17 ms·

Nextcloud cries foul over Google Play Store app rejection

280 points by brodo 1y ago

mritzmann 1y ago
Background: > Other apps were not allowed to use this permission at all, once it was introduced in 2022. I could convince them back then, that we need this. But nowadays they are more strict on it and thus we needed to remove this permission. Thus is, why it feels now like a regression / problem in UX, while it was only an exception that they allowed it for ~2 years. https://github.com/nextcloud/android/issues/14135#issuecomment-2550393752 https://github.com/nextcloud/android/issues/14135#issuecomme...
0x000xca0xfe 1y ago
The war on general purpose computing goes on. It will only end when every piece of software could be a web app.
- threeseed 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - cybrox 1y ago
    Maybe a fluid, touch-centric experience would be less important for most use-cases if not every simple to-do app had to be over-engineered with 20 animations and gestures...
  - yjftsjthsd-h 1y ago
    > Nobody other than irrelevant nerds think of their phones as general purpose computing devices. Everyone else thinks of them as consoles or microwaves. Phones run arbitrary programs and store files; they're computers by any name. If my microwave had an app store then I would feel comfortable calling it a computer, too.
    - threeseed 1y ago
      You can install apps on fridges, cars etc. I guess you're driving a computer ?
      - yjftsjthsd-h 1y ago
        1. Yes. 2. I'm open to drawing a line based on whether the primary purpose of a device is running programs. A car with no user-facing computers is still a car, a fridge with no computers is still a fridge, a modern phone with no user-facing programs is a worthless paperweight. Like... the fact that we call them "phones" is just a historical accident at this point, but that's not what our handheld computers really are, at least not primarily.
pjc50 1y ago
So it's the functionality/"security" dichotomy again, but in a slightly different place from iOS. Google won't let an app access all your files, but what if you the user specifically want this app to access all your files because it is, say, a file manager or sync tool? The escape hatch is to use the FDroid version rather than the Play Store version.
- zb3 1y ago
  No, they just use the "security" argument in bad faith, so third party apps can't compete with builtin ones made by Google.
  - troyvit 1y ago
    That's my take. And even if they aren't using the security argument in bad faith this time, they have so often in the past that now they can reap the rewards of using that argument in bad faith.
  - izacus 1y ago
    Right, because y'all didn't scream when Android games could upload all private photos to their servers because they got this blanket permission to download their game files. Get outta here.
    - zb3 1y ago
      I don't care about games I don't download. I don't see a problem with the fact that if I download and execute a binary file on linux without explicit sandbox, it can mess up my system, that's my responsibility. Google pretends to care about my security, but they actually care about cementing their monopoly.
  - UncleMeat 1y ago
    The builtin app is using the more privacy-friendly framework that Nextcloud claims they cannot use.
- tarruda 1y ago
dismalpedigree 1y ago
Does Google Drive have this elevated privilege? If so, seems blatant abuse of app store control. If not, it would seem to indicate there is a workaround somehow the Nextcloud could also leverage.
- jfim 1y ago
  Drive doesn't sync arbitrary files on Android though. A closer analogue to what nextcloud is trying to do would be syncthing, who also discontinued its Android app due to issues with getting the proper permissions with the play store (see https://github.com/syncthing/syncthing-android/issues/2064 https://github.com/syncthing/syncthing-android/issues/2064).
  - genpfault 1y ago
    > syncthing, who also discontinued its Android app https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.github.catfriend1.syncthingandroid/ https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.github.catfriend1.syncth... https://github.com/Catfriend1/syncthing-android-fdroid https://github.com/Catfriend1/syncthing-android-fdroid
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- new_user_final 1y ago
  Google Drive, Google Photos do not have this permission but Android Auto and Files by Google have.
_def 1y ago
Ah so that's probably yhe reason why the Dropbox app has these weird abstraction layers. If it weren't for integration with other apps, I would much prefer Nextcloud. But some apps simply don't offer anything else than "cloud sync"
rkagerer 1y ago
Google - if you're out there - stop being such absolute effing jerks to your users. A lot of us actually want to run apps with full access to our system. The kind of access your own backend has with features like cloud backup. Syncthing already abandoned their Android app because of this nonsense (as jfim pointed out: https://github.com/syncthing/syncthing-android/issues/2064 https://github.com/syncthing/syncthing-android/issues/2064)
- robertlagrant 1y ago
  You must realise there are lots of different user types, and far far more people just want a phone that can't have stuff installed on it that can't do naughty things.
  - cwillu 1y ago
    If google controlled the trade codes, your house would have electrical panels that could only be opened with a tool that was only available to google certified tradies, you know, for safety.
    - robertlagrant 1y ago
      If Google's reputation were on the line if anyone's electrical panel broke, or if someone stole all your personal data from your life that they run through that panel then, yeah. I imagine so.
      - modo_mario 1y ago
        And that electrical panel would still break and now it would have people like me shitting on their reputation at every chance given whether it breaks for me or not. Because philosophically its a stain, now I likely pay more and i can't have my knowledgeable family in the trade deal with the issue and me with some of the others.
        robertlagrant 1y ago
SpaghettiCthulu 1y ago
Why doesn't Nextcloud use the scoped storage access introduced in recent years? Users could give Nextcloud access to the particular folders they want synced. Is there some kind of access they need that those APIs don't support?
- threeseed 1y ago
  Often it's because setting up a David versus Goliath story is good for business. Spotify did this all the time where they would complain about Apple not allowing them access to some private API and then when they did didn't even bother to use it.
  - palata 1y ago
    Nextcloud is about synchronising files. Some people may only sync media files, but surely you can imagine that others want to sync other files, right? It's not that crazy, Dropbox, GDrive, iCloud, etc. all do that. Do you really think it seems unfair that a file sync app would want to access files?
    - izacus 1y ago
      Scoped storage allows them to access any files the user allows them to.
      - hashhar 1y ago
        Not really. Downloads is out of bounds and the root folder is also out of bounds.
- f33d5173 1y ago
  This is the one that only allows access to media files, yes? This is fact the API they are using. They expound in the article that it is insufficient for their use case.
  - izacus 1y ago
monegator 1y ago
>Attempts to raise the issue with Google resulted in little more than copy-and-pasted sections of the developer guide My exact same experience. We had two very simillar apps for a brief time, the old version that interfaces to the old hardware, for old phones, and the new version which was basically redesigned from scratch but kept the same UI. We wanted at least to have a fallback version in case users had any issue, for whatever reason. From the top of my head, i can name at least a dozen apps that i use daily that have multiple versions of them on the store, for the same reason we did. However, we received a complaint from google, which froze both our apps, because apparently you can't make one app that looks too simillar to another one. First, it's our APP. We are not trying to copy anyone (the chief reason for this rule, you don't want fake malicious clones of apps) Second, it's only the first page that looks the same (a video was provided showing the differences once you connected to a companion device. Also ALL our apps have the same first page) Third, what about all the free/pro app pairs you can find? Not every developer chose to follow the in-app-purchase route for unlocking features. For at least two weeks i kept receiving copypasted responses. All the same wording, all copypasting pieces of the guidelines which can be interpreted in many different ways. After two weeks, they either escalated to a human being, or to a less useless one and we started chatting. We could convince them to at least unlock one of the Apps while deciding what to do with the other one. Re: second point, they were immovable. Re: third point, when i was asking why the other developer's apps are still there, and what could i do to make the same, the answer was invariably the same: "I can't comment for the other apps, but if you think they violate the guidelines you can report them", so the exact opposite of what i was asking. Which is proof enough to me: they don't stop anything unless reported, and we had a third party attack us with a swarm of fake reports on behalf of a competitor, which already happened in the past. Human beings - or at least with a functioning brain - are not working at google's developer support. In the meantime we had to distribute the APK, which is not great the moment you need to update. Apple gave zero fuss, we have had both versions on the store since day one.
- UncleMeat 1y ago
  Were these shipped by different developer accounts? Or at least signed with different keys?
conartist6 1y ago
Just want to say that both things can be true. Google can be acting in the interests of security and doing the right things for the majority of their users, yet still be running the anti-competition playbook by cutting people off with no warning explanation or recourse.
- izacus 1y ago
  The API that Nextcloud can use it readily available since Android 4.4 (2013). They just didn't put in the work in 10 years despite repeated deprecation warnings. This seems modus operandi from many OSS developers (syncthing is the other one that had the exact same issue) - ignore warnings, ignore migration guides, ignore API changes and then scream their heads off 6 YEARS later about how evil people are that they don't get unfettered access to users data anymore. And conveniently ignore that the migration path was available for longer than their product exists.
  - Ajedi32 1y ago
    I'm guessing it was back ported to Android 4.4, so it probably hasn't been available quite that long. (Update: Nevermind, looks like it was in the initial 4.4 release: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxHVeXbK1P4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxHVeXbK1P4) But they've definitely been warning about the pending API change since at least 2019: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnJ3amzJM94 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnJ3amzJM94 The devs in the comments of that video do have some valid complaints about the added complexity of not being able to use the standard Java filesystem APIs anymore with the new permissions model, but still, it has been 6 years.
    - izacus 1y ago
      There was no backport, it was introduced in API level 19 as the doc itself mentions: https://developer.android.com/guide/topics/providers/document-provider https://developer.android.com/guide/topics/providers/documen...
      - deleted 1y ago
nopelynopington 1y ago
Probably irrelevant but I gave up on next cloud because I found the syncing apps to be unusable on Mac, windows and Linux. Nothing ever worked the way it was meant to. They crashed all the time, were unresponsive, and the UX was terrible
- palata 1y ago
  Since we're sharing anecdotes: Nextcloud works really well for me.
  - nopelynopington 1y ago
    I'm glad, I wish I knew your secret
- nisa 1y ago
  I hate the nextcloud ux with a passion and I'm running multiple instances for company and non-profits. Especially their calendar app makes we want to delete that thing every time I have to use it. If you leave the beaten path it tends to break. It's free and it feels wrong to complain but it's not good software IMHO.
- nativeit 1y ago
  This article is thick with tribalism, but I personally found it to be a mixed bag. For open source software and self-hosting enthusiasts, NextCloud (OwnCloud, et al) makes you feel really empowered to sort of build out your own personal cloud and/or groupware, and in many of the most salient aspects it delivers. But like anything so ambitious in scope, it doesn’t take much before you begin to push up against its boundaries (even as generous as they are). This is the kind of software that the biggest players in the industry devote armies of highly paid developers and billions of capital to. The accomplishments of the OSS community should not be diminished. I personally will continue to use and support these tools in my own capacity. But it’s kind of inevitable that, while they offer lots of cool major features, they won’t ever be quite as polished or refined as competing solutions from industry giants, or even other OSS apps that take a narrower, more uni-tasked approach. Having read through most of these comments, I think the truth is probably somewhere between competing ideas, and everything else is subjective and context-dependent.
nottorp 1y ago
At least the permission exists and users can sideload. As opposed to on the Apple side...
- boesboes 1y ago
  Ohhh, what a insightful comment! Thank you! edit: next cloud is available from the app store, soooo, have fun on the otherside. And from the author: > Apple gave zero fuss, we have had both versions on the store since day one.
  - nottorp 1y ago
    Interesting. As an Apple user on both mobile and desktop, I fully expected a solution like NextCloud to be unusable on their platform. Especially since i was a pCloud user but Apple in their infinite wisdom deprecated the extension they were using to offer a 'virtual drive' for syncing. On desktop.
izacus 1y ago
I find it deeply ironic that HN users DEMAND that Linux/macOS/Windows all implement this exact sandboxing (where user controls which files apps can access) and then threads like these are full of angry people demanding that Google allows Android apps to just demand access to all private photos, documents and app data with one blanket permission (which was abused by every malware ridden game out there). Android supports scoped storage which is fine for Nextcloud and requires NO extra permissions. It gives control to user because user then selects which directories they want to give Nextcloud to. Nextcloud just needs to put in the work to support it properly instead of just demanding full unfettered disk access to all photos and app data with no user control over it.
- mariusor 1y ago
  > users controls which files apps can access > Google allows Android apps to just demand access to all private photos Your own words betray that you are probably confused about what the problem actually is. From my perspective, I think people generally want the same thing on both platforms: the user be in charge of which files the OS gives access to applications.
  - izacus 1y ago
    As a developer that did many of those migrations, I can claim that it's crystally clear what the problem is. Storage Access Framework is a framework where user decides which files an app can access and see. That's the API Nextcloud refuses to use. Old READ_EXTERNAL_STORAGE (replaced with MANAGE_EXTERNAL_STORAGE now) permission gives full access to all shared storage data (where for example DCIM directory with all private photos and their locations lives) without exception or privacy filters like EXIF stripping. This permission was required by many games, malware apps and everyone with 5 minutes of time that could paste that string into the app and refused to allow users to run the app without granting it. It was VERY common to demand access to all storage at startup just to do simple things like download a potential file. That's the API Nextcloud demands to use and Google is telling them that they can't because they should be using SAF.
    - 1y ago
buyucu 1y ago
Google'a app store policies are very anti-competitive. This kind of behaviour hurts all users.
rcarmo 1y ago
Both major app stores have of late gone further and further down the rabbit hole of enforcing platform entitlements, and it feels like Google is catching up to the point where the Play Store is nearly as hostile to advanced functionality as Apple. Most people don’t even know F-Droid exists, so the only real way is to fix this at the platform level—-maybe with an additional app review tier for specialized apps, or just a better process that doesn’t feel as if you’re talking to a generalist call center or untrained staff…
dhruv3006 1y ago
interesting.

280 points by brodo 1y ago

Background: > Other apps were not allowed to use this permission at all, once it was introduced in 2022. I could convince them back then, that we need this. But nowadays they are more strict on it and thus we needed to remove this permission. Thus is, why it feels now like a regression / problem in UX, while it was only an exception that they allowed it for ~2 years. https://github.com/nextcloud/android/issues/14135#issuecomment-2550393752 https://github.com/nextcloud/android/issues/14135#issuecomme...

0x000xca0xfe 1y ago

The war on general purpose computing goes on. It will only end when every piece of software could be a web app.

threeseed 1y ago
[flagged]
- cybrox 1y ago
  Maybe a fluid, touch-centric experience would be less important for most use-cases if not every simple to-do app had to be over-engineered with 20 animations and gestures...
- yjftsjthsd-h 1y ago
  > Nobody other than irrelevant nerds think of their phones as general purpose computing devices. Everyone else thinks of them as consoles or microwaves. Phones run arbitrary programs and store files; they're computers by any name. If my microwave had an app store then I would feel comfortable calling it a computer, too.
  - threeseed 1y ago
    You can install apps on fridges, cars etc. I guess you're driving a computer ?
    - yjftsjthsd-h 1y ago
      1. Yes. 2. I'm open to drawing a line based on whether the primary purpose of a device is running programs. A car with no user-facing computers is still a car, a fridge with no computers is still a fridge, a modern phone with no user-facing programs is a worthless paperweight. Like... the fact that we call them "phones" is just a historical accident at this point, but that's not what our handheld computers really are, at least not primarily.

pjc50 1y ago

So it's the functionality/"security" dichotomy again, but in a slightly different place from iOS. Google won't let an app access all your files, but what if you the user specifically want this app to access all your files because it is, say, a file manager or sync tool? The escape hatch is to use the FDroid version rather than the Play Store version.

zb3 1y ago
No, they just use the "security" argument in bad faith, so third party apps can't compete with builtin ones made by Google.
- troyvit 1y ago
  That's my take. And even if they aren't using the security argument in bad faith this time, they have so often in the past that now they can reap the rewards of using that argument in bad faith.
- izacus 1y ago
  Right, because y'all didn't scream when Android games could upload all private photos to their servers because they got this blanket permission to download their game files. Get outta here.
  - zb3 1y ago
    I don't care about games I don't download. I don't see a problem with the fact that if I download and execute a binary file on linux without explicit sandbox, it can mess up my system, that's my responsibility. Google pretends to care about my security, but they actually care about cementing their monopoly.
- UncleMeat 1y ago
  The builtin app is using the more privacy-friendly framework that Nextcloud claims they cannot use.
tarruda 1y ago

dismalpedigree 1y ago

Does Google Drive have this elevated privilege? If so, seems blatant abuse of app store control. If not, it would seem to indicate there is a workaround somehow the Nextcloud could also leverage.

jfim 1y ago
Drive doesn't sync arbitrary files on Android though. A closer analogue to what nextcloud is trying to do would be syncthing, who also discontinued its Android app due to issues with getting the proper permissions with the play store (see https://github.com/syncthing/syncthing-android/issues/2064 https://github.com/syncthing/syncthing-android/issues/2064).
- genpfault 1y ago
  > syncthing, who also discontinued its Android app https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.github.catfriend1.syncthingandroid/ https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.github.catfriend1.syncth... https://github.com/Catfriend1/syncthing-android-fdroid https://github.com/Catfriend1/syncthing-android-fdroid
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
new_user_final 1y ago
Google Drive, Google Photos do not have this permission but Android Auto and Files by Google have.

_def 1y ago

Ah so that's probably yhe reason why the Dropbox app has these weird abstraction layers. If it weren't for integration with other apps, I would much prefer Nextcloud. But some apps simply don't offer anything else than "cloud sync"

rkagerer 1y ago

Google - if you're out there - stop being such absolute effing jerks to your users. A lot of us actually want to run apps with full access to our system. The kind of access your own backend has with features like cloud backup. Syncthing already abandoned their Android app because of this nonsense (as jfim pointed out: https://github.com/syncthing/syncthing-android/issues/2064 https://github.com/syncthing/syncthing-android/issues/2064)

robertlagrant 1y ago
You must realise there are lots of different user types, and far far more people just want a phone that can't have stuff installed on it that can't do naughty things.
- cwillu 1y ago
  If google controlled the trade codes, your house would have electrical panels that could only be opened with a tool that was only available to google certified tradies, you know, for safety.
  - robertlagrant 1y ago
    If Google's reputation were on the line if anyone's electrical panel broke, or if someone stole all your personal data from your life that they run through that panel then, yeah. I imagine so.
    - modo_mario 1y ago
      And that electrical panel would still break and now it would have people like me shitting on their reputation at every chance given whether it breaks for me or not. Because philosophically its a stain, now I likely pay more and i can't have my knowledgeable family in the trade deal with the issue and me with some of the others.
      - robertlagrant 1y ago

SpaghettiCthulu 1y ago

Why doesn't Nextcloud use the scoped storage access introduced in recent years? Users could give Nextcloud access to the particular folders they want synced. Is there some kind of access they need that those APIs don't support?

threeseed 1y ago
Often it's because setting up a David versus Goliath story is good for business. Spotify did this all the time where they would complain about Apple not allowing them access to some private API and then when they did didn't even bother to use it.
- palata 1y ago
  Nextcloud is about synchronising files. Some people may only sync media files, but surely you can imagine that others want to sync other files, right? It's not that crazy, Dropbox, GDrive, iCloud, etc. all do that. Do you really think it seems unfair that a file sync app would want to access files?
  - izacus 1y ago
    Scoped storage allows them to access any files the user allows them to.
    - hashhar 1y ago
      Not really. Downloads is out of bounds and the root folder is also out of bounds.
f33d5173 1y ago
This is the one that only allows access to media files, yes? This is fact the API they are using. They expound in the article that it is insufficient for their use case.
- izacus 1y ago

monegator 1y ago

>Attempts to raise the issue with Google resulted in little more than copy-and-pasted sections of the developer guide My exact same experience. We had two very simillar apps for a brief time, the old version that interfaces to the old hardware, for old phones, and the new version which was basically redesigned from scratch but kept the same UI. We wanted at least to have a fallback version in case users had any issue, for whatever reason. From the top of my head, i can name at least a dozen apps that i use daily that have multiple versions of them on the store, for the same reason we did. However, we received a complaint from google, which froze both our apps, because apparently you can't make one app that looks too simillar to another one. First, it's our APP. We are not trying to copy anyone (the chief reason for this rule, you don't want fake malicious clones of apps) Second, it's only the first page that looks the same (a video was provided showing the differences once you connected to a companion device. Also ALL our apps have the same first page) Third, what about all the free/pro app pairs you can find? Not every developer chose to follow the in-app-purchase route for unlocking features. For at least two weeks i kept receiving copypasted responses. All the same wording, all copypasting pieces of the guidelines which can be interpreted in many different ways. After two weeks, they either escalated to a human being, or to a less useless one and we started chatting. We could convince them to at least unlock one of the Apps while deciding what to do with the other one. Re: second point, they were immovable. Re: third point, when i was asking why the other developer's apps are still there, and what could i do to make the same, the answer was invariably the same: "I can't comment for the other apps, but if you think they violate the guidelines you can report them", so the exact opposite of what i was asking. Which is proof enough to me: they don't stop anything unless reported, and we had a third party attack us with a swarm of fake reports on behalf of a competitor, which already happened in the past. Human beings - or at least with a functioning brain - are not working at google's developer support. In the meantime we had to distribute the APK, which is not great the moment you need to update. Apple gave zero fuss, we have had both versions on the store since day one.

UncleMeat 1y ago
Were these shipped by different developer accounts? Or at least signed with different keys?

conartist6 1y ago

Just want to say that both things can be true. Google can be acting in the interests of security and doing the right things for the majority of their users, yet still be running the anti-competition playbook by cutting people off with no warning explanation or recourse.

izacus 1y ago
The API that Nextcloud can use it readily available since Android 4.4 (2013). They just didn't put in the work in 10 years despite repeated deprecation warnings. This seems modus operandi from many OSS developers (syncthing is the other one that had the exact same issue) - ignore warnings, ignore migration guides, ignore API changes and then scream their heads off 6 YEARS later about how evil people are that they don't get unfettered access to users data anymore. And conveniently ignore that the migration path was available for longer than their product exists.
- Ajedi32 1y ago
  I'm guessing it was back ported to Android 4.4, so it probably hasn't been available quite that long. (Update: Nevermind, looks like it was in the initial 4.4 release: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxHVeXbK1P4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxHVeXbK1P4) But they've definitely been warning about the pending API change since at least 2019: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnJ3amzJM94 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnJ3amzJM94 The devs in the comments of that video do have some valid complaints about the added complexity of not being able to use the standard Java filesystem APIs anymore with the new permissions model, but still, it has been 6 years.
  - izacus 1y ago
    There was no backport, it was introduced in API level 19 as the doc itself mentions: https://developer.android.com/guide/topics/providers/document-provider https://developer.android.com/guide/topics/providers/documen...
    - deleted 1y ago

nopelynopington 1y ago

Probably irrelevant but I gave up on next cloud because I found the syncing apps to be unusable on Mac, windows and Linux. Nothing ever worked the way it was meant to. They crashed all the time, were unresponsive, and the UX was terrible

palata 1y ago
Since we're sharing anecdotes: Nextcloud works really well for me.
- nopelynopington 1y ago
  I'm glad, I wish I knew your secret
nisa 1y ago
I hate the nextcloud ux with a passion and I'm running multiple instances for company and non-profits. Especially their calendar app makes we want to delete that thing every time I have to use it. If you leave the beaten path it tends to break. It's free and it feels wrong to complain but it's not good software IMHO.
nativeit 1y ago
This article is thick with tribalism, but I personally found it to be a mixed bag. For open source software and self-hosting enthusiasts, NextCloud (OwnCloud, et al) makes you feel really empowered to sort of build out your own personal cloud and/or groupware, and in many of the most salient aspects it delivers. But like anything so ambitious in scope, it doesn’t take much before you begin to push up against its boundaries (even as generous as they are). This is the kind of software that the biggest players in the industry devote armies of highly paid developers and billions of capital to. The accomplishments of the OSS community should not be diminished. I personally will continue to use and support these tools in my own capacity. But it’s kind of inevitable that, while they offer lots of cool major features, they won’t ever be quite as polished or refined as competing solutions from industry giants, or even other OSS apps that take a narrower, more uni-tasked approach. Having read through most of these comments, I think the truth is probably somewhere between competing ideas, and everything else is subjective and context-dependent.

nottorp 1y ago

At least the permission exists and users can sideload. As opposed to on the Apple side...

boesboes 1y ago
Ohhh, what a insightful comment! Thank you! edit: next cloud is available from the app store, soooo, have fun on the otherside. And from the author: > Apple gave zero fuss, we have had both versions on the store since day one.
- nottorp 1y ago
  Interesting. As an Apple user on both mobile and desktop, I fully expected a solution like NextCloud to be unusable on their platform. Especially since i was a pCloud user but Apple in their infinite wisdom deprecated the extension they were using to offer a 'virtual drive' for syncing. On desktop.

izacus 1y ago

I find it deeply ironic that HN users DEMAND that Linux/macOS/Windows all implement this exact sandboxing (where user controls which files apps can access) and then threads like these are full of angry people demanding that Google allows Android apps to just demand access to all private photos, documents and app data with one blanket permission (which was abused by every malware ridden game out there). Android supports scoped storage which is fine for Nextcloud and requires NO extra permissions. It gives control to user because user then selects which directories they want to give Nextcloud to. Nextcloud just needs to put in the work to support it properly instead of just demanding full unfettered disk access to all photos and app data with no user control over it.

mariusor 1y ago
> users controls which files apps can access > Google allows Android apps to just demand access to all private photos Your own words betray that you are probably confused about what the problem actually is. From my perspective, I think people generally want the same thing on both platforms: the user be in charge of which files the OS gives access to applications.
- izacus 1y ago
  As a developer that did many of those migrations, I can claim that it's crystally clear what the problem is. Storage Access Framework is a framework where user decides which files an app can access and see. That's the API Nextcloud refuses to use. Old READ_EXTERNAL_STORAGE (replaced with MANAGE_EXTERNAL_STORAGE now) permission gives full access to all shared storage data (where for example DCIM directory with all private photos and their locations lives) without exception or privacy filters like EXIF stripping. This permission was required by many games, malware apps and everyone with 5 minutes of time that could paste that string into the app and refused to allow users to run the app without granting it. It was VERY common to demand access to all storage at startup just to do simple things like download a potential file. That's the API Nextcloud demands to use and Google is telling them that they can't because they should be using SAF.
  - 1y ago

buyucu 1y ago

Google'a app store policies are very anti-competitive. This kind of behaviour hurts all users.

rcarmo 1y ago

Both major app stores have of late gone further and further down the rabbit hole of enforcing platform entitlements, and it feels like Google is catching up to the point where the Play Store is nearly as hostile to advanced functionality as Apple. Most people don’t even know F-Droid exists, so the only real way is to fix this at the platform level—-maybe with an additional app review tier for specialized apps, or just a better process that doesn’t feel as if you’re talking to a generalist call center or untrained staff…

dhruv3006 1y ago

interesting.