gemini://jsreed5.org/log/2022/202208/20220825-on-the-frustrations-of-android.gmi

StackSmith shared some well-written and very relatable frustrations about Android today^, citing the example of LibriVox and independently-developed audiobook players. I don't listen to audiobooks on Android, so I can't comment too much on that particular experience, but I definitely understand how difficult it can be to get certain apps to recognize certain types of data.

I should first mention some of the specific things I do that make my Android experience a little easier. I am very much a smartphone "power user", utilizing my phone similarly to how I use a computer. As such, I've spent a good amount of time in the past looking for apps that work the way I want them to.

Central among them is a powerful and feature-rich file manager. The one I prefer is MiXplorer^^, developed by Hootan Parsa. It combines features that would normally require many apps, such as cloud storage access, FTP and SMB access, local HTTP and FTP servers for file transfer, and basic media viewers. Internet browsers can hand off file downloads to MiXplorer, which defaults to asking where to save the file, and files can even be downloaded directly from inside MiXplorer if a direct URL is supplied. The app is unfortunately not open-source, I suspect because of the cloud storage tools, but I have used it for years and I recommend it.

Everything I've just said, however, is really a long-winded way of saying "Dude, just find a better app". That, to me, is the larger problem with Android: the expectation that if you desire a certain functionality on your device, a nameless "someone" will make an app for you that does it. And if no-one actually makes such an app, or if it doesn't behave the way you want, you're simply out of luck. There's no expectation or even ability to string together applications in a customizable way and build your own workflows.

Part of this problem stems from the "walled garden" nature of modern devices. True freedom, digitally or otherwise, is not something that can be sold to people on a company's terms, nor can it be revoked by them. Such freedom, however, isn't as profitable as tight control masquerading as safety or convenience. Companies today would rather their customers use apps rather than websites, because they can more tightly control user behavior and implement more pervasive tracking through apps, and that brings in more cash. Similarly, limiting interoperability between apps forces users to download multiple apps to do simple things, thereby increasing their tracking footprint and yielding even more revenue.

However, I think consumers themselves are often part of the problem. Many, many people who use smart devices have little to no clue about how they work, and most of those people have no interest in finding out. "I want an audiobook. Does Kindle have that book? Okay, I don't care what I need to do, I just want the book." "I need to replace the charger for my laptop. Does eBay have that charger? Okay, I'm not interested in the finer points of how the eBay app analyzes my scrolling habits. I just need the charger." Ignorance of or apathy to how the system works will inevitably lead customers to want walled gardens, because they want their devices to "just work" and they don't want to fuss with them.

Of course, this leads to a self-sustaining cycle, in which walled gardens thrive on opacity, that opacity contributes to public ignorance, and that ignorance leads to an increased demand for walled gardens. Both parties are to blame in my book. And unfortunately, I don't see the feedback loop being broken anytime soon.

On the Frustrations of Android

2022-08-25