• jerkface@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    1 year ago

    Can you elaborate on “limited”? Surely that is what we want. One of the problems with the Play store is certainly not that it does not have a wide enough selection, but rather that it is full of harmful, hostile, dangerous, exploitive software. Any solution to that problem is necessarily going to limit (or one might prefer to say curate) its contents. That is exactly why I use F-Droid. It is limited to software that is not trying to hurt me.

    • lickmysword@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      I guess F-Droid is limited in the sense of low user awareness? Similar to lemmy in the sense that its just not that popular atm, but maybe its gaining popularity?

      • null@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sure, but that’s not going to be helped by making something new that’s “compelling” – which is the topic at hand

    • Melpomene@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Limited as in, lacks a fair number of apps that many people (myself included) need to be able to function as professionals. I’m not sure how much safer F-Droid is in theory, as the vetting process for apps seems to be pretty nonexistent. For each app, I have to either research or trust. That’s fine for me, but trying to explain how to handle that to tech-unsavvy people is a bridge too far.

      “Just research the publisher or programmer and review the code, mom!” Yeah, not going to work.

      • jerkface@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Those products that you “need” to function as professionals are never going to be available in a way that does not exploit you and put you at risk. You’re always going to be trapped with the incumbent marketplace’s shitty practices until you take steps to meet those needs in some other way.

        You do not have to personally audit every application you use. After all, you DON’T audit closed applications, and neither does anyone else. At least with an application with code available under a public license, other people have the ability to review it and raise concerns. I can’t see how you can cast that as a disadvantage, just because you don’t personally want to audit the software yourself.

        Personally, I’m not comfortable predicating my very livelihood on closed, commercial software that somebody else owns and leverages with the specific intention of exploiting me. That sounds like fucking madness to me.

        • Melpomene@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          That fine; now tell the companies you work with that to work with you that they have to retrain their tens of thousands of employees to use those other applications, apps that lack critical functionality they rely on. Whether you like it or not, there are business critical applications that the apps on F-Droid cannot currently replace. Pretending that F-Droid offers everything everyone needs is not helpful to moving toward a better way; it’s akin to those guys who scream “USE LINUX” every time someone has an issue with a Windows application. Me, I love Linux… but I also realize that for the businesses I work with, Linux as a desktop solution isn’t going to sell.

          My apps are around 5% Google Play (paid apps from indie developers unavailable on other platforms, using a throwaway account) 25% F-Droid, 25% direct APK, and 45% Aurora. As apps I need join F-Droid, I switch… but many just don’t see the value.