

No More Notification Ads and Icon Ads in Android Apps - thijser
http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2013/08/no-more-notification-ads-and-icon-ads.html

======
babuskov
What Android really needs is a way to accept/deny each permission separately.
I see some apps. asking for some permission they clearly do not need to
function, and you're left with a choice of either not installing the app. at
all or having to give it the permission you don't want.

~~~
WestCoastJustin
Permission is one of my _major_ gripes about the whole smart phone thing. I
wish devs would take the spirit of GNU and just release some simple free apps
without all these "adware" crap. For example, I wanted to install a led
flashlight app a couple days ago. The one with 10 million downloads wants
access to my phone book, internet, browser, etc. WTF! This is a LED flashlight
app and it has an install base of 10 million, why on earth does it need access
to the internet and phone book?! Arg, there is a total disconnect between
useful apps and privacy! I do not know what the answer is, but the current
system really grinds my gears!

Imagine if you wanted to use the ls, cd, grep, tar, pwd, top, etc commands on
unix and an "ad" would pop up, or maybe you would see it connecting to the
internet. These are utilities too. Is this acceptable behavior?

~~~
kevb
App stores are great for commercial developers but culturally clash with open
source apps. If someone were to take grep and commercialize it, no one would
use it. (Though I have seen stories about it happening with Blender). But if
grep were an app in the Play Store, and it was open source, someone would grab
the source, commercialize it, and maybe even invest in advertising to make
their grep to the most popular one.

Spare Parts is (was?) part of the Android Open Source Project, but got posted
to the Android Market with ads added and only minor changes. Romain Guy (of
Google's Android team) posted sample code for a Shelves application and had
the same experience.

I love open source, but make my living with closed source Android apps. One of
my early projects actually was an LED flashlight app. I tried selling it for a
week or two, then switched to a free and donate model which doesn't make much
money. My other apps do, and it's just a flashlight so I have no interest in
monetizing it. I also rarely update it, don't answer support emails for it,
and certainly don't buy banner ads to promote it. Without any marketing effort
on my part, there is no way it will compete with the commercial offerings.
I've considered open sourcing it, and maybe I should, but I'm still a bit
attached, as it was one of my first apps, and I'd hate to see a fork of it
with ads and junk grow more popular than it. I also wouldn't have much time to
review pull requests and build/test new APKs to publish.

The app is TeslaLED. If it works on your device (works on most modern devices)
then it's probably what you're looking for. Sadly if it doesn't it is unlikely
to get updated in the near future with support.

~~~
cbhl
> _I 'd hate to see a fork of it with ads_

Having seen this happen with Connectbot and others, I'm under the impression
that open-sourcing Android apps isn't worth it, in spite of what your
principles about software may be.

Which makes me wonder, does this happen on other platforms (iOS, BB10, WP7/8)
too, or is it just Android?

~~~
e12e
How about a licence with a special clause forbidding adware and/or
"privacyware"?

As long as you hold copyright, you could always offer different licensing if
anyone had a genuine need for it (say re-licence under GPL for some "worthy"
project, or re-sell under BSD for a price).

~~~
claudius
While certainly possible, I see two caveats here:

a) The ‘worthy project’ would have to license their product under GPL, too,
which has the obvious effect that the whole thing is properly open-sourced
again and everybody can slap ads on _their_ stuff.

b) A license forbidding the modification to add advertisements is certainly
not DFSG-free, and while this is likely of less concern in the Android
ecosystem, I tend to measure the open-sourcness of a programme by its possible
inclusion in Debian.

------
icesoldier
> _" Smartphone usage has skyrocketed, and some advertisers have begun to
> experiment with aggressive, new techniques to display ads on mobile devices.
> This includes pushing ads to the standard Android notification bar, dropping
> generically designed icons on the mobile desktop, and_ modifying browser
> settings like bookmarks or the default homepage," _explains Lookout._

Wait, seriously? Perhaps I'm too accustomed to iOS, but I wouldn't expect a
smartphone app to change the browser homepage.

~~~
duiker101
PC applications have always been able to do it so I don't see why not, in the
end it's the user that is accepting this, everything needs permissions, if the
user doesn't pay attention it's partly his fault. This are features that can
still be useful for legitimate uses.

~~~
marssaxman
I have always found the fact that Windows app installers routinely do this to
be one of the irritating things about that platform. Apps should know their
place: it's my machine, not theirs, and they should not presume to tell me how
I should organize it.

~~~
MichaelGG
It's interesting that Android is rediscovering the same lessons Windows
learned. As Windows progressed, they exposed less things via API, realising
that the _user_ wants control of their experience. For instance, pinning items
to the taskbar.

Devs call MS and whine "how can I make my installer pin the app to the
taskbar" and the answer is "that's the user's space, so you're not allowed".
Of course, without a sandbox or approved environment, applications can reverse
engineer the system somehow. And if MS adds a mandatory sandbox/approval
(WinRT) then it's "but it's not an open or fair platform; my machine is locked
down; freedom etc.".

Sure, you might say "but I _want_ " this app to violate the sandbox. But if
that's remotely easy to accomplish, then all apps just request you to violate
the sandbox (just like the tons of sites that used to have "click yes to
install the ActiveX control when the scary warning pops up").

~~~
xenophonf
The converse is that I really wish there were an app for managing the Start
screen in Windows 8 because having to right click a million icons etc. by hand
really sucks.

------
DominikR
Other important changes that will improve the ecosystem:

"Do not post an app where the primary functionality is to: Drive affiliate
traffic to a website or Provide a webview of a website not owned or
administered by you (unless you have permission from the website
owner/administrator to do so)"

and

"Apps that are created by an automated tool or wizard service must not be
submitted to Google Play by the operator of that service on behalf of other
persons."

I wouldn't be surprised if 10% of all apps in the Play store fall in those
categories.

------
thijser
This is quite significant as some of the bigger ad networks focus almost
exclusively on these kind of ad units and have reasonable market shares
(Airpush and Leadbolt are good examples):
[http://www.appbrain.com/stats/libraries/ad](http://www.appbrain.com/stats/libraries/ad)

~~~
cheald
Airpush going away makes me very happy.

~~~
brandnewlow
Airpush has developed a DSP over the last few months, likely in anticipation
of this happening.

------
reginaldjcooper
Mobile apps are such a shitty situation; it seems like one either has to
submit to the ridiculous walled garden approach or stand constant vigil
against every app one installs.

All OSs need fine(r)-grained permissions, they need to supply fake data to
apps that refuse to run without permissions, and in general make it
deleterious to abuse the user's trust.

My ideal vision is sandboxed applications that can reach out to shared data
stores or open external apps via some kind of intents; but only if the user
allows them to. Also apps should be signed and the user should have the option
of installing third-party CA certificates.

------
ParkerK
It would be nice if Apple would implement/actually enforce this as well. I
have ads pushing out notifications on "deals" or whatnot daily. Good on Google
for making this happen

~~~
MBCook
It's been against Apple's push notification rules since, I believe, day one.
I've had it happen a few times as well though.

------
adjwilli
"The Google Search app will be able to show Google Now ads for nearby
businesses". We'll that's good that at least Google get's to show its ads,
because it's "open" and you are its product.

