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

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Bloomberg: Nick Winke, a photographer in the Pacific northwest, was perusing internet forums when he came across a complaint that alarmed him: On certain Samsung Electronics Co. smartphones, users aren't allowed to delete the Facebook app. Winke bought his Samsung Galaxy S8, an Android-based device that comes with Facebook's social network already installed, when it was introduced in 2017. He has used the Facebook app to connect with old friends and to share pictures of natural landscapes and his Siamese cat -- but he didn't want to be stuck with it. 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.

A Facebook spokesperson said the disabled version of the app acts like it's been deleted, so it doesn't continue collecting data or sending information back to Facebook. But there's rarely communication with the consumer about the process. The Menlo Park, California-based company said whether the app is deletable or not depends on various pre-install deals Facebook has made with phone manufacturers, operating systems and mobile operators around the world over the years, including Samsung. Facebook, the world's largest social network, wouldn't disclose the financial nature of the agreements, but said they're meant to give the consumer "the best" phone experience right after opening the box.

Comments

Don't sugarcoat the turd

[Opportunist]

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

Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd

[grep -v '.*' *]

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.

Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd

[Anonymous Coward]

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

[JaredOfEuropa]

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.

Re: Don't sugarcoat the turd

[Zontar The Mindless]

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

Wanna bet?

Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd

[drinkypoo]

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.

Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd

[Opportunist]

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

Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd

[Z00L00K]

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

Re:Don't sugarcoat the turd

[ctilsie242]

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

[fahrbot-bot]

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.

Re:Not even close to a new issue

[Iwastheone]

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

Not really shocking

[LubosD]

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.

Er?

[cascadingstylesheet]

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.

I wonder how that plays with Not-Facebook-Members

[Sique]

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.

Re:Gotta love the doublespeak

[thegarbz]

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.

Interesting play on words..

[sycodon]

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.