Well, it's not like we don't know about the default file picker. If we'd switch our customers to that clunky, buggy piece of brittle UX bricolage, they start throwing stones. And you know what: They'd be right. They usually are right. They just don't know or care what it costs to build that they don't want to pay for. And understandably, since everything else in Google world comes completely free of charge.
Some experts here seem to think that “It’s great that Google takes security seriously. I don’t want just any app getting access to my Drive.” Guys...
You think this is air you're breathing? CASA isn’t real security. It’s a very badly played security theater. There are plenty of holes, MI CASA SU CASA, that real hackers can use to steal your selfies and credit card info. You still think we’re not informed enough? We never wanted access to Google Drive. We don’t care about your Google Drive or anyone’s Drive at all.
We don’t have, want, or ever asked for access to your files. And don’t start with, “But you could be hackers!” We’re not. Google has our entire history—7 years with them, 14 years building apps, and 20 years as a company. They have our code, user feedback, passports, phone numbers, bank info, and confidential documents. But they still pass the security theatre burden onto us, making us pay KPMG for audits. Not because it makes things safer. It's so they can lean back, do nothing, and then lift both hands and then point fingers in case things go wrong. That scales nicely.
You know what is a much better way to care about safety? A human mind that knows, checks and cares. Oh, that doesn't scale? Okay, so let's increase bureaucracy. Yeah, bureaucracy will make things safer. Safety by bureaucracy was always the best great hacker barrier. Or is it the opposite? Bureaucracy makes you calculable. If I were a hacker, I'd welcome bureaucracy.
Because of security reasons, my web browser cannot write to "Downloads", but "Downloads/a" works.
Because of security reasons, my file manager cannot access "Android/obb" and I need to use a trick with the "Files" app.
In order to improve user experience, the option to directly mount the SD card via USB has been removed. Now I need to physically remove it from the phone because the Android's default way of handling things simply doesn't work when you have more than a handful of files.
BTW SD cards suck on Android, but when you connect them to the cheapest Chinese USB reader and to your PC, then they're magically 10x faster.
It's clear to me that Google pushes business decisions under the disguise of "improvements". I think that removing the audio jack was the symbol of Google moving away from creating a good OS to monetizing their OS. I really wish there was a viable alternative to Android that I could install on any phone.
> If we'd switch our customers to that clunky, buggy piece of brittle UX bricolage, they start throwing stones.
I mean like... have you tried asking them?
I use the Obsidian app on Android with the default file picker is fine for my usage. I barely even notice it, and as a Syncthing user it ensures I get a native and compatible experience.
This arguing over "safety" when Google's stance is entirely logical does not give me a good feeling about your product. Your job, as a developer that relies on Google and Apple to ship your app, is to jump through their hoops. Grandstanding your userbase doesn't sell new licenses, it makes people question relying on you at any point in the future - it hurts iA's brand more than it hurts Google. As an Obsidian user this basically confirms my suspicion that most SAAS-based Markdown editors are totally overengineered and (apparently) not a reliable choice if you only use the Play Store.
It's your call. Putting up with Apple and Google's bullshit sucks, but it's also literally your job as a provider of support to those platforms. If Google's behavior is enough to make you react like this, I half expect the Windows, iOS and MacOS builds will join Han Solo by the end of the year.
Some experts here seem to think that “It’s great that Google takes security seriously. I don’t want just any app getting access to my Drive.” Guys...
You think this is air you're breathing? CASA isn’t real security. It’s a very badly played security theater. There are plenty of holes, MI CASA SU CASA, that real hackers can use to steal your selfies and credit card info. You still think we’re not informed enough? We never wanted access to Google Drive. We don’t care about your Google Drive or anyone’s Drive at all.
We don’t have, want, or ever asked for access to your files. And don’t start with, “But you could be hackers!” We’re not. Google has our entire history—7 years with them, 14 years building apps, and 20 years as a company. They have our code, user feedback, passports, phone numbers, bank info, and confidential documents. But they still pass the security theatre burden onto us, making us pay KPMG for audits. Not because it makes things safer. It's so they can lean back, do nothing, and then lift both hands and then point fingers in case things go wrong. That scales nicely.
You know what is a much better way to care about safety? A human mind that knows, checks and cares. Oh, that doesn't scale? Okay, so let's increase bureaucracy. Yeah, bureaucracy will make things safer. Safety by bureaucracy was always the best great hacker barrier. Or is it the opposite? Bureaucracy makes you calculable. If I were a hacker, I'd welcome bureaucracy.