Andrew wrote:

> On only that topic of "youtube keeping you awake half the night", I
> presume that's because you watch a video and eventually fall asleep but the
> videos keep going (I may be wrong on that guess though).

No, I don't have it set to autoplay the next and the next
recommendation, I rarely queue-up a list of videos ...

> I create a nightly playlist of documentaries I want to listen to

I find the Asianometery "videos" are good to listen to without actually
watching.

Carlos E.R. wrote on Wed, 2 Oct 2024 14:51:43 +0200 :

> On 2024-10-02 14:19, Andy Burns wrote:
>> Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>
>>> some of these apps have a free version in the Play Store, and some
>>> times another one in F-Droid; but they are not the exact same one.
>>
>> I gather google is moving to enforce install of apps from the play store
>> if you try to sideload them, or load them from alternate stores?
>
> Not exactly. What I read is that you can not install one way and update
> the other. And developers can choose to block different install methods.

The way it has been, for a while, but it has already changed a few times,
is that if you load an app from location 1, it's signed with a certain
signature which is different than if you loaded that same app from location
2.

So if you loaded it from location 2, you have to update from location 2.
Otherwise the signatures don't match.

However... that's only the most simplistic view as Google recently allowed
developers to share the credentials among locations, so anything can be the
case for any given app.

Safest way around all that complexity is to update from the same repository
that you got your app from. I even have started inserting the repository
name into the download of the APK (since I do all my Android APK installs
from Windows).

fdroid_name.of.apk
github_name.of.apk
google_name.of.apk

Let's hope Google hasn't messed with this, as I don't even have the Google
Play Store package installed on my non-rootable Android user partition.

It's never needed.

VanguardLH wrote on Wed, 2 Oct 2024 07:31:53 -0500 :

> Paid features:
>
> OsmAnd Pro (subscription)
> * OsmAnd Cloud (backup and restore);
> * Cross-platform;
> * Hourly map updates;
> * Weather plugin;
> * Elevation widget;
> * Customise route line;
> * External sensors support (ANT+, Bluetooth);
> * Online Elevation profile.
>
> Subscription? You have to pay $39.99 every year? Ouch!

I wonder what they mean by "cross platform"?

And why would anyone need most of those things?
Cloud? For what?
Hourly updates? C'mon.
Weather plugin? Sure, but there are weather apps.
Elevation widget? Not sure what it does.
Customize route line? You can do that with other apps.
Online elevation profile? For what?

I'd use the free OSMAnd~ instead.

Carlos E.R. wrote on Wed, 2 Oct 2024 18:39:10 +0200 :

> There are areas in Spain without phone coverage. Spain is very
> mountainous, so a natural park, where few people live, gets little
> attention from companies. And a natural park is an area one wants to go
> with a map.

On that topic of offline maps for geolocating yourself in a national park,
here are about 250 state and national parks in the USA, where EVERY ONE has
a georeferenced PDF that you can download for free and load into a free
mapping and routing program such as Avenza or Paper Maps.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.trailheadlabs.outerspatial

Frank Slootweg wrote on 2 Oct 2024 13:43:28 GMT :

> I mainly use OsmAnd+. For serious navigation, especially in remote
> areas (in our case rural/outback/remote Australia), there's really no
> feasible alternative.

For anywhere other than the USA, I'm sure what Frank says is correct, but
for the USA, you cannot get better offline maps for backcountry hiking than
the USGS geoPDFs, which plenty of map programs (e.g., Avenza, PaperMaps,
etc.) treat just like the OSM database is treated by OSMAnd(whatever).

Specifically the isocline lines in the offline OSM maps are atrociously
inaccurate, but if you're only following a trail, they'll work fine.

Conversely, the smaller creeks (the kind you can hop over) are MUCH BETTER
shown in the OSM database than in the USGS geoPDF 1:24000 quadrangles.

Hence, when I'm backcountry hiking, I have to use *both* to navigate.

Also the spoken navigation for walking in the OSMAnd~ program is excellent.

> But for most people, in 'civilized' areas, Google Maps and HERE WeGo
> are perfectly fine as well. (I used Google Maps in urban areas of
> Australia, to find certain shops, Maccas :-), etc.).

I agree with Frank that in the civilized areas, Google Maps is as good as
it gets, although you have to be careful to create one-tap shortcuts to
turn off all the location tracking that Google Maps forces you to turn on
(which upload even when your wifi is turned off - which is sneaky of them).

In one case the offline OSMAnd~ program is BETTER than Google, and that is
when you're walking between buildings - such as apartment complexes or
shopping malls - where I find the offline OSMAnd~ does a much better job of
directing a pedestrian than does even the online Google Maps tools.

The main reason not to use Google Maps is that you have to turn on precise
location (even though it's not needed) and you often end up turning on
Wi-Fi Scanning for Google (which doesn't help you - it uploads to Google).

Andrew wrote:

> Let's hope Google hasn't messed with this, as I don't even have the Google
> Play Store package installed

Seems sensible that they have side-loading turned off by default, but
beyond that I don't want google deciding what I can or can't install.

Andy Burns wrote on Wed, 2 Oct 2024 20:32:37 +0100 :

>> Let's hope Google hasn't messed with this, as I don't even have the Google
>> Play Store package installed
>
> Seems sensible that they have side-loading turned off by default, but
> beyond that I don't want google deciding what I can or can't install.

I agree, as I don't think Google will turn off what you call side loading
(and which I refer to as "normal loading"), especially as the phone works
just fine without the Google Play Store app installed (as I install from
the Google Play Store repository every day without the Google Play Store
app involved).

So I'm not worried that Google will make normal loading impossible; they'll
just make it extra button presses so that it can't be done accidentally.

What I am worried about is Google wants developers to provide only the code
for a specific device and not for all devices, which bothers me because I
save all the APKs I download and re-use them on plenty of phones over time.

But if the package downloaded from the Google Play Store repository is only
for, oh, say, a Samsung with the MediaTek CPU, it might not work on, oh
say, a Samsung with the Qualcomm CPU.

Since all my Android APK downloads and installs are done from Windows, I
have started to prefix each APK with the origin, e.g.,
google_app.name.apk
fdroid_app.name.apk
githug_app.name.apk

Where the Google ones will be suspect if they're only for my specific type
of phone. They may or may not work on, oh, say, a Pixel, whereas the other
two will work (as I always download the larger universal apk from Github).

On 30 Sep 2024, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote in
comp.mobile.android:

> As google are offering me 95% off a item from the play store, has
> anyone got any recommendations for paid for apps (not
> games/films)?
>
> I can't think of any I've been putting-off buying ...

I highly approve of "Podcast Addict", a very full-featured podcast
aggregator. Although you can run it with all features enabled (I think)
with a few unobtrusive ads, I wanted to reward the developer by paying
is small asking price.

Another of my most-used, most-liked apps is the audio player
"MediaMonkey". I like its interface a lot - it just seems to work in a
way that's compatible with my brain - but it also works with
MediaMonkey for Windows to allow me to pretty-seamlessly sync the music
library on my desktop with my phone. I payed for it to enable a couple
of features that are crippled in the free version, mostly the ability
to stream from a DLNA server on my network.

In comp.mobile.android, on Wed, 2 Oct 2024 14:51:43 +0200, "Carlos E.R."
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

>On 2024-10-02 14:19, Andy Burns wrote:
>> Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>
>>> some of these apps have a free version in the Play Store, and some
>>> times another one in F-Droid; but they are not the exact same one.
>>
>> I gather google is moving to enforce install of apps from the play store
>> if you try to sideload them, or load them from alternate stores?
>
>Not exactly. What I read is that you can not install one way and update
>the other. And developers can choose to block different install methods.

It seems fair to let them do that.

Carlos, of the people I know, you seem most likely to be able to answer
a personal question (about Spain and geography) and if you want, you
could send me your email address. (Delete NONONO from mine.)

Or I can just ask here. I don't mind that, but it is off-topic.

Micky

><https://www.xataka.com/aplicaciones/nuevo-android-duro-golpe-a-apks-instalas-app-google-play-store-no-usas>
>
>It is in Spanish, so you need a translator tool.
>
>
>*The new thing about Android is a hard blow to APKs: either you install
>the app from the Google Play Store or you don't use it*
>
> Play Integrity will allow the developer to verify whether or not
>the app has been installed from the Google Play Store
> The system allows you to block the use of the app until it has been
>updated from the official Android store
>
>One of the things that has characterized, and characterizes, Android has
>been the possibility of installing applications from third-party sources
>. Simply install the APK file to have an application like WhatsApp
>working normally. But like everything in this life, there are sources
>and sources. Some are legitimate, others are not so much. An APK of
>uncertain origins can work against both the user and the developer, so
>Google Play has launched a function to put a stop to it.
>
>The problem . There are several reasons why a user may prefer to install
>an app via APK instead of through the Google Play Store. There are as
>many reasons as there are reasons a developer can have for not doing so.
>Let's think, for example, that an installation made via APK does not
>count for the metrics in Google Play. Perhaps the user is installing an
>outdated version, not optimized for their device or, why not, a modified
>version to offer functions that, in another context, would be paid for.
>This can harm both parties involved, user and developer.
>
>... continues on link.
>
>>
>> Not seen it in practice, because pixels haven't been given Android 15
>> upgrades yet :-(
>>

In comp.mobile.android, on Wed, 2 Oct 2024 01:49:19 -0000 (UTC), Andrew
<andrew@spam.net> wrote:

>Carlos E.R. wrote on Tue, 1 Oct 2024 23:31:54 +0200 :
>
>>> Given I've never in my life paid for an Android or iOS app, it will be
>>> interesting to see what apps people recommend that must be paid for, since
>>> it's my current assessment that almost everything you want, will be free.
>>
>> Sleep for Androids.
>
>I'm completely different than most people because I care to help, so you'll

So you keep saying. Why this need to strut so much? But you are not
completely different from most people. Almost everyone wants to help.

Many people also want to show how smart they are, how much they know,
but they do it by helping people.

>almost never see me suggest an app without a URL to that app, not only

Most people include a url. Most people on Usenet go farther to be nice
than I thought they would, than I thought they needed to, when I started
reading it, so I began to usually do the same. When people don't
include a url it's likely because they no longer have it handy. They're
talking about something they read days or years ago.

>because I'm intelligent enough to know there are often duplicates, but also
>because I'm compassionate enough to realize doing so helps others find it.

Everyone knows that giving the url is helpful and except for the easily
identified trolls, everyone is helpful. Get over yourself
>
>Carlos is neither,

Carlos is very helpful. I make a point to read his posts becasue they
are some of the best. OTOH, I haven't identified compassion in any
poster here. We don't discuss lost pupplies, sick babies, or any sort
of tragedy here, so I don't see any way to find compassion in a poster
here, including you.

And I wouldn't be crticising you above if you hadn't attacked Carlos for
no good reason. I've been tempted before but I always let it go. But
other times you were just strutting, not dumping on someone else for no
good reason. His post was only 3 words long and none were offensive.

>but let's move forward and not let his rudeness stop us

Get it straight: It is not rude to give the name of an app without the
url. One could call it incomplete, but posting the name without the url
is better than not posting it at all. People don't have extra time to
hunt for urls. Would you rather someone not post the name at all if
they didn't know the url? I would not prefer no name at all, but that's
what you seem to be saying. It is rude to step on someone's foot
without saying "I'm sorry".

Micky.

>from finding payware app functionality for Andy Burns that has no free APK.
>
>Presumably that's an app functionality that's not free that is useful,
>right? If so, then Andy Burns might want to know about it to buy it.
>
>As for me, I never heard of it, so allow me first to google what it does.
>
>I can't easily find in the first page of hits "Sleep FOR Android" but there
>are plenty of hits for "Sleep AS Android", so I'll assume that's the app.
>
> "Sleep as Android enables you to use the phone's microphone and
> speaker as a sonar (for range and movement detection using ultrasound)"
> <https://docs.sleep.urbandroid.org/sleep/sensors.html>
>
>But wait a minute... it's also for "sleep tracking" from the same app!
> "Sleep tracking is a way to objectively measure
> the quality of your sleep."
> <https://docs.sleep.urbandroid.org/sleep/sleep_tracking.html>
>
>Since that's two completely different functionalities, and since I don't
>want to waste my time finding the wrong app functionality, which is it?
>
>Which of the features are you suggesting Andy Burns would want to pay for?
>Or were you thinking of a different app?

On 10/2/2024 4:37 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2024-09-30 18:28, Andy Burns wrote:
>> As google are offering me 95% off a item from the play store, has
>> anyone got any recommendations for paid for apps (not games/films)?
>>
>> I can't think of any I've been putting-off buying ...
>
> Apps I have paid for:
>
> OsmAnd+ — Maps & GPS Offline
> Contour lines plugin — OsmAnd
> The Photographer's Ephemeris (Crookneck Consulting LLC)
> Simple Gallery Pro (Simple Mobile Tool)
> Sleep as Android from Petr Nálevka (Urbandroid)
>
>
> Yes, some of these apps have a free version in the Play Store, and some
> times another one in F-Droid; but they are not the exact same one. And
> people like OsmAnd deserve the contribution.

I've also paid for OsmAnd+.

Some other apps I've paid for:
• TorquePro $4.95
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.prowl.torque>
• Music Folder Player non-ad version $1.59
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=de.zorillasoft.musicfolderplayer.donate>

--
“If you are not an expert on a subject, then your opinions about it
really do matter less than the opinions of experts. It's not
indoctrination nor elitism. It's just that you don't know as much as
they do about the subject.”—Tin Foil Awards