4 ms·

DJI seems to be the one company that requires sideloading the Android app. DJI makes great products, but there's really few companies who I would trust less to

DJI seems to be the one company that requires sideloading the Android app. DJI makes great products, but there's really few companies who I would trust less to give unvetted access to my phone. I know the Android app sandboxing should help a lot, but there's enough unknowns & potentially lurking security holes that I really wouldn't want to trust them. They also are 100% the most likely company on the planet to self-update & start truly-epic-level spying on the world if China ever gets a little bit more nervous. It's just not a tenable proposition to trust DJI with this security stance; no one at the company has the power nor right to say no, & as such there's no basis for trust to form.

steve_adams_86 4y ago
I’m in the same camp. I got my son a Mini 3, which is a stellar quadcopter in its own right, but the DJI ecosystem is a spectacle to behold for some good and many bad reasons. One issue could be that they don’t communicate compatibility between devices very well, so it’s very hard to know if buying one thing will lead to being very limited and locked in — even within the DJI ecosystem. People often find themselves needing to buy more equipment to accomplish seemingly trivial things. For example, the controller we got can’t install apps and it doesn’t work with a multitude of other quads DJI sells. Why not? Are they good reasons or bad? Where can I find clear explanations? I’m sure the controller is very resource constrained, but can’t I just opt into bad performance if I don’t mind? Is the controller incompatible with other quads due to radio protocols, or is this a choice intended to force eventual upgrades? Without being able to tell with certainty, sometimes it begins to seem a little manufactured and nefarious. Otherwise, the fact that their protocols are all proprietary and I can’t use the controller with custom quads is very frustrating. I have a Radio Master TX12 that I can’t use with any DJI products, and a DJI controller I can’t use with any custom quads already built or that I could ever build. That’s all crazy. Sure, tight integration means better performance, but the extent to which it’s closed off is unreal. Although the Mini 3 is a genuinely awesome device, I don’t think I’ll buy DJI again. I think I’d rather buy into open VTX hardware and use my own camera to record footage. It’s a huge compromise in convenience and upfront cost, but if you care a lot about the hobby it’s perhaps well worth it. The flexibility afforded is enormous.
- brokenmachine 4y ago
  100%. I was thinking about getting an Avata, and I was just about to pull the trigger, then they released a recent update that includes Remote ID which means that now you have to connect your phone to the goggles to take off (something you never had to do before) so it can get a GPS location to broadcast the operator location. I'm not even sure why it would need to do that because the drone itself has a GPS so wouldn't it know where it took off from anyway? I'm in Australia so we don't even use Remote ID, so I don't know what will happen if I bought one. Do I have to connect my phone to use the drone? Will I have to in the future? How can I find out? What if I'm in an area with no phone signal? I am quite interested in trying out FPV drones, and I would like to have the (unique?) feature of the Avata where if I get in a bad spot I can just hit the switch to enable GPS auto-hover, but all of the uncertainty with DJI stuff has made me not buy one, and I probably won't. I didn't even know you had to sideload the app until this thread. Spidey senses going off 2000%. I don't need to spend $2k on another hacking project on my list of devices that I've paid for but still don't really own. Probably better to just buy a more DIY setup that I have full control over, and real ownership of.
  - saidinesh5 4y ago
    GPS return to home/fail safe modes has been a feature of most fpv drone firmware for quite a while. Betaflight, iNav etc .. All support that as long as you have a GPS (+ compass) module installed. The only thing avata brings is some beginner friendly flight modes for a premium. Kind of like Apple products. You also have a lot of ready to fly/bind and fly options (buy a radio separately and bind it to your quad and fly) out there these days..
    - brokenmachine 4y ago
      Hmm, I'll have to check them out a bit. Are there DIY digital FPV goggles with as good quality video as the Avata ones? Do you need a separate camera for the footage (gopro), as well as the FPV camera? Also the gimbal on the Avata seems very well integrated, even having fancy head tracking, which I wouldn't mind giving up, but do the DIY drones have a gimbal at all, or is it a manual job to stabilize the footage later? I agree, DJI seems like the Apple of drones. And I'm against Apple for computers and phones, because I can DIY better and more features. But for drones, I suspect that DJI actually has features that you can't (reasonably) DIY. What are the good brands for the ready to fly/bind and fly drones, so I can have a google?
yreg 4y ago
I get why people want the end of the App Store monopoly and I apprieciate the idea of being able to run anything I want on my hardware, but this here is the reason why I'm hesitant. As a user I want the big developers to have to bend the knee to Apple. I don't want to side load my DJI app, I don't want to download Instagram from the Meta store. I don't agree with all of Apple's rules (and also with the way the app revenue is split), but I'm mostly satisfied with them.
- archagon 4y ago
  Then the future of computing will be in the hands of mega-corporations. Have an innovative app idea that goes against corporate policy? Too bad, won't happen. Strict sandboxing and a robust permissions model can still give you security with these kinds of apps.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - rektide 4y ago
    It really bothers me that DJI is basically the one notable example that gives the anti-sideloading FUD-dites some ammunition. It's generally not a real issue, DJI are just extra punks, and yeah, sandboxing should offer really good protection in general, but maybe maybe your drone is live uploading all drone data to the CCP perhaps. Freedom enables choice. Humanity's greatness is built entirely off our ability to explore possibilities & create new ways. Gating innovation behind what Apple & all the governments permit us is just not an option for the most important most noospheric device on the planet. Not having choices is to let ourselves be chained up in the PKD Black Iron Prison. I refuse that dejection.
    - yreg 4y ago
      >Freedom enables choice. One could argue that also for the freedom to choose a curated platform. Android exists and prospers, I have a choice.
miohtama 4y ago
Is there any other reason to force sideloading except that China hates Google?
- capableweb 4y ago
  - No need to deal with Google or the Play Store and everything that comes with, having to do reviews and all that - Faster deployments to actual devices. AFAIK, you could even implement self-updating if you're feeling brave - No sharing of data to Google and/or Play Store. - Basically everything that the Play Store is now allowed, as you set your own rules (besides local regulation). Basically, lots of goodies for developers and companies who want to skirt whatever safety Google has setup, with minor benefit to the users themselves.
  - blacksmith_tb 4y ago
    Presumably, no benefits to users (other than being able to use app itself, that is). But I believe even sideloaded apps are scanned daily by Play Protect[1] which should spot if DJI started doing something sneaky? 1: https://developers.google.com/android/play-protect/client-protections https://developers.google.com/android/play-protect/client-pr...
lostsock 4y ago
Pretty sure this comes with it's own standalone DJI remote (which is really just running android underneath). No need to sideload or connect to your phone in any way.
ChancyChance 4y ago
Simple: don't use your phone. They make remotes that have screens built in. No way I give them access. I even have them connect to a locked down SSID in my house LAN.
- FeistySkink 4y ago
  You don't need a phone to activate a new DJI drone?
  - ChancyChance 4y ago
    Not all of them. Depends on the remote that comes with it though. Some remotes don’t have a screen to save money and you need a phone for that style.

steve_adams_86 4y ago

I’m in the same camp. I got my son a Mini 3, which is a stellar quadcopter in its own right, but the DJI ecosystem is a spectacle to behold for some good and many bad reasons. One issue could be that they don’t communicate compatibility between devices very well, so it’s very hard to know if buying one thing will lead to being very limited and locked in — even within the DJI ecosystem. People often find themselves needing to buy more equipment to accomplish seemingly trivial things. For example, the controller we got can’t install apps and it doesn’t work with a multitude of other quads DJI sells. Why not? Are they good reasons or bad? Where can I find clear explanations? I’m sure the controller is very resource constrained, but can’t I just opt into bad performance if I don’t mind? Is the controller incompatible with other quads due to radio protocols, or is this a choice intended to force eventual upgrades? Without being able to tell with certainty, sometimes it begins to seem a little manufactured and nefarious. Otherwise, the fact that their protocols are all proprietary and I can’t use the controller with custom quads is very frustrating. I have a Radio Master TX12 that I can’t use with any DJI products, and a DJI controller I can’t use with any custom quads already built or that I could ever build. That’s all crazy. Sure, tight integration means better performance, but the extent to which it’s closed off is unreal. Although the Mini 3 is a genuinely awesome device, I don’t think I’ll buy DJI again. I think I’d rather buy into open VTX hardware and use my own camera to record footage. It’s a huge compromise in convenience and upfront cost, but if you care a lot about the hobby it’s perhaps well worth it. The flexibility afforded is enormous.

brokenmachine 4y ago
100%. I was thinking about getting an Avata, and I was just about to pull the trigger, then they released a recent update that includes Remote ID which means that now you have to connect your phone to the goggles to take off (something you never had to do before) so it can get a GPS location to broadcast the operator location. I'm not even sure why it would need to do that because the drone itself has a GPS so wouldn't it know where it took off from anyway? I'm in Australia so we don't even use Remote ID, so I don't know what will happen if I bought one. Do I have to connect my phone to use the drone? Will I have to in the future? How can I find out? What if I'm in an area with no phone signal? I am quite interested in trying out FPV drones, and I would like to have the (unique?) feature of the Avata where if I get in a bad spot I can just hit the switch to enable GPS auto-hover, but all of the uncertainty with DJI stuff has made me not buy one, and I probably won't. I didn't even know you had to sideload the app until this thread. Spidey senses going off 2000%. I don't need to spend $2k on another hacking project on my list of devices that I've paid for but still don't really own. Probably better to just buy a more DIY setup that I have full control over, and real ownership of.
- saidinesh5 4y ago
  GPS return to home/fail safe modes has been a feature of most fpv drone firmware for quite a while. Betaflight, iNav etc .. All support that as long as you have a GPS (+ compass) module installed. The only thing avata brings is some beginner friendly flight modes for a premium. Kind of like Apple products. You also have a lot of ready to fly/bind and fly options (buy a radio separately and bind it to your quad and fly) out there these days..
  - brokenmachine 4y ago
    Hmm, I'll have to check them out a bit. Are there DIY digital FPV goggles with as good quality video as the Avata ones? Do you need a separate camera for the footage (gopro), as well as the FPV camera? Also the gimbal on the Avata seems very well integrated, even having fancy head tracking, which I wouldn't mind giving up, but do the DIY drones have a gimbal at all, or is it a manual job to stabilize the footage later? I agree, DJI seems like the Apple of drones. And I'm against Apple for computers and phones, because I can DIY better and more features. But for drones, I suspect that DJI actually has features that you can't (reasonably) DIY. What are the good brands for the ready to fly/bind and fly drones, so I can have a google?

yreg 4y ago

I get why people want the end of the App Store monopoly and I apprieciate the idea of being able to run anything I want on my hardware, but this here is the reason why I'm hesitant. As a user I want the big developers to have to bend the knee to Apple. I don't want to side load my DJI app, I don't want to download Instagram from the Meta store. I don't agree with all of Apple's rules (and also with the way the app revenue is split), but I'm mostly satisfied with them.

archagon 4y ago
Then the future of computing will be in the hands of mega-corporations. Have an innovative app idea that goes against corporate policy? Too bad, won't happen. Strict sandboxing and a robust permissions model can still give you security with these kinds of apps.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- rektide 4y ago
  It really bothers me that DJI is basically the one notable example that gives the anti-sideloading FUD-dites some ammunition. It's generally not a real issue, DJI are just extra punks, and yeah, sandboxing should offer really good protection in general, but maybe maybe your drone is live uploading all drone data to the CCP perhaps. Freedom enables choice. Humanity's greatness is built entirely off our ability to explore possibilities & create new ways. Gating innovation behind what Apple & all the governments permit us is just not an option for the most important most noospheric device on the planet. Not having choices is to let ourselves be chained up in the PKD Black Iron Prison. I refuse that dejection.
  - yreg 4y ago
    >Freedom enables choice. One could argue that also for the freedom to choose a curated platform. Android exists and prospers, I have a choice.

miohtama 4y ago

Is there any other reason to force sideloading except that China hates Google?

capableweb 4y ago
- No need to deal with Google or the Play Store and everything that comes with, having to do reviews and all that - Faster deployments to actual devices. AFAIK, you could even implement self-updating if you're feeling brave - No sharing of data to Google and/or Play Store. - Basically everything that the Play Store is now allowed, as you set your own rules (besides local regulation). Basically, lots of goodies for developers and companies who want to skirt whatever safety Google has setup, with minor benefit to the users themselves.
- blacksmith_tb 4y ago
  Presumably, no benefits to users (other than being able to use app itself, that is). But I believe even sideloaded apps are scanned daily by Play Protect[1] which should spot if DJI started doing something sneaky? 1: https://developers.google.com/android/play-protect/client-protections https://developers.google.com/android/play-protect/client-pr...

lostsock 4y ago

Pretty sure this comes with it's own standalone DJI remote (which is really just running android underneath). No need to sideload or connect to your phone in any way.

ChancyChance 4y ago

Simple: don't use your phone. They make remotes that have screens built in. No way I give them access. I even have them connect to a locked down SSID in my house LAN.

FeistySkink 4y ago
You don't need a phone to activate a new DJI drone?
- ChancyChance 4y ago
  Not all of them. Depends on the remote that comes with it though. Some remotes don’t have a screen to save money and you need a phone for that style.