What can't you do on Android WITHOUT a Google Account set up in the OS?

For example, YouTube app functionality can be replaced by the open-source
NewPipe app, which does NOT need a Google Account set up on the phone.

Likewise, Google Play Store APK installation from the Google Play repo can
be replaced by the open-source Aurora app, which does NOT need a Google
Account set up on the phone.

Similarly, GMail app functionality can be replaced by the FairEmail app,
which does NOT need a Google Account set up on the phone.

What app functionality from Google can NOT be replaced with an app that
does the same functionality but WITHOUT a Google Account set up in the OS?

Andrew,

> What can't you do on Android WITHOUT a Google Account set up in the OS?
>
> For example, YouTube app functionality can be replaced by the open-source
> NewPipe app, which does NOT need a Google Account set up on the phone.
....

That fully depends on when you call a non-Google app a replacement for the
Google one.

Example: On Windows there are several open-source replacements for Word and
Excel. Some people reject them because they are not one-on-one
replacements.

Also, do realize that as long as you are using Googles Android you are still
part of their ecosystem (search for "google android advertising framework").
Perhaps start with replacing the OS with one which gives you the tools to
tame badly-behaving apps ?

As for your question for us to deliver replacement apps for everything thats
already on you phone and/or available in Googles "walled garden" : why don't
you just take the name of the Google app you're interrested in, pre/append
"open source" or perhaps "replacement" to it, drop it in your favorite
search-engine (Google ? :-) ) and see what you get ?

Perhaps make a list of apps in order of importance to you first ?

Personally I would start with a sand-boxed non-google webbrowser with an
adblocker (and plugin capabilities) and use that to access YouTube e.a.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

Andrew wrote:

> What can't you do on Android WITHOUT a Google Account set up in the OS?
>
> For example, YouTube app functionality can be replaced by the open-source
> NewPipe app, which does NOT need a Google Account set up on the phone.

Just using https://m.youtube.com/ would likely be good enough for most
people

> Similarly, GMail app functionality can be replaced by the FairEmail app,
> which does NOT need a Google Account set up on the phone.

You can use the gmail website, but you won't get far without a login ...

Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
> Andrew wrote:
>
> > What can't you do on Android WITHOUT a Google Account set up in the OS?
> >
> > For example, YouTube app functionality can be replaced by the open-source
> > NewPipe app, which does NOT need a Google Account set up on the phone.
>
> Just using https://m.youtube.com/ would likely be good enough for most
> people

To use a Fitbit, you need a Google account (unless you have a legacy Fitbit
account from years ago). To use the Fitbit app you need to sign in with the
Google account, which installs the Google account centrally on the phone,
which means that account infests the rest of the OS and gets used for other
stuff (eg Play Services/Store).

If your phone vendor supports 'user profiles' you can make a new profile,
add the Google account there. Then it won't interfere with other profiles
and you can terminate the session by logging out after you're done.

Theo

Theo,

> To use a Fitbit, you need a Google account

Which is a good reason no to use it.

I could imagine using an open-source or freeware map app in which you can
locally(!) record the path you've walked (and calculate/estimate the total
length of that path) ?

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
> > Andrew wrote:
> >
> > > What can't you do on Android WITHOUT a Google Account set up in the OS?
> > >
> > > For example, YouTube app functionality can be replaced by the open-source
> > > NewPipe app, which does NOT need a Google Account set up on the phone.
> >
> > Just using https://m.youtube.com/ would likely be good enough for most
> > people
>
> To use a Fitbit, you need a Google account (unless you have a legacy Fitbit
> account from years ago). To use the Fitbit app you need to sign in with the
> Google account, which installs the Google account centrally on the phone,
> which means that account infests the rest of the OS and gets used for other
> stuff (eg Play Services/Store).

Are you sure about that? Can't you just use a Google account to login
into the *app*, instead of into the *system*/OS? Many apps have such
functionality, i.e. an app-specific login, so I wouldn't know why the
Fitbit app would be any different.

FWIW, we still have legacy Fitbit accounts and are not going to
convert to Google accounts until we have to.

> If your phone vendor supports 'user profiles' you can make a new profile,
> add the Google account there. Then it won't interfere with other profiles
> and you can terminate the session by logging out after you're done.

On 1/1/2025 6:05 AM, R.Wieser wrote:
> Theo,
>
>> To use a Fitbit, you need a Google account
>
> Which is a good reason no to use it.
>
> I could imagine using an open-source or freeware map app in which you can
> locally(!) record the path you've walked (and calculate/estimate the total
> length of that path) ?
>

Or people could go back to just taking a walk and stop trying
to document "ptogress" in all things. Tracking steps is about as
pitiful as it gets.

I have a TracFone with no Google account, APKPure for
apps, something (Netguard?) to give me more control, and
all Google apps removed or disabled. But I accidentally let
it update awhile back and now I get popups telling me the
sky will fall if I don't enable Google this or that. It's really
obnoxious. I'm amazed that these companies are allowed,
legally, to exert such control over a device I paid for.

But I think Arlen is missing the point, anyway. Cellphone
under surveillance is a lifestyle. If people use apps, gmail,
maps, Waze, dating, Fitbit, DoorDash, Uber, shopping apps....
That's all spyware. Most of it is tracking location. Even just
leaving the cellphone turned on means you're being tracked.
If you care about that then you don't live on a cellphone... It's
a choice. So many people want to know the best method for
maintaining privacy while telling 6 dozen corporations their
every move.

Newyana2,

>> I could imagine using an open-source or freeware map app in which you can
>> locally(!) record the path you've walked (and calculate/estimate the
>> total length of that path) ?
>
> Or people could go back to just taking a walk and stop trying
> to document "ptogress" in all things. Tracking steps is about as
> pitiful as it gets.

Although I agree with you, dropping all the measurement taking is probaly a
step too far for FitBit users. You'll hve to wean them off of it one step
at a time.

Than again, all our sports (and often working lives too) are based on being
the better/faster/etc. one than all the others, so I can understand the
competitive part of it.

> I have a TracFone with no Google account,
[snip]

I replaced android with graphene OS. The phone is switched off unless I
need it (when traveling). Its main app is OsmAND, a map program.

> I'm amazed that these companies are allowed, legally, to exert such
> control over a device I paid for.

I hope you're not running Win10/11, which has become nothing more than a
thick ethernet client and doubling as an advertising platform. :-)

> But I think Arlen is missing the point, anyway.

That sounds like Arlen alright.

> Cellphone under surveillance is a lifestyle. If people use apps, gmail,
> maps, Waze, dating, Fitbit, DoorDash, Uber, shopping apps....
> That's all spyware. Most of it is tracking location.

Yup. And we have next to zero control about what those apps are allowed to
do - nor any way to even look at what they are doing. IOW, a smartphone
(running googles android) is, in regard to spamming and tracking, a big
companies wet dream.

> Even just leaving the cellphone turned on means you're being tracked.

True, but thats by a local phone company, not some faceless conglomerate
thats located outside the country, and as such almost untouchable. Being
able to use the internet to connect to servers all over the world has its up
sides, but this is one of its down sides.

> If you care about that then you don't live on a cellphone...

Ageed.

> It's a choice. So many people want to know the best method for
> maintaining privacy while telling 6 dozen corporations their
> every move.

I don't think that most people know about that, or, as they have not yet
bumped into problems with it, they don't care that it happens.

Funny though that my country has laws forbidding stalking and that people
will blow their casket when discovering when it happens to them - including
involvement of police - but have zero problems when their phone is doing it.
Weird, if you think about it.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

R.Wieser <address@is.invalid> wrote:
> Theo,
>
> > To use a Fitbit, you need a Google account
>
> Which is a good reason no to use it.
>
> I could imagine using an open-source or freeware map app in which you can
> locally(!) record the path you've walked (and calculate/estimate the total
> length of that path) ?

FTR, Fitbit *can* track your position/route, but only if you enable
that function (it can use its own GPS (if it has one) or use your
phone's GPS (if you carry it with you)). (I don't have that function
enabled.)

But as its name implies, its main function is as an activity tracker;
steps, (estimated) distance, (estimated) calories, heart rate, oxygen
saturation and sleep analysis.

As I mentioned before, 'smartwatches' are a different category of
devices, but the functions largely overlap, i.e. 'smartwatches' have
activity tracking and sleep analysis and 'activity trackers' are also
watches and somewhat 'smart.

"R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> wrote:

> Andrew,
>
>> What can't you do on Android WITHOUT a Google Account set up in the OS?
>>
>> For example, YouTube app functionality can be replaced by the open-source
>> NewPipe app, which does NOT need a Google Account set up on the phone.
> ...
>
> That fully depends on when you call a non-Google app a replacement for the
> Google one.
>
> Example: On Windows there are several open-source replacements for Word and
> Excel. Some people reject them because they are not one-on-one
> replacements.

I tried LibreOffice for over a year. Too many functions missing, or
having to hunt for where they were buried, or goofy and often incomplete
workarounds. LibreOffice didn't even have a handle at the corner of a
table to expand it to add a new row with the same attributes while also
changing the data ranges in a linked chart. Had to go back to MS Office
for both Word and Excel.

I had not built any custom apps using VBA with any Office component, but
those who do can't migrate to other office suites. I've seen entire
corporate applications built on Office and scripts that don't look
anything like the Office apps. Conversion away from MS Office would
take a lot of time and money. Similarly, if someone built a custom
program upon LibreOffice's scripting then a whole new project would be
needed to migrate to MS Office scripting.

I know some users want to eradicate all of Edge from Windows, except
WebView2 is also used by other software.

However, I suspect the OP's viewpoint is sufficient non-Google
alternatives need not be one-on-one substitutes, just good enough for
his consideration.

> Also, do realize that as long as you are using Googles Android you are still
> part of their ecosystem (search for "google android advertising framework").
> Perhaps start with replacing the OS with one which gives you the tools to
> tame badly-behaving apps ?
>
> As for your question for us to deliver replacement apps for everything thats
> already on you phone and/or available in Googles "walled garden" : why don't
> you just take the name of the Google app you're interrested in, pre/append
> "open source" or perhaps "replacement" to it, drop it in your favorite
> search-engine (Google ? :-) ) and see what you get ?
>
> Perhaps make a list of apps in order of importance to you first ?
>
> Personally I would start with a sand-boxed non-google webbrowser with an
> adblocker (and plugin capabilities) and use that to access YouTube e.a.

As for the OP's inquiry, I use Google Maps. I've tried Here [WeGo] and
OSM as alternatives, but they weren't as useful. Here was good,
especially for offline maps. It's also used in car navigation systems.
OSM is crowd-sourced, so areas with few or no OSM users are poorly
mapped. OSM also uses public record information, like city plats, which
show planned roads that don't yet exist, and may never exist. I have
not heard of any car maker touching OSM for nav data. Is there a
non-Google replacement for Google Maps that is as robust, and updated a
lot, and not by happenstance with erratic voluntary input?

While there are non-Google alternatives, they don't seem equal. Being
good enough does not mandate an alternative is a sufficient replacement.
Few users need that warm comfy feeling of disconnecting from Google.

I'm sure Andrew really is not interested in discovering what Google-ized
apps have no "sufficient" non-Google alternatives. Seems more like he
wants to start another flame thread.

Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:

> To use a Fitbit, you need a Google account (unless you have a legacy Fitbit
> account from years ago). To use the Fitbit app you need to sign in with the
> Google account, which installs the Google account centrally on the phone,
> which means that account infests the rest of the OS and gets used for other
> stuff (eg Play Services/Store).
>
> If your phone vendor supports 'user profiles' you can make a new profile,
> add the Google account there. Then it won't interfere with other profiles
> and you can terminate the session by logging out after you're done.

I thought all accounts were globally defined. That's why when you add a
new app with an existing account, it is found from the list in Android.
Any app having you add another account then adds it to the Accounts list
in Android. Not just Fitbit does this.

Android settings -> General -> Accounts

R.Wieser <address@is.invalid> wrote:
> Newyana2,
[...]
> > I have a TracFone with no Google account,
> [snip]
>
> I replaced android with graphene OS. The phone is switched off unless I
> need it (when traveling). Its main app is OsmAND, a map program.

You might want to post which phone (brand, model, etc.) you have and
what you needed to do to put graphene OS on it (i.e. unlock the boot
loader, fastboot, TWRP, etc.).

Probably other privacy-concious will be interested in learning whether
or not a non-Android OS is something they would be willing to try and
how hard/easy it is to accomplish it.

Just a thought.

VanguardLH wrote:

> I tried LibreOffice for over a year. Too many functions missing, or
> having to hunt for where they were buried, or goofy and often incomplete
> workarounds. LibreOffice didn't even have a handle at the corner of a
> table to expand it to add a new row with the same attributes while also
> changing the data ranges in a linked chart. Had to go back to MS Office
> for both Word and Excel.

The last version of MS Office I installed on any of my machines was
Office97, since then only OpenOffice or more recently LibreOffice.

> I had not built any custom apps using VBA with any Office component, but
> those who do can't migrate to other office suites.

If I end-up using a desktop of a customer it will have Office365
installed. I hadn't done much Word/VBA programming until this year when
someone wanted a system to generate and maintain risk assessment
documents based on numerous partial boilerplates.

I tried to do it using the "modern" Word javascript API, but found it
was far from good enough for the task, so scrapped it and started again
using VBA and that wasn't bad.

> I've seen entire corporate applications built on Office and scripts
> that don't look anything like the Office apps. Conversion away from
> MS Office would take a lot of time and money. Similarly, if someone
> built a custom program upon LibreOffice's scripting then a whole new
> project would be needed to migrate to MS Office scripting.

Agreed, you're making a one-off choice there.

"R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> wrote:

> Theo,
>
>> To use a Fitbit, you need a Google account
>
> Which is a good reason no to use it.

And what would be the suggested alternative that does not require ANY
account anywhere while still just as robust, or even more robust, in
features? What is better than Fitbit, but with no account? Didn't
those extra/premium services require a Fitbit account (now a Google
account)? Do the better than Fitbit alternatives also have availability
of those extra services, too?

Google acquired Fitbit. Maybe that's why a Google account later became
required. Did/does Fitbit not allow storing of historical data to an
online account?

https://www.fitbit.com/global/us/technology/compatible-devices

A Google Account is required for all new users.

A Google Account is required to activate new Fitbit devices released
after the launch of Google Accounts for Fitbit.

Existing users have the option to use either a Google Account or their
existing Fitbit account until at least 2025 at which point they will
be required to use a Google Account for login.

So, Fitbit devices had a Fitbit account. Google acquired Fitbit, and
wanted to leverage their authentication services instead of maintaining
a setup in which they were never involved. There are premium services
that cost money, so I can see Google wanted payment to be controlled by
Google, not whatever Fitbit used before.

I had a Fitbit 2, and now a Fitbit Luxe. Doesn't upload anything to any
account. I never bought any premium services. I don't need all those
extras for how I use it. The only "extra" I enabled was to pair the
Fitbit to my smart phone via Bluetooth to transfer data from device to
Android app. Don't need an online account for that.

Fitbit is a company name that produces several models of mobile devices.
Maybe the Fitbit 2 and Luxe are considered too limited to bother with an
online account (whether it was with Fitbit or now with Google), or I
never upgraded to paid features which would then require an account.

https://support.google.com/fitbit/?visit_id=638713434358117766-3078936505&p=sp_hc_fitbit&rd=1#topic=14236398

From what I saw there, it isn't the device itself that mandates using a
Fitbit/Google account, but the app ran on the smart phone. However,
Fitbit upped the minimum supported Android version which eliminates my
phone (back on Android 8). I get "Not compatible" with my phone when I
visit the Play Store page for Fitbit. So, I cannot test if the app can
be installed, BT paired to the Fitbit Luxe, and not buy any premium
services to see if I'm forced to have a Google account. I don't recall
ever having a Fitbit account, because I never paid for any extra stuff
nor wanted to.

It looks like after Google's acquisition that new Fitbit devices via the
Android app must get registered.

https://support.google.com/product-documentation/answer/14226283?hl=en#:~:text=A%20Google%20Account%20is%20required%20to%20activate%20new%20Fitbit%20devices,a%20Google%20Account%20for%20login.

There it mentions Android 10 is the minimum, so my old phone is out.

When someone says "Fitbit", I think of the device on my wrist, not of
the app on a phone. I think "Fitbit" to the OP meant the app. I'm
still using the Fitbit device without any Fitbit app on my old phone.
The device still works by itself. I don't need "To make full use of the
Fitbit products and services", because I never used those extras. And
now their app won't install on my old phone, so the Fitbit device has
nowhere to communicate, anyway.

What are those extra "Fitbit services" that I never needed nor wanted?
When I did have the app, I never had to activate the device. I just
paired the device to the app, and that was it.

VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
> Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>
> > To use a Fitbit, you need a Google account (unless you have a legacy Fitbit
> > account from years ago). To use the Fitbit app you need to sign in with the
> > Google account, which installs the Google account centrally on the phone,
> > which means that account infests the rest of the OS and gets used for other
> > stuff (eg Play Services/Store).
> >
> > If your phone vendor supports 'user profiles' you can make a new profile,
> > add the Google account there. Then it won't interfere with other profiles
> > and you can terminate the session by logging out after you're done.
>
> I thought all accounts were globally defined. That's why when you add a
> new app with an existing account, it is found from the list in Android.
> Any app having you add another account then adds it to the Accounts list
> in Android. Not just Fitbit does this.
>
> Android settings -> General -> Accounts

And those accounts are only accounts on your *phone* (i.e. in
Settings) if the app so chooses. For example I have apps for several
airlines and for only one of them (KLM! :-)) the account shows up under
'Accounts and backup' in Settings.

And BTW, Fitbit is *not* listed in my list of accounts (but as I said
before, I still have a legacy (non-Google) Fitbit account).

Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
> Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> > To use a Fitbit, you need a Google account (unless you have a legacy Fitbit
> > account from years ago). To use the Fitbit app you need to sign in with the
> > Google account, which installs the Google account centrally on the phone,
> > which means that account infests the rest of the OS and gets used for other
> > stuff (eg Play Services/Store).
>
> Are you sure about that? Can't you just use a Google account to login
> into the *app*, instead of into the *system*/OS? Many apps have such
> functionality, i.e. an app-specific login, so I wouldn't know why the
> Fitbit app would be any different.

It shows under Settings -> Accounts, and the Play Store uses it without
asking. There's no way to sign out of it apart from deleting it from the
phone. If I do that the Fitbit app stops working and wants a sign in again.

Theo

VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
> "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Theo,
> >
> >> To use a Fitbit, you need a Google account
> >
> > Which is a good reason no to use it.
>
> And what would be the suggested alternative that does not require ANY
> account anywhere while still just as robust, or even more robust, in
> features? What is better than Fitbit, but with no account? Didn't
> those extra/premium services require a Fitbit account (now a Google
> account)? Do the better than Fitbit alternatives also have availability
> of those extra services, too?

There are devices that are supported by Gadgetbridge, which need no account
and just sync via Bluetooth to the open source Gadgetbridge app on the
phone. I have no idea how they compare on features - that likely depends on
what you want it for (notifications v fitness v health v communications).

> When someone says "Fitbit", I think of the device on my wrist, not of
> the app on a phone. I think "Fitbit" to the OP meant the app. I'm
> still using the Fitbit device without any Fitbit app on my old phone.
> The device still works by itself. I don't need "To make full use of the
> Fitbit products and services", because I never used those extras. And
> now their app won't install on my old phone, so the Fitbit device has
> nowhere to communicate, anyway.

It depends on the device, some have no display or a very basic display, and
some features are only available in the app (eg tracking trends).

> What are those extra "Fitbit services" that I never needed nor wanted?
> When I did have the app, I never had to activate the device. I just
> paired the device to the app, and that was it.

You can't pair to the app without a Google account. 'Sign in' is the very
first screen.

Theo

Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:

> VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
>
>> When I did have the app, I never had to activate the device. I just
>> paired the device to the app, and that was it.
>
> You can't pair to the app without a Google account. 'Sign in' is the
> very first screen.

Probably because Google decided to require registration of the devices,
and the app is of no use unless it gets paired to a device. Seems
overreaching to require registration of the devices that the user paid
for. This is not the situation where the devices are Google's property.
But their app is.

Google completed the $2.1B acquisition of Fitbit back in the start of
2021, but haven't required switching from a Fitbit account to a Google
account until 2025 (which is now). 2 years after acquisition Google
decided to discontinue the Fitbit smartwatches.

https://www.yahoo.com/tech/why-google-quietly-discontinuing-fitbit-170315663.html

So, what of the $2.1B is left for the Fitbit product line? Just the
health trackers?

Despite now mandating a login to a Google account to just install the
app, users are complaining the app doesn't stay logged in. They have to
repeatedly re-login. With all the troubles reported with the
Google-ized app, seems Google is also trying to kill off the rest of
their $2.1B outlay by killing off the other Fitbit devices in making
them too difficult to use with the app. Of course, fucking up the app
only affects those that feel compelled to use the device with an app.

I got spared the mandatory login requirement. Fitbit decided to up the
minimum supported Android version, and I wasn't buying a new phone just
to satisfy their moving requirements. The Fitbit device still works all
by itself. When I buy a toaster, I don't need an app to use it. I
never used the app other than to play with it at first. Interest waned,
and I uninstalled it. Later when I decided to trial it again, oops,
latest version no longer compatible with my old phone. Oh well, no loss
to me, anyway.

On 1/1/2025 9:33 AM, R.Wieser wrote:

>> I have a TracFone with no Google account,
> [snip]
>
> I replaced android with graphene OS. The phone is switched off unless I
> need it (when traveling). Its main app is OsmAND, a map program.
>
I don't think I can do that with TacFone, but it's OK. I only
use the phone on an occasional basis, and pretty much only for phone calls.

>> I'm amazed that these companies are allowed, legally, to exert such
>> control over a device I paid for.
>
> I hope you're not running Win10/11, which has become nothing more than a
> thick ethernet client and doubling as an advertising platform. :-)
>
I have Win11 installed for testing software. I haven't allowed it
online and haven't done much with it. About a year ago I built a new
computer and decided to try Win10. It took about 2 weeks, but I'm
happy. It's fast, lean, free of all the crap, with updates blocked. The
last thing I managed to accomplish was to stop ALL notification
popups. So now it works as well as XP, but with support for newer
hardware/software/64-bit, etc.

It was very complicated, but not impossible. Though after getting
it mostly set up it wouldn't activate. I had to start over from scratch and
activate first, before the tweaking. That worked. I tried to install a
security update in Auguest. One problem led to another. I finally gave up.
The upddate messed up my system big time, despite not actually
installing! Luckily I had made a disk image just before updating.

Moral of the story, to my mind: Win10 is mostly OK but very brittle and
very bloated. Win10 doesn't like tweaks. Microsoft are increasingly trying
to control everything. I've had no surprises, no ads, no Copilot showing
up, etc. But I'm not allowing any updates and have disabled as much
calling home as I can find.

I don't expect to try any updates again. The August experience was
a ridiculous fiasco that shouldn't have happened for mere security
updates. I ended up on a wild goose chase enlarging WinRE. (Which
shouldn't even be required.) And it still just screwed everything up.
BUT, the same update went without a hitch on my laptop that's
less tweaked. So that seems to be further evidence that MS are
punishing tweaks.

On 2025-01-01 03:08, Andrew wrote:
> What can't you do on Android WITHOUT a Google Account set up in the OS?

I need my bank app, which I'm sure checks for the google environment. I
know that payment by phone is done using Google Wallet, and phone to
phone payment via Bizum; both require the google auth. Besides that, I
use a Fitbit watch, and that also requires a login. My car GPS depends
on Android Auto, and runs other google apps and tools.

So no, I'm not interested in finding out what I can do without a login
to google.

Good luck igniting another flame war, Arlen :-)

--
Cheers, Carlos.

VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
[...]

> I had a Fitbit 2, and now a Fitbit Luxe. Doesn't upload anything to any
> account. I never bought any premium services. I don't need all those
> extras for how I use it. The only "extra" I enabled was to pair the
> Fitbit to my smart phone via Bluetooth to transfer data from device to
> Android app. Don't need an online account for that.

I don't know what a "Fitbit 2" is, probably a "Fitbit <something> 2"
where "<something>" is the relevant part.

Anyway, I always needed a Fitbit account for our Fitbits (Alta HR,
Charge 4, Charge 5 and Charge 6). Without an account, the Fitbit won't
sync, also not to the Fitbit app on the phone. And to sync, it needs an
Internet connection. Stupid design, but that's the way it is.

So, on the phone, do you use the Fitbit app or another app, if so
which one?

I think my <insert_loved_one> has a Fitbit Luxe (on an iPhone). I've
to ask her what she needs to sync. I know they have a Fitbit Family
account together with her <insert_smaller_loved_one>.

[...]

On 2025-01-01 19:59, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
> [...]
>
>> I had a Fitbit 2, and now a Fitbit Luxe. Doesn't upload anything to any
>> account. I never bought any premium services. I don't need all those
>> extras for how I use it. The only "extra" I enabled was to pair the
>> Fitbit to my smart phone via Bluetooth to transfer data from device to
>> Android app. Don't need an online account for that.
>
> I don't know what a "Fitbit 2" is, probably a "Fitbit <something> 2"
> where "<something>" is the relevant part.
>
> Anyway, I always needed a Fitbit account for our Fitbits (Alta HR,
> Charge 4, Charge 5 and Charge 6). Without an account, the Fitbit won't
> sync, also not to the Fitbit app on the phone. And to sync, it needs an
> Internet connection. Stupid design, but that's the way it is.
>
> So, on the phone, do you use the Fitbit app or another app, if so
> which one?

Google Fit.

>
> I think my <insert_loved_one> has a Fitbit Luxe (on an iPhone). I've
> to ask her what she needs to sync. I know they have a Fitbit Family
> account together with her <insert_smaller_loved_one>.
>
> [...]

--
Cheers, Carlos.

Newyana2,

>> I replaced android with graphene OS. The phone is switched off unless
>> I need it (when traveling). Its main app is OsmAND, a map program.
>>
> I don't think I can do that with TacFone,

Ah yes, I forgot to mention that my phone is a pixel 6. The replacing with
graphene OS was done online, using a webbrowser. Rather painless.

> I have Win11 installed for testing software. I haven't allowed it
> online and haven't done much with it.

:-) As long as you do not connect it to the internet than you are,
ofcourse, shielded from most of the shennigans MS could try to pull.

> Moral of the story, to my mind: Win10 is mostly OK but very brittle
> and very bloated.

I would have the same problem(s) with it as you: I tweak the sh*t outof what
I've got running.

> So that seems to be further evidence that MS are punishing tweaks.

Think of occams razor: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately
explained by stupidity."

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

On 01/01/2025 14:33, R.Wieser wrote:

> I replaced android with graphene OS. The phone is switched off unless I
> need it (when traveling). Its main app is OsmAND, a map program.

I've always understood that GrapheneOS is Android that's been
"degoogled". You may have replaced the original Android OS in whatever
Pixel you're using with GrapheneOS, but it's still Android.

--
Jeff

Carlos,

>> What can't you do on Android WITHOUT a Google Account set up in the OS?
....
> Good luck igniting another flame war, Arlen :-)

I think you are misjudging arlen here. Its more than likely he really wants
to know what he asked for.

The only problem is that he's, as so often, not really thinking about the
impossibility of *what* he's asking. It will take an exorbitant ammount of
time to go thru *all* the available google apps and trying to find
replacements for them, just to come up with the (short)list he actually
wants.

And damnit, does /everyone/ here know that Andrew is the next nym of Arlen ?
I thought I was the only one here who knew that. :-)

Regards,
Rudy Wieser