AT&T explains, basically ignores criticism for locking down Android handsets
By Tim Stevens 
posted July 1st 2010 10:54AM
posted July 1st 2010 10:54AM
There, don't you feel safer now?AT&T selected Android Market as the exclusive source for applications because it forces developers to be accountable for the apps they submit. If the Android community has issues with an app, the app can be flagged and removed. This minimizes the risk of malicious apps harming customers and provides more protection to the customer's private data stored on the phone.
Well, since that's the reason why, why does AT&T even have Android handsets? The goal of Android is to be open to the world, not to be locked down by some wireless network.
@LCDBox
100% agree, I personally dont have any apps that arent off the Andriod Market, but I like knowing I can install any app if I choose, AT&T will come around eventually I bet.
Defeats the purpose of even offering one.
@LCDBox
Same reason they have the iPhone. Cuz they think it's trendy.
@Pojomofo nope. you bet wrong
@LCDBox att and android are a shitty combo.
Verizon looks great compared to them
@Pojomofo I'll take that bet.
@LCDBox The only good news that can come out of this is forcing users to buy from the Android Market will increase Android App sales which means App Developers will be more likely to update & maintain their apps. This will also encourage new developers to create new apps.
I think most of us are well-aware that the beauty of Android (well, one of it's shining features) is that you can basically download any app (paid or otherwise) and transfer it to your SD card to install it. For the end-user, this is great. For the app developer, it's terrible.
I think we all are also aware of the fact that the iPhone app store dwarf's Android's. Maybe this is a contributing factor? The locked down market and app access forces users to buy buy buy. Buying gives app developers a job.
Think about it this way; if movies all over the world suddenly became free to download online as soon as they come out.. Movie theaters would probably go out of business.
Personally, I'm glad I'm on Sprint because not having that freedom does kind of suck... but maybe those AT&T subscribers using Android handsets will be doing their part for the better of the market and Android devs?
Just my two cents.
@Pojomofo Theres an unlimited divx player on the net but not on the market. I would be pissed if I was on AT&T.
@LCDBox
No, the goal of android was to provide a royalty free phone/tablet OS. Anything beyond that is what the public has TAKEN Android to be.
Don't be so naive to believe that apps in any other marketplace (which certainly get much less traffic, and are therefor less desirable to devs) are not there for a reason: they can't get their app into google's market. Why? most would equally not be allowed on a store shelf (pirated IP, cloned legitimate software without permission, steal identity data or use it in un-kosher ways, or actually contain viruses, or they're simply completely unstable or don;t work as advertised). This is also the place where all apps that exist in violation of carrier police, or state/local laws land.
I've seen surveys done where some 70% percent of non marketplace apps are either illegal, dangerous, or don't work. Did you think the carriers would last long before doing something about that?
Do you think a very basic legal clearance, app stabilty requirement, and limited customer support requirement is a bad thing? If your app met this, why would you NOT want it signed, and in that store, where all the customers are? The people who put apps elsewhere should be avoided.
Initially, the idea was to have lots of stores, with reputable firms setting them up. Guess waht, not only did that not happen, but there's no legitimate competition for the general store, it won. Time to give up on that idea, leave them out there just for the jail-breakers. If an app works as advertised, and isn't infringing on unlicensed IP, put it in google's store. Simple. They don't have most of the restrictions Apple does, it's not "as" closed, it's just a completely reasonable level of testing and assurance for customers, that's it....
Source forge is open, but you can't get your shit listed there either without agreeing to certain terms and following certain policies. How is this different?
...oh, and AT&T isn't the only one. Motorola is also doing this for all forthcoming android phones (regardless of carrier), Sprint has been discussing it, and t-Mobile has been as well. No word from Verizon, but as evil as they are, they'll love the idea too.
You can side load using the API, it's so easy that if you can't figure it out you're one of the people AT&T is worried about installing unknown apps.
There's like 3 people here at work with these and they are nice little phones.
@engadget
Speaking of AT&T, where is the Verizon fascinate review you promised us last night? Yes, you PROMISED!
@LCDBox
I hate ATT for this but being a android user is this even a problem. Let me explain quick. The type of people that will install apps that are not on the market are most likely tech trendy people. Those techies will know or at least know of rooting your android device. Couldn't they just root their device and install the programs. Then again if nobody wants a ATT android phone there might not be a market for devs to get working on rooting it.
@LCDBox
"open world" sounds nice (it really does) in theory, but is definitively not safe in practice and confusing in terms of quality management, and finally way to fragmented to ensure some benefits of an "open world".
@zelannii I can only up-vote you once, but this post was brilliant.
@LCDBox Android isn't open, but it's fans think it is.
@zelannii
As a Motorola Droid user, I have installed a BUNCH of apps that COULD be found on the market but I choose to download it from some site I found searching Google. (I was learning how to use Android Debug Bridge at the time which is using PC command prompt to do things on the phone).
When I then was learning about permissions in apps, I downloaded a whole bunch of free and paid apps off of various places and sometimes the sites were pretty shady.
Guess what I found? Every pirated app I decompiled had permissions other than what it was supposed to, and checked out to be virus-free. I've since deleted them so I don't know about any versions that just got updated, but still.
That 70% is pure FUD. Was it the same article that claimed X % of apps could dial anyone in the contacts list without user interaction? Somebody linked to that article on the Cyanogenmod forum. Don't fall for twisted journalism so easily.
@LCDBox
The goal of android was to turn the mobile sphere into a win-win battle for google in advertising. It just happens to be open (in some ways).
@zelannii Well put my goof Sir well put
@beatsandmelody
WOW brainfart from my boss telling me something over the phone!
I meant to say:
*************** Every pirated app I decompiled had the permissions it was supposed to ****************
@zelannii
Swype and Flash are both non-marketplace apps. I have both on my rooted Droid, but you don't even have to be rooted to install Swype. Opera originally was a non-marketplace app when they were beta testing. Fennec is also non-marketplace while they're alpha and beta testing. All these apps are from reputable companies.
I wonder if rooting an ATT android phone will grant you access. I imagine it will.
@Bosco
Yeah, ATT has the iPhone because its trendy. Not because it's bringing boat-loads of subscribers to pay for their services.
I don't think Android is trendy yet either. Fauxhemian? Maybe in IT circles.
@zelannii
I meant to say well put my good Sir well put
@zelannii
Are you sure about that? I recently gave up and bought an Aria because I'm tired of ATT stringing us along with the promise of something better. It came locked down (obviously), and the first thing I did was root it and get the stupid 'unknown sources' lock off. Why? Because the phone came without a bunch of stuff I wanted that other phones usually come with, like live wallpapers. I also like the idea of having some method of distributing beta versions of software without going through the market, so developers don't cram it with half-finished products they need customers to test. There are many more uses for that feature than trolling the internet for porn virus programs.
@jroff
Forgot to finish my thought there - Anyway, the point is that I paid for the phone and the hardware now belongs to me, so logically, I should be able to do what I want with it. And yet you're arguing that I should not be able to because I might.. have a bad experience? Are you serious? I dunno about you, but I like to actually own the hardware that I purchase, and not have some company tell me I can't install programs I actually want while uninstalling their crappy programs that I don't want.
@schmidt1985 Yes - we can (and have) rooted our phones. I had mine rooted before my service even got transferred over.
As to why I did it, here's a short list:
* Sideloading (specificly, Swype. The software is still in beta, and they don't want to submit every revision for review)
* Removing AT&T's bloatware apps. AT&T Navigator has basically the same features as Google Maps (which also comes pre-loaded) except that you must pay an extra $5 per month to use it. No thanks. There's no option to remove these from the Application menu - the only way to get rid of them is to use root access to delete them from the phone.
* AT&T's market specifically blocks some apps that ARE approved and listed on the market (PDAnet being a notable example).
Since I have 5 lines of service on AT&T and mine was the only one up for a new contract, my choices were to keep my aging 3-year-old handset and possibly change carriers on all lines simultaneoulsy, or to renew my contract with AT&T and get a decent phone. The Aria really is a pretty nice piece of hardware.
@Pojomofo
Result of their making love to Apple!
@Pojomofo
the att service is just going down hill
@LCDBox Maybe Microsoft, Apple, Linux, etc should lock down their OS so you can't install anything on your home computers without going through their app stores.
After all, it's in your best interest...
@zelannii and if you have ever been to xda developers sight, you will know alot of programs are in beta/wont be in the market. such as mangler, wich is still in partial beta, its a ventrilo client for android. its not on the market.
theres also firefox alpha, or fennec. its not in the market either. why? becuase its still being made and needs people to beta test it. cant do that with atnt now can we?
@LCDBox just use adb to install your apps.
I use it on the backflip. no issues.
I mean ok, so not being to install directly from the phone sucks, but i install from my computer so its not terrible
and with droid explorer it is so ridiculously easy
ATT doesn't know that they wont have the iphone forever!
@shizzledmg Wow. I had to sign up for an account just to reply to your comment. The way you worded your comment alone is crazy to me. It's as though you regard yourself as having the authority to declare, without citing any evidence to back you, these criticisms of a software release methodology that entire armies of developers passionately support.
@LCDBox hey thanks at&t for all your help. now f.off and open it up. wtf! I don't need you babying me, holding my hand or changing my diapers/nappies.
@Stotherd
There is a leaked beta that the dev hasn't released. Also bittorrent archives of commercial apps. Is this what you are referring to?
Besides, Samsung Captivate plays divx natively (and why don't all android devices?).
@mythgarr "Since I have 5 lines of service on AT&T and mine was the only one up for a new contract, my choices were to keep my aging 3-year-old handset and possibly change carriers on all lines simultaneoulsy, or to renew my contract with AT&T and get a decent phone."
Actually depending on the number of ETFs you may or may not have to pay you could STILL save quite a bit if you switched to Sprint or something.
I know for me I would break even in less than a year switching from Verizon to Sprint. But convincing the wife is difficult...
@LCDBox - "The goal of Android is to be open to the world"
No. The goal of Android is provide revenue (indirectly) to Google.
Saying otherwise is like saying that Apple contributes to open source WebKit because they're really generous and community-minded (when, er, it should be obvious they're not).
@zelannii
How about those devs that refuse to share their revenue with Google? Also, I believe that the Market agreement is not too friendly for enterprise applications.
Uh, kinda defeats the purpose! I guess AT&T is using the same iPhone mentality, which is good in some ways (no malware, etc) and bad in others (locked to iTunes). To each his/her own.
@Fafafoooey
I suppose it makes sense to the suits upstairs. The iphone is their highest selling handset and it's about the the most locked down phone you can get. So to them, why wouldn't everyone want this on all the other phones.
@Fafafoooey Motorolla also joined the party, lockign all future phones to the one market, and Sprint has openly discussed the same plans.
What's in those markets other than the default marketplace? all the apps that didn't pass the muster (are not stable enough to meet google's base and simple requirement), are illegal in some way (IP infringement, identity/data misappropriation, or actually violate state laws in some way), apps that are designed solely to hide trojans and viruses, those that violate carrier policies that google would be forced to ban, and apps that in some other way can't be sold in google's store.
Think about it, if you're a legit dev, why would you NOT want your app in that store? How can you trust any unsigned app in any store that's not 3rd party validated for your protection?
If it can't be sold on a shelf in a store, you shoudl not have it on your phone, and there;s no way in hell a carrier is going to let you have that phone on your network.
If they knew the alt-marketplaces would become a haven for crap software and illegal apps, and if they had a way to block it earlier, they would have.
@Fafafoooey
I agree. I like that the iPhone is locked down to some extent. However, if I were to get an Android phone, would want it entirely open.
Also - who holds AT&T liable for the shit they pull? They are worried about holding developers liable for their apps, why not start holding themselves liable for their network and all of the promises the make but fail to deliver on (better service, iPhone tethering "soon" = 3 years, etc).
@gittenlucky
Don;t blame AT&T for their network, blame the FCC, where it should rightly be.
AT&T can not control what devices enter and leave NY that operate in their frequency ranges, and there's such little bandwidth, and a 4X increase in it;s use, that they simply could not build more towers. It was a hard cap. Also, iPhones use 2 concurrent channels per user, not just 1 like verizon, and they're useless smartphone network that can't multitask calls and data on a multitasking device otherwise capable of it. Still AT&T DID hold themselves accountable anyway, and spend a few hundred million overhauling the network to HSDPA, added an 850MHz band they acquired, increased data speeds to the max possible for existing (and upcoming) devices, and lowered airtime usage by 40% in about a year resulting in a near 70% reliability improvement. You think putting hands on over 10,000 cell units hundreds of miles of fiber, overhauling central systems, and all without bringing the systems down or making it worse during that time was going to just take a few days?
Oh, and you think Verizon doesn't suffer in NYC and SF too? they do, but since they have more air per subscriber per sq mile in those cities, its simply less pronounced. (and AT&T thinks it may actually be in a better position now in NY, having better reliability and data speed both).
@zelannii
Moto is not doing that shit. If you have some proof lets see it.
@Fafafoooey
Good for ATT, bad for consumers.
@Fafafoooey Actually this is worse than the iPhone. At least you can buy developer mode for $100/year. How the hell do they expect people to *develop and test* apps on their Android phones?
@zelannii SWYPE for one. Your lack of vision is appalling.
@zelannii wrote "Think about it, if you're a legit dev, why would you NOT want your app in that store?"
Maybe I am ignorant of how development works on Android but how do you test the app that you wrote on your device if you can't side-load it? I know you can emulate it but that's still not giving you the same feel as if it were actually running on your phone.
Plus, not every program I write is intended for general consumption. Some things are just for me (or a very small group like my fantasy football league) to use. Those kinds of programs are not meant to go through a general app store.
That actually makes sense as I read it, but we all know it's to try to keep free tethering apps off of your phone. Maybe us adults can try to make the decision on our own like big boys and girls.
@Waltah
There are free tethering apps in the market.