, user can just disable it.

article summarized by astrofurter · 2019-01-09 01:59 · Score: 1

Article summarized:

Faceboot sez, "fuck all you all, you lose, you have no rights, all your bases are belong to us, hahahahahahaha! Fuck you, proles, that's why!"

Samsung heartily concurs.

Same thing on LG G6 by Predathar · 2019-01-09 02:00 · Score: 2

I just checked on my phone, a LG G6 and Facebook came preinstalled... no option to delete, just DISABLE...

Re:Same thing on LG G6 by AmiMoJo · 2019-01-09 04:00 · Score: 1

Can I ask where you bought it from? I'm trying to determine if this is an LG problem or if the network operator sold you a custom version of the phone with their own crapware pre-installed.

--
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Re:Same thing on LG G6 by Predathar · 2019-01-09 04:06 · Score: 1

From Koodo, in Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Re:Same thing on LG G6 by kalpol · 2019-01-09 04:10 · Score: 1

On mine it was AT&T's version with resident evil^H^H^H^H Facebook, I had the international version of the phone and it was not present.

--
12:50 - press return.
Re:Same thing on LG G6 by AmiMoJo · 2019-01-09 04:52 · Score: 1

Yeah, so from you and kalpol's response it seems that it's carrier installed crapware. If you buy the phone sans-contract or whatever you get the stock LG firmware that doesn't have Facebook.

--
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Re:Same thing on LG G6 by thegarbz · 2019-01-09 09:02 · Score: 1

I'll bet you a dollar that if you disable the app it'll free up hundreds of MB from your phone. Due to the frequency of Facebook app updates phone vendors don't typically ship a functional app with their OS image, instead just a shell app which causes the actual app to be downloaded from the Play Store when the Google account is first added.
Disabling not only prevents an app from loading and hides it from the menu, but it also deletes any downloaded updates and prevents it from interacting with the Play Store.
I use Facebook, but on my phone I use Facebook Lite, along with disabling the main Facebook app this literally freed up around 230MB.

Translation of Facebook comment by Registered+Coward+v2 · 2019-01-09 02:02 · Score: 1

Facebook, the world's largest social network, wouldn't disclose the financial nature of the agreements, but said they're meant to give the Facebook "the best" data mining opportunity right after opening the box.

--
I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.

Shadow Profiles make this moot by OzPeter · 2019-01-09 02:03 · Score: 3, Insightful

Given that FB has been accused of making shadow profiles of people not on FB, does deleting the App from a phone really achieve anything?

No .. I am not saying the outrage is not justified, just that is misdirected.

http://theconversation.com/sha...

--
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?

Re:Shadow Profiles make this moot by strikethree · 2019-01-11 10:09 · Score: 1

Given that FB has been accused of making shadow profiles of people not on FB, does deleting the App from a phone really achieve anything?

Yes. It does do something. Deleting it would prevent it from coming back to life like some sort of undead monster. Once it is back to life, it can continue sending data to Facebook.
It doesn't matter whether or not you have a shadow profile or a real profile, the "app" is fucking dangerous to you and should be deleted entirely so it can not keep reviving itself and sending more data.

--
"Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen

Score one for closed source by doubledown00 · 2019-01-09 02:04 · Score: 1

Sucks but true: This doesn't occur on I-phones. The carriers are taking advantage of the open nature of Android to push apps on to the phone. And because Android is open to the world, they know exactly how to do it. They can't do that with I-phones because it's not open and Apple won't tell them / allow them to do it (at least for now. That might change if revenue keeps dropping).

Re:Score one for closed source by Enigma2175 · 2019-01-09 03:25 · Score: 2

Yeah, on my iPhone I just get constant reminders to give my credit card numbers to ApplePay or buy iCloud storage so it's not third parties trying get my money, it's the phone manufacturer doing it directly. Along with the bullshit "unsupported device" messages that come up now when trying to use a headphone adapter (which wouldn't even be needed if they had kept the jack), their moneygrubbing behavior has caused me to resolve never to give Apple another cent. I won't need another phone for a couple of years but I guess I should start looking now, it sounds like it's going to be a PITA to find one that's not constantly marketing to me and spying on me.

--
Enigma
Re:Score one for closed source by Voice+of+satan · 2019-01-09 09:04 · Score: 1

Why not a non smartphone. ? :)
Re:Score one for closed source by doubledown00 · 2019-01-09 11:38 · Score: 1

Pick your poison. But if you're holding out for a cell phone that is not spying on you.......well you're just ice skating up hill there. Increasingly the only solution is to leave your phone at home, and insist everyone with you do the same.

Not just Samsung! by Tomahawk · 2019-01-09 02:25 · Score: 1

I'm sure this is the case for more phone manufacturers. It's certainly the case for Sony also, at the very least.

I found on my old S8+ that I couldn't delete the Facebook app, so I just disabled it. Along with some other apps.
I found the same on my Sony. So again I just disabled it, along with some other apps.

It's frustrating, though, that these apps are bundled as 'system apps' and thus cannot be uninstalled. I probably wouldn't mind as much if it came preinstalled but I could then remove it. But preventing it's removal is a Bad Thing (R), and personally I'd prefer none of the major (or non-major) phone manufacturers to do this.

But it's worth money to them, so of course they will. So, I suppose, at least we can disable them.

My personal preference is to use the browser for stuff like this. Facebook, Imgur, Reddit, Amazon, eBay, etc -- I prefer to just use their site when I want to do something. Yes, this means that they are tracking me online (even despite GDPR), but at least it's only my browsing habits they are getting and not also various data from my phone, which we all know the facebook apps, among others, captures and sends back to Mark...

Is this true? by ceesco · 2019-01-09 02:32 · Score: 1

I've had my Galaxy S8 from Verizon for about six months now (work phone), and no Facebook app at all. There was a "Facebook Application Manager" app, which I was also able to uninstall.

--
Ceci n'est pas un sig

The best you can do is not log in by damn_registrars · 2019-01-09 02:33 · Score: 1

Yeah, it sucks that Samsung won't sell you a phone without it. You can of course buy phones from other companies (Motorola phones generally don't have facebook preinstalled) but if for whatever reason you have to have a Samsung phone, the only effective way to keep facebook from following you is to never use the app. That's what I've done with every Samsung android phone I've had, and it seems to work pretty well.

It might help somewhat that I don't have a facebook account, but the point is the same. They can't track you if you don't associate your phone with an account.

--
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.

Re:The best you can do is not log in by tsqr · 2019-01-09 03:26 · Score: 1

Damn. I was getting all pumped up to join in the outrage; then I discovered that I can delete (not just disable) the Facebook app from my Samsung S8+. Maybe it's the carriers that make these deals and not Samsung, and Verizon didn't make the deal? Now I sorta feel left out.

The right to r00t by hAckz0r · 2019-01-09 02:33 · Score: 1

Almost any purchased phone these days comes with a bunch of crapware applications that consume what limited space there is on that device. No application should be undeletable. I don't care if it is the manufacturer, service provider, or the Android developers. We should have the permissions necessary to delete any application from any phone/device we purchase, and if not, the right to r00t that device in order to remove it without invalidating the warranty.

Just like the right to repair, we should have the right to remove. The necessity of deleting apps we still want to have, just so we can update the other apps that we still want to have, is completely ridiculous when we could have just removed their (in most cases) disabled crapware instead. Why do I need to have three or four separate "music purchasing" applications on my phone that I will never even run? Why do I need to have numerous video applications on a phone that I can't even find the space to store a movie? What is the point of consuming so much space on that device that you can't get anything to work without having to find innovative ways to defeat their own enforcement policies?

Re: The right to r00t by PPH · 2019-01-09 03:59 · Score: 1

Verstanden?
Jawohl, mein Fuhrer!

--
Have gnu, will travel.

Facebook App by DaMattster · 2019-01-09 02:35 · Score: 1

Disabling the Facebook App is almost as good as deleting it. My LG Stylo 4 is rooted so I can see the process tree and there is no Facebook processes running when the app is disabled. Personally, I think it is anti-consumer to force users to use certain apps and not allow them to be deleted. This could be a nice class action lawsuit against Facebook, the phone manufacturers, and the carriers.

Re:Facebook App by Iwastheone · 2019-01-09 03:35 · Score: 1

I use NoRoot Firewall by Grey Shirts in order to prevent certain pre-installed apps from having any access to the internet. I have no idea where this app redirects to, nor do I care, could be the Chinese leaders desk for all I care. It just works.

Re:Same as every other pre-installed app by _merlin · 2019-01-09 02:39 · Score: 2

On the Galaxy S3 none of the pre-installed apps could be removed, but on the Galaxy S8 I found that Google Duo, Facebook, Instagram, Flipboard and a number of other pre-installed things actually could be removed. I don't have as many disabled apps as I used to on my S3 - just Chrome, Game Launcher, Gmail, Google Play Store, and YouTube - since my S8 allowed all the other obnoxious things to be uninstalled. I have Telstra Australia firmware, and it's the SM-G950F variant.

The Biggest lies by thomn8r · 2019-01-09 02:41 · Score: 1

I'll respect you in the morning, it's just a cold sore, and it doesn't continue collecting data or sending information back to Facebook.

Sigh by ledow · 2019-01-09 02:52 · Score: 2

"the best" phone experience right after opening the box...

would include "Do you want me to install Facebook for you? Yes/No" and if I click No then it doesn't do anything at all and leaves no traces or processes around whatsoever.

Hell, "Would you like me to install a bunch of common apps (e.g. Facebook, Snapchat, Whatsapp, etc.) for you now?" would be absolutely fine - user-friendly, helpful for newbies, and not obstructive to power users.

If Samsung did that, instead of forcing apps that I will NEVER use on my phone (including all the Samsung apps, not to mention things like Flipboard or whatever it is, Office suites and all kinds), I'd actually like them MORE and recommend them MORE and get them MORE customers and money than they will ever get in goodwill gestures from Facebook etc. for doing so.

Honestly, it's not your phone Samsung. Feel free to suggest things, but let me even turn off suggestions.

So... by argStyopa · 2019-01-09 03:00 · Score: 1

"A Facebook spokesperson said the disabled version of the app acts like it's been deleted"
So then what's the reasoning preventing us from, y'know, ACTUALLY deleting it?

--
-Styopa

This is news? by Chris+Mattern · 2019-01-09 03:08 · Score: 1

Samsung phones have had apps you can't delete for years, including Facebook and other stuff.

Never got this by DrXym · 2019-01-09 03:15 · Score: 1

Okay, I understand why Facebook might pay Samsung to put an app on their phone, but why bake it into the firmware? Facebook is one of those apps which updates every week so the one in the firmware is instantly obsolete wasting space even if someone did want to use that app. What's the point?

It would be far more sensible to just ask the user during phone setup if they want [list of partner apps] installed and if the user says yes they get queued up for installation. Otherwise a clean phone. And aside from being a way for the user to avoid crapware, it makes the firmware easier to test since there is less in it.

But this is Samsung. Their phones are filled with crapware, much of it of their own making and I doubt they'll change any time soon unless people start voting with their wallets.

Re:Duh, another Slashdot non-story by Ol+Olsoc · 2019-01-09 03:16 · Score: 2

Same, this is not news,

Consider that some people might not know this yet.

I've known that Facebook and some others are pretty cancerous for years. That doesn't mean that I refuse to tell anyone about it because I happen to know about it. Y'all need to understand that there are more people out there than yourselves.

It has been like that since I know smartphone. How can this be new?!?!?!?

I don't recall anyone saying this is something that was implemented yesterday. It is a story about how a person was surprised to find out about the practice. So he's telling people about it. Many people who don't already know about the practice. It's news to them.

Do you think that you should be the final arbiter of what should or should not be reported?

Are you the first person that ever knew this - if not, there probably a lot of people before you who knew it, and they never should have told you - old news, you know, wasting the intelligent people's time.

It is also the reason I buy unlocked phones, my latest one, Nokia 6.1, is an Android One phone and no bloatware installed.

How is buying an unlocked phone even news any more? Practice what you preach. Meanwhile, I just file this under a chance to give some folks some knowledge. If they already know, they can scroll on by.

--
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.

It's not just facebook by guacamole · 2019-01-09 03:29 · Score: 2

My older Samsung devices came preinstalled with Evernote, Netflix, Flipboard, NYTimes, and others. And while it was possible to disable most of these (not completely uninstall though), the Evernote could not be even disabled . Thank you Samsung.

Interesting play on words.. by sycodon · 2019-01-09 03:42 · Score: 4, Interesting

If it "Acts" like it's been deleted, then that suggests it is actually running and therefor able to, "act".

Is this an unfortunate and awkward statement on their part, or is it a deliberate effort to suggest the app is inert while being truthful about that fact the app is still running?

Don't put anything past the lawyers.

--
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.

Re:Interesting play on words.. by Solandri · 2019-01-09 06:45 · Score: 3, Informative

The app is inert if it's disabled. It doesn't run. (Disabling it also reverts it to the original version which came with the device, which is actually a bit troubling since although it's supposed to be a space-saving move, it implies that if you don't disable it your device actually wastes storage space on two copies of the app. On some devices, the original version is just a placeholder about 8 kB in size.)

The problem is another app - Facebook App Manager or whatever they're calling it now. It's responsible for keeping Facebook's suite of apps updated. You're supposed to be able to disable it, but on some devices it can't be disabled. I disabled the Facebook app on my Motorola phone, but couldn't disable Facebook App Manager. I found it's activity spiking one day, then noticed that the Facebook had been enabled and updated. So I disabled the Facebook app again, only to find it re-enabled and updated again a few days later. I had been being lazy and hadn't rooted this phone yet, but that's what finally got me to put aside the time one evening to root it. Both are gone for good now.

So, again by nightfire-unique · 2019-01-09 04:12 · Score: 1

We need laws that confirm and protect our right to root our devices; it should be illegal to manufacture, sell, or import for resale any device which has intentional limitations on privilege escalation.

There can be no negotiation on this point. The alternative is, frankly, terrifying.

--
A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC

glib, lip-licking paternalism by epine · 2019-01-09 04:20 · Score: 1

but said they're meant to give the consumer "the best" phone experience right after opening the box

Basically that translates to: assume the position; you can thank us later for providing you with such a nice, soft barrel.

Re:Duh, another Slashdot non-story by dryeo · 2019-01-09 05:07 · Score: 1

My Fido pay as you go MotoE came with very little besides the default Google apps. As the FM player is useful, never tried to delete it.

--
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism

Disabled apps can still run by WaffleMonster · 2019-01-09 06:58 · Score: 1

This is a common theme I keep hearing over and over again. Apparently vendors think if they parrot the same lie enough times users will believe it.

First they said you didn't have to stop apps because they won't consume resources unless they are in the foreground so it makes no difference what's running.

Then they said if an app isn't running it can't do anything.

Finally they said if an app is disabled it can't possibly execute.

All three are false assertions on the Android platform. Reality is you can register with various systems to live through anything and creepy stalker apps leverage it to the max.

Samsung is not user friendly by bobbutts · 2019-01-09 07:01 · Score: 1

I switched to a Pixel 2 from my Samsung Galaxy S7 mostly because Samsung was so hostile to unlocking the bootloader and rooting the phone. It was possible to modify, but it didn't perform as well as it did on stock. At least with the Pixel 2 I can unlock the bootloader and root the device with only a stern warning about the integrity of the OS not being verified.

What's the fuss? by OneHundredAndTen · 2019-01-09 07:50 · Score: 1

We all know what Samsung is like. If you are stupid enough to give them your money, you deserve what you get.

I had no problem deleting Facebook from my S8 by Blinkin1200 · 2019-01-09 08:32 · Score: 1

I upgraded to an S8 last August and had no problem deleting the Facebook app. It was one of the first things I did with the phone. I'm on Verizon.

Facebook app?!?! by Bruinwar · 2019-01-09 09:15 · Score: 1

I didn't even know it was on my S8. Thanks Slashdot! I uninstalled the app, no problem. Verizon S8... I get a nice discount from my employer with Verizon OK?!

--
SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT

Facebook should be removable by trytoguess · 2019-01-09 09:45 · Score: 1

Assuming you're ok with using adb, someone with a Galaxy S8 should be able to remove Facebook (or any other bloatware) even if they don't have root. You'll just need to follow these steps from xda. Only issue with this is anything you remove will come back if you do a factory reset.

Disabled == deleted by farble1670 · 2019-01-09 12:51 · Score: 1

He tried to remove the program from his phone, but the chatter proved true -- it was undeletable. He found only an option to "disable," and he wasn't sure what that meant.

When apps are installed via the system image (shipped with the phone) they can't be deleted, because that would mean modifying a signed, read-only disk partition.

Android instead has the ability to disable these apps. That means they will never run, won't show in the launcher, and won't use any data storage (beyond what the original app image uses of the read-only partition, which can't be used for anything else anyway, except pre-installing a different app).

Re:I wonder how that plays with Not-Facebook-Membe by Waccoon · 2019-01-09 21:24 · Score: 1

Everything is done with EULAs these days. What are these "contracts" you mention?

I'm sure if you read the Samsung EULA closely enough, it says something about "sharing with business partners -- but only the absolute minimum amount required to fulfill services".

android one by sad_ · 2019-01-10 00:12 · Score: 1

for me to buy a phone, it needs one or preferably both of these;

- runs with the android one program, a clean android with no extra crap or crazy customizations, but with regular updates
- is an open device which allows me to install a custom rom

shouldn't be too much to ask for.

--
On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.

Don't forget about Facebook App Installer by Krutontar · 2019-01-12 06:26 · Score: 1

So under apps you have Facebook and Facebook App Manager....but that's not all. I installed F-Droid and DNS66 (I don't have root yet) and if you tell it to show system apps you see that there is also something called Facebook App Installer (com.facebook.system) which is not visible on the regular Apps list so there is no button to stop/disable. Just a little PSA. Make sure your phone is rootable before you buy :P

Re:Don't forget about Facebook App Installer by Krutontar · 2019-01-12 06:31 · Score: 1

Edit: I hadn't found the "view system apps" button on the normal app page. New phone. But you can disable it from there. Whatever Disable really means...

Slashdot Mirror

Samsung Phone Users Perturbed To Find They Can't Delete Facebook (bloomberg.com)

192 of 315 comments (clear)