5 ms·

Right. So is there now no user access to the device's file system? At all, I mean. And what about SD cards? And use of Dropbox or whatever? Or AWS and Google

Right. So is there now no user access to the device's file system? At all, I mean. And what about SD cards? And use of Dropbox or whatever? Or AWS and Google storage?

Arnt 8y ago
There is user access, but app access is becoming scarce. An app can ask you, as user, to pick a file for reading/writing/creation, and it receives access to something very much like a file, but the app isn't even permitted to know whether that's a file on the local device or an on-demand download/upload by another app.
- mirimir 8y ago
  Thanks. So is this to help protect apps from each other? And/or to protect users from malicious apps? And what if you've rooted the device, and installed your own file-management app. Could that app manage files normally?
  - koolba 8y ago
    > So is this to help protect apps from each other? And/or to protect users from malicious apps? One angle is it prevents apps from scanning your local storage for files and stealing them. Another angle is that it blurs the line between cloud and local so that storing data on cloud services gets treated the same as local data. If you happen to own said cloud storage services (cough Google cough) then that direction aligns with your corporate interests.
    - i_cant_speel 8y ago
      Not being concerned about where a file comes from sounds like a convenience to developers. It's like a file repository. I don't know why that implies Google is scheming to further integrate their cloud services.
      - TeMPOraL 8y ago
        It's not a convenience to developers, it's extra complexity. It's convenient for companies though, because it makes implementing cloud-centric business models easier. It's a problem for users, because they no longer have clue where the data is stored or how to find it beyond the app that claims to own it.
  - Arnt 8y ago
    Protecting users from malicious apps seems to be the main thing. I think you can manage files even without rooting. I plugged a phone (XZ1C, Android 9) into USB now, the computer offered to open the phone's storage, 2-3 clicks later and I see the photos that are stored on the phone.
- Pxtl 8y ago
  Well considering that Android doesn't include a respectable file-browser built-in and so you have to do that through apps, that functionally means user access too. No, you can't see your file system. Not yours.
  - Arnt 8y ago
    Not meaning to voice disagreement or anything, but do you have an example of a decent file browser?
    - pbhjpbhj 8y ago
      Not OP but I like ES File Explorer. It perhaps follows a desktop FM form to closely, but works for me when I need to navigate the Android file system. Edit: There's a load of suggestions downthread, I think I might be on an older version of ES, maybe pihole is blocking some of the ads others are complaining of.
      - fivefive55 8y ago
        Es was the best for awhile, but it's bloated and has ads now. I switched to Solid Explorer and it works great for me, nice UI and pretty quick. No complaints so far.
    - Pxtl 8y ago
      The Asus ZenUI one is pretty good, I use that.
    - Yetanfou 8y ago
      Amaze File Manager does quite well, is free software [1] and can be installed from both F-Droid as well as the Play Store. [1] https://github.com/TeamAmaze/AmazeFileManager https://github.com/TeamAmaze/AmazeFileManager
  - simias 8y ago
    That seems pretty reasonable to me honestly given the whole mindset behind Android. Why would the average user even care about exploring the filesystem? And if you're a poweruser who really wants to have low level access then you can just root your device and run whatever you want on it. Regardless of whether you think it's good or bad design, at least it's consistent IMO.
- MayeulC 8y ago
  This sounds very much like the model Google uses in its Fuschia operating system, where there is no access to the filesystem per se, but handles are passed around, that allow writing in a folder or a file, with various permissions attached to that handle.
- josteink 8y ago
  > There is user access, but app access is becoming scarce. But without an app to access it, how will the user get to the files?
- iggldiggl 8y ago
  > and it receives access to something very much like a file, but the app isn't even permitted to know whether that's a file on the local device or an on-demand download/upload by another app ... and which is also completely unsuitable for content that implicitly depends on multiple files, e.g. locally stored HTML files: For the case where an app is launched because you wanted to view a particular file, you'll only get access to that "something very much like a file" for that exact file only, but you (respectively your browser) cannot access any other associated files that might be required (images, style sheets, scripts and whatnot) that way, and neither would navigation among separate files stored locally work.

Right. So is there now no user access to the device's file system? At all, I mean. And what about SD cards? And use of Dropbox or whatever? Or AWS and Google storage?

Arnt 8y ago

There is user access, but app access is becoming scarce. An app can ask you, as user, to pick a file for reading/writing/creation, and it receives access to something very much like a file, but the app isn't even permitted to know whether that's a file on the local device or an on-demand download/upload by another app.

mirimir 8y ago
Thanks. So is this to help protect apps from each other? And/or to protect users from malicious apps? And what if you've rooted the device, and installed your own file-management app. Could that app manage files normally?
- koolba 8y ago
  > So is this to help protect apps from each other? And/or to protect users from malicious apps? One angle is it prevents apps from scanning your local storage for files and stealing them. Another angle is that it blurs the line between cloud and local so that storing data on cloud services gets treated the same as local data. If you happen to own said cloud storage services (cough Google cough) then that direction aligns with your corporate interests.
  - i_cant_speel 8y ago
    Not being concerned about where a file comes from sounds like a convenience to developers. It's like a file repository. I don't know why that implies Google is scheming to further integrate their cloud services.
    - TeMPOraL 8y ago
      It's not a convenience to developers, it's extra complexity. It's convenient for companies though, because it makes implementing cloud-centric business models easier. It's a problem for users, because they no longer have clue where the data is stored or how to find it beyond the app that claims to own it.
- Arnt 8y ago
  Protecting users from malicious apps seems to be the main thing. I think you can manage files even without rooting. I plugged a phone (XZ1C, Android 9) into USB now, the computer offered to open the phone's storage, 2-3 clicks later and I see the photos that are stored on the phone.
Pxtl 8y ago
Well considering that Android doesn't include a respectable file-browser built-in and so you have to do that through apps, that functionally means user access too. No, you can't see your file system. Not yours.
- Arnt 8y ago
  Not meaning to voice disagreement or anything, but do you have an example of a decent file browser?
  - pbhjpbhj 8y ago
    Not OP but I like ES File Explorer. It perhaps follows a desktop FM form to closely, but works for me when I need to navigate the Android file system. Edit: There's a load of suggestions downthread, I think I might be on an older version of ES, maybe pihole is blocking some of the ads others are complaining of.
    - fivefive55 8y ago
      Es was the best for awhile, but it's bloated and has ads now. I switched to Solid Explorer and it works great for me, nice UI and pretty quick. No complaints so far.
  - Pxtl 8y ago
    The Asus ZenUI one is pretty good, I use that.
  - Yetanfou 8y ago
    Amaze File Manager does quite well, is free software [1] and can be installed from both F-Droid as well as the Play Store. [1] https://github.com/TeamAmaze/AmazeFileManager https://github.com/TeamAmaze/AmazeFileManager
- simias 8y ago
  That seems pretty reasonable to me honestly given the whole mindset behind Android. Why would the average user even care about exploring the filesystem? And if you're a poweruser who really wants to have low level access then you can just root your device and run whatever you want on it. Regardless of whether you think it's good or bad design, at least it's consistent IMO.
MayeulC 8y ago
This sounds very much like the model Google uses in its Fuschia operating system, where there is no access to the filesystem per se, but handles are passed around, that allow writing in a folder or a file, with various permissions attached to that handle.
josteink 8y ago
> There is user access, but app access is becoming scarce. But without an app to access it, how will the user get to the files?
iggldiggl 8y ago
> and it receives access to something very much like a file, but the app isn't even permitted to know whether that's a file on the local device or an on-demand download/upload by another app ... and which is also completely unsuitable for content that implicitly depends on multiple files, e.g. locally stored HTML files: For the case where an app is launched because you wanted to view a particular file, you'll only get access to that "something very much like a file" for that exact file only, but you (respectively your browser) cannot access any other associated files that might be required (images, style sheets, scripts and whatnot) that way, and neither would navigation among separate files stored locally work.