Development: Avoid Samsung Device Care Wakeup alarms - Android Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting

Hello,
We have an Android SDK that many applications use for marketing purposes. Specifically, it allows to deliver personalized messages to their users based on geofences or bluetooth beacons detection.
We've dedicated tons of hours optimizing the thing so it does not drain user battery or annoys in any matter, however we are now facing a new challenge: Samsung Device Care (Samsung Maintenance).
As you may know, this application comes pre installed in (I think) all Samsung devices, and helps users to keep the battery consumption low by detecting apps that consume too much in the background among other features.
Our software behaves correctly in almost all categories, including battery consumption and background time execution, however the Samsung device care app sometimes shows an alert saying that the "application generates too many wake ups". In order to avoid this, we are being more aggressive by explicitly controlling the number wake ups when app is in the background, the only problem is that we are completely blind right now, as we don't know what is the threshold that Samsung Device care app uses to trigger this alarm.
I have decompiled the Samsung device care app, however the app seems to be written in C / C++, hampering the task.
I have also run tests for days in a couple of Samsung phones in order to see if I can trigger the alarm, so I can try to empirically found what the limits are, however I haven't been able to trigger any alarm, even though my testing code is requesting an AlarmManager callback every 30 seconds.
Finally, I have also opened a ticket in the Samsung Developer site, but no answer so far...
Do you have any idea where can I find this information? :crying:

Related

'No-sleep Energy Bugs' Drain Smartphone Batteries (Purdue University research)

Researchers have proposed a method to automatically detect a new class of software glitches in smartphones called "no-sleep energy bugs," which can entirely drain batteries while the phones are not in use.
"These energy bugs are a silent battery killer," said Y. Charlie Hu, a Purdue University professor of electrical and computer engineering. "A fully charged phone battery can be drained in as little as five hours."
Because conserving battery power is critical for smartphones, the industry has adopted "an aggressive sleep policy," he said.
"What this means is that smartphones are always in a sleep mode, by default. When there are no active user interactions such as screen touches, every component, including the central processor, stays off unless an app instructs the operating system to keep it on."
Various background operations need to be performed while the phone is idle.
"For example, a mailer may need to automatically update email by checking with the remote server," Hu said.
To prevent the phone from going to sleep during such operations, smartphone manufacturers make application programming interfaces, or APIs, available to app developers. The developers insert the APIs into apps to instruct the phone to stay awake long enough to perform necessary operations.
"App developers have to explicitly juggle different power control APIs that are exported from the operating systems of the smartphones," Hu said. "Unfortunately, programmers are only human. They make mistakes when using these APIs, which leads to software bugs that mishandle power control, preventing the phone from engaging the sleep mode. As a result, the phone stays awake and drains the battery."
Findings are detailed in a research paper being presented during the 10th International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications and Services, or MobiSys 2012, June 25-29 in the United Kingdom. The paper was written by doctoral students Abhinav Pathak and Abhilash Jindal, Hu, and Samuel Midkiff, a Purdue professor of electrical and computer engineering.
The researchers have completed the first systematic study of the no-sleep bugs and have proposed a method for automatically detecting them.
"We've had anecdotal evidence concerning these no-sleep energy bugs, but there has not been any systematic study of them until now," Midkiff said.
The researchers studied 187 Android applications that were found to contain Android's explicit power control APIs, called "wakelocks." Of the 187 apps, 42 were found to contain errors - or bugs - in their wakelock code. Findings showed the new tool accurately detected all 12 previously known instances of no-sleep energy bugs and found 30 new bugs in the apps.
The glitch has been found in interactive apps, such as phone applications and services for telephony on Android that must work even though the user isn't touching the phone. The app may fail to engage the sleep mode after the interactive session is completed.
Smartphone users, meanwhile, don't know that their phones have the bugs.
"You don't see any difference," Hu said. "You put it in your pocket and you think everything is fine. You take it out, and your battery is dead."
To detect bugs in the applications, the researchers modified a tool called a compiler, which translates code written in computer languages into the binary code that computers understand. The tool they developed adds new functionality to the compiler so that it can determine where no-sleep bugs might exist.
"The tool analyzes the binary code and automatically and accurately detects the presence of the no-sleep bugs," Midkiff said.
The Purdue researchers have coined the term "power-encumbered programming" to describe the smartphone energy bugs. Researchers concentrated on the Android smartphone, but the same types of bugs appear to affect other brands, Hu said.
LINK to original post

[Q] How to ensure that a networking thread gets treated as high priority.

We have a Service with some threads dedicated to network communication. It's heartbeat-type traffic - a quick request-response a couple of times a second with small amounts of data. The problem is that a thread sometimes just stops being run for 20 or more seconds when a network request is made (that's based on calling System.currentTimeMillis() at the start and finish of the network request, and I know from measurements on the server side that the request was completed in a fraction of a second).
The advice out there suggests setting thread priorities using the Android-specific API and/or the pure Java API. It also suggests poking the service into the foreground with notifications, because Android favours foreground processes. I've tried the thread priorities, doesn't work. I'm currently trying the foreground notification trick, I don't know yet if it solves the problem.
Even if any of those techniques happen to work, it stil seems brittle - the kind of thing that could stop working with a hardware change or operating system upgrade. Is there any way of telling Android that a given thread is important enough to get attention a few times a second, and to have it treated as a requirement and not as a suggestion?
This isn't a general release application that needs to be a good citizen and let other apps have their turn: we're running it on a tablet that's dedicated just to running this application, and that we can modify in any way that's required to support the application.
Have you come across this problem before? What do you suggest?
Thanks.

Need best way to monitor Android device for random crash/freeze/other misbehavior

I support users of various Android devices (mostly Samsung tablets, 5.1/6.0) and we frequently encounter reports of app behavior that is not (easily) reproducible-- crashes, freezes, etc-- and because we only get these reports after the fact, or cannot remote in the moment using Mobicontrol due to state of the device or poor connectivity, we can only attempt to surmise what might have happened instead of knowing for certain what did. Logcat files don't really help us because we cannot connect via adb for geographically distant users, and we need to have such a session running to capture the condition but we cannot know in advance when it might occur. Furthermore, these users are not technically proficient in the least so we cannot rely on their information or trust that they can reliably follow directions beyond simple point and click interface elements.
Root is not an option for us so whatever tool or method might be recommended must meet the following criteria:
-Run unattended, but can be scheduled start/stop
-Should impact system resources minimally so it doesn't possibly contribute to performance issues
-Should keep a rolling log of CPU. RAM, events, etc that is automatically purged to avoid buildup of unnecessary logs, say 24 hours, or configurable interval
-Ideally would email log, with user description/annotation, to preconfigured recipient list upon command from local or remote user when app performance warrants
-License would need to permit us to deploy on "suspect" devices via apk push via Mobicontrol package rules, not Play store, for between 5 and 10 devices as needed
I am hoping to find what the offending app(s) are, under what specific conditions the users experience the interruptions to their work, and what the actual experiences are-- is slow performance being experienced as a freeze? Is an app trying to connect to a network when none is available? Etc. Again, we can't rely on our users to accurately assess and describe what led up to the crash or freeze and unless we are connected via Mobicontrol when it happens we cannot get the details later without such a tool as described above.
Any and all help is greatly appreciated, thank you
Matt
No ideas? Bump
Hoping that someone may have recommendations, we can really use the help. Thanks.

About the use of accessibility service in Greenify

Like many other developers, I also received the 30-days deadline warning email from Google Play team about the potential "misuse" of accessibility service in Greenify.
As the very first developer who introduced this trick of "misusing" accessibility to achieve UI automation years ago, I'm very proud that many more creative tool apps followed this approach to enable fantastic functionality beyond the imagination of the creator of Android, without root. It's a miracle bred from the openness and flexibility of Android.
Unfortunately, the supervisor of the dominant app market is now declaring its right of final interpretation, to judge the proper use of Android API and claim that this whole idea is unacceptable. At this point, I feel I have to say something.
Why accessibility service?
As we all know, root is the ultimate playground of super users in the Android community. But it also has its inconvenience and grey side, so I decided to make Greenify work for users with non-root device. I had been experimenting with many approaches for this purpose in almost the whole year 2013. Finally I found the magic of UI automation driven by accessibility service. With this approach, many more users now enjoy the improved battery life and smoothness brought by Greenify.
I know that accessibility service is not a perfect solution, considering the overall UI performance degradation involved (explained below). So I never gave up seeking alternative approaches ever since, (many of which might also be considered API "misusing" in strict speaking) but still no better approach found. If Android could provide any alternative solution, I would never prefer accessibility service in the first place.
The Good
Accessibility service is so powerful, that I have to admit it's some kind of Pandora's box.
With accessibility, developers could not only help people with disabled abilities, but also greatly benefit the general users with wonderful use cases, including:
• Remote assistant via touch interaction, without root. (seems like no such apps yet?)
• Automate the tedious operations inside not-well-designed apps, even possibly driven by Tasker or IFTTT, without root.
• Programatically trigger global actions (e.g. Back, Home).
• Overlay the whole screen including the notification shade on Android O.
• ……
I even wrote a small app with accessibility service to "fix" the bottom navigation bar of my wife's Moto X Style, whose touch screen is not reading touches any more in bottommost rows of pixels.
The Bad
With such power, accessibility service is also becoming the trending target of malware, endangering average users world-wide. A typical malware could deceive user to enable its accessibility service and then perform many dangerous actions without user consent, including gaining other sensitive privileges.
Together with screen overlay, this could even hide from average user's observation, effectively making it a seductive approach, thus highly dangerous in the wild.
The Ugly
The dangers above may not be a thread to advanced users, but the overall UI lag caused by accessibility service could be a real hurt.
Android delivers accessibility events to active accessibility service in two phases. Events are first generated in the current interacting app and immediately sent to system process, then dispatched to separate accessibility services, each in its own process.
If no accessibility services enabled, both phases are shutdown, thus no performance affection at all. If at least one accessibility service is enabled, the first phase is turned on, in full power, no matter which types of events are interested (declared by accessibility service). The second phase is taking that into consideration and only delivers the interested events to each accessibility service.
The performance lag comes mostly out of the first phase because some types of accessibility events are so heavy, considering how frequently they are triggered. For example, TYPE_WINDOW_CONTENT_CHANGED is generated and sent every tiny bit of UI content changes and TYPE_VIEW_SCROLLED is generated and sent every pixel your finger is moved across during scrolling, even if no accessibility services are interested in them.
Sounds crazy? Unfortunately that's the current situation. Although Android O took a step to address that, the situation is still not changed fundamentally. Maybe in Google's view, accessibility service is not intended for general users, so performance optimization is never in the priority.
How is Greenify doing
Performance is always Greenify's priority since it’s one of the purposes defining Greenify. So I took all the possibilities to improve that in the past years, even greatly pulled-back by Android system itself.
First of all, Greenify declares no interest of events at all at most of the time and only declares minimal interest of events (all are trivial to generate) and specific target (system settings app) required during the short period of on-going hibernation operation. This is implemented by dynamic registration, cutting the cost of the second phase to almost zero.
Due to the inefficient implementation in Android system, the first phase is still the bottleneck of UI performance. After a long time of trial and failure, I finally managed to eliminate that cost, in a tricky way. With necessary permission granted via ADB, Greenify only enables its accessibility service during the hibernation operation and disable it immediately afterwards. That means, if no other accessibility service enabled, you will have no performance problem of accessibility service at all while still enjoy the power of Greenify.
With above optimization, Greenify limited the events it could receive to the minimal, thus also effectively keeps the privacy of users in safety. I'm planning to bring this optimization to broader users who has little knowledge about ADB, and even to other apps with accessibility service hopefully.
My Concern
Accessibility service is a yard full of potential creativity and magic. It should never be a Pandora's Box if Android itself implement it with caution in the first place. I understand the complexity and historical reasons that lead to the current situation, but feel sorry and sad about how Google deals with this situation, by banishing popular tool apps. Will that make Android users more secure? I highly doubt.
I don't know if Google Play team represents the atitude of Android team at Google. If so, it will then be the breaking day for all Android developers, when Google starts to use its power to judge the "proper use" of Android API, even if it's not used by malware.
Will it come a day that the use of screen overlay besides showing information will be banned?
Will it come a day that the use of content provider not for providing data will be banned?
Will it come a day that the use of internal APIs will be banned?
oasisfeng said:
Like many other developers, I also received the 30-days deadline warning email from Google Play team about the potential "misuse" of accessibility service in Greenify.
As the very first developer who introduced this trick of "misusing" accessibility to achieve UI automation years ago, I'm very proud that many more creative tool apps followed this approach to enable fantastic functionality beyond the imagination of the creator of Android, without root. It's a miracle bred from the openness and flexibility of Android.
Unfortunately, the supervisor of the dominant app market is now declaring its right of final interpretation, to judge the proper use of Android API and claim that this whole idea is unacceptable. At this point, I feel I have to say something.
Why accessibility service?
As we all know, root is the ultimate playground of super users in the Android community. But it also has its inconvenience and grey side, so I decided to make Greenify work for users with non-root device. I had been experimenting with many approaches for this purpose in almost the whole year 2013. Finally I found the magic of UI automation driven by accessibility service. With this approach, many more users now enjoy the improved battery life and smoothness brought by Greenify.
I know that accessibility service is not a perfect solution, considering the overall UI performance degradation involved (explained below). So I never gave up seeking alternative approaches ever since, (many of which might also be considered API "misusing" in strict speaking) but still no better approach found. If Android could provide any alternative solution, I would never prefer accessibility service in the first place.
The Good
Accessibility service is so powerful, that I have to admit it's some kind of Pandora's box.
With accessibility, developers could not only help people with disabled abilities, but also greatly benefit the general users with wonderful use cases, including:
• Remote assistant via touch interaction, without root. (seems like no such apps yet?)
• Automate the tedious operations inside not-well-designed apps, even possibly driven by Tasker or IFTTT, without root.
• Programatically trigger global actions (e.g. Back, Home).
• Overlay the whole screen including the notification shade on Android O.
• ……
I even wrote a small app with accessibility service to "fix" the bottom navigation bar of my wife's Moto X Style, whose touch screen is not reading touches any more in bottommost rows of pixels.
The Bad
With such power, accessibility service is also becoming the trending target of malware, endangering average users world-wide. A typical malware could deceive user to enable its accessibility service and then perform many dangerous actions without user consent, including gaining other sensitive privileges.
Together with screen overlay, this could even hide from average user's observation, effectively making it a seductive approach, thus highly dangerous in the wild.
The Ugly
The dangers above may not be a thread to advanced users, but the overall UI lag caused by accessibility service could be a real hurt.
Android delivers accessibility events to active accessibility service in two phases. Events are first generated in the current interacting app and immediately sent to system process, then dispatched to separate accessibility services, each in its own process.
If no accessibility services enabled, both phases are shutdown, thus no performance affection at all. If at least one accessibility service is enabled, the first phase is turned on, in full power, no matter which types of events are interested (declared by accessibility service). The second phase is taking that into consideration and only delivers the interested events to each accessibility service.
The performance lag comes mostly out of the first phase because some types of accessibility events are so heavy, considering how frequently they are triggered. For example, TYPE_WINDOW_CONTENT_CHANGED is generated and sent every tiny bit of UI content changes and TYPE_VIEW_SCROLLED is generated and sent every pixel your finger is moved across during scrolling, even if no accessibility services are interested in them.
Sounds crazy? Unfortunately that's the current situation. Although Android O took a step to address that, the situation is still not changed fundamentally. Maybe in Google's view, accessibility service is not intended for general users, so performance optimization is never in the priority.
How is Greenify doing
Performance is always Greenify's priority since it’s one of the purposes defining Greenify. So I took all the possibilities to improve that in the past years, even greatly pulled-back by Android system itself.
First of all, Greenify declares no interest of events at all at most of the time and only declares minimal interest of events (all are trivial to generate) and specific target (system settings app) required during the short period of on-going hibernation operation. This is implemented by dynamic registration, cutting the cost of the second phase to almost zero.
Due to the inefficient implementation in Android system, the first phase is still the bottleneck of UI performance. After a long time of trial and failure, I finally managed to eliminate that cost, in a tricky way. With necessary permission granted via ADB, Greenify only enables its accessibility service during the hibernation operation and disable it immediately afterwards. That means, if no other accessibility service enabled, you will have no performance problem of accessibility service at all while still enjoy the power of Greenify.
With above optimization, Greenify limited the events it could receive to the minimal, thus also effectively keeps the privacy of users in safety. I'm planning to bring this optimization to broader users who has little knowledge about ADB, and even to other apps with accessibility service hopefully.
My Concern
Accessibility service is a yard full of potential creativity and magic. It should never be a Pandora's Box if Android itself implement it with caution in the first place. I understand the complexity and historical reasons that lead to the current situation, but feel sorry and sad about how Google deals with this situation, by banishing popular tool apps. Will that make Android users more secure? I highly doubt.
I don't know if Google Play team represents the atitude of Android team at Google. If so, it will then be the breaking day for all Android developers, when Google starts to use its power to judge the "proper use" of Android API, even if it's not used by malware.
Will it come a day that the use of screen overlay besides showing information will be banned?
Will it come a day that the use of content provider not for providing data will be banned?
Will it come a day that the use of internal APIs will be banned?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well thanks for all you've done for the Android community!
Perhaps you and many other devs should just pull away from Google and switch to a different market like FDroid.
Google has done this sort of thing in the past, like with SCR Pro (screen recording software with internal audio support) because it changed SELinux Policy. If Google loses their cut money, maybe they would rethink that decision. Personally if I was Google, I'd just add a "Potential Security Issue" or a "Modifies Critical Security Settings" indicator to apps on the Play Store that use the Accessibility Services or change SELinux Policy, or other security related settings. Give the users the option of what they choose or not choose to run on their phones! They already have some sort of a system in place that already does this with the "Play Protect" system. Slowly but surely, Android is becoming more like iOS with less freedom.
Interesting update to original article on XDA
https://www.xda-developers.com/google-threatening-removal-accessibility-services-play-store/
"Update: LastPass has just responded to this news and states that there will be “no immediate impact” for their Android apps. Whether or not this means that other applications will be given leniency remains to be seen."
Accessibility Service options
If I may ask -- what are you going to do? Are you going to pre-emptively unpublish the app before the 30 day limit is up? Are you going to try to reach out to Google and ask them to clarify whether there is any changes / clarifications? (LastPass implies they have gotten some kind of assurance, but they don't directly state that). Or, are you going to try to get as compliant as possible (put the appropriate language in the appropriate places), and hope for the best?
As far as I'm concerned your app is one of the few mission critical apps in the android ecosystem. So I can only hope that this can be resolved amicably.
I think this change is aimed solely at Substratum, as I have heard (not confirmed) than in Android 8.1 without root/unlocking and only using accessibility services, OMS can be exploited for theming. So Google is using a shotgun to kill all apps using this service rather than narrow their focus.
@oasisfeng
An insightful, deliberate and extremely well written post! ?
Sent from my SM-G955W ??
I think its time of the developers make a big migration of the apps to the XDA store to save the lagacy of the -7.0
Sent from my Asus ZenFone 3 Deluxe using XDA Labs
divineBliss said:
Interesting update to original article on XDA
https://www.xda-developers.com/google-threatening-removal-accessibility-services-play-store/
"Update: LastPass has just responded to this news and states that there will be “no immediate impact” for their Android apps. Whether or not this means that other applications will be given leniency remains to be seen."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LastPass and Chrome enjoyed a cozy relationship in the past. That said I'm almost surprised at the news given Google could easily incorporate similar functionality into Android. Maybe Google and LogMeIn have something going on the side (new rumor...lol).
As much as i like to sympathize with developers using Accessibility to improve functionality of Android, I can't.
Because in last couple of months i have seen many crappy apps (cleaners n all) also start asking for same permission, and average user don't really understand or even care to read what impact or access they are giving and more than 95% of Android user falls in this category. We at XDA or other nerdy site don't like this fact but it's bare truth.
And from Google perspective, They can't monitor each and every App for eternity that which one is using this permission for good and which one isn't. So hammer of Banning all of it seems only solution for now on their part. especially considering Accessibility service was never meant to use for improving "Device Functionality" (Button Mapper, Battery Saver) it was always meant for "helping hand" in case normal functionally can't be used, not as "Replacement".
Also in my personal option, i think this ban is more due to App developers are trying to bypass each and every thing device manufacturers put (Bexby & Assistant Button) than apps trying to help with routine task (LastPass, Greenify).
Though they may not say explicitly OEM are not happy with their excursive feature are ruined by apps using accessibility as bypass and they (including Google in this case) can force Play Store to make restriction on this. (whether it's is Good practice or not is entire different topic so don't dwell into that debate in replies)
So in conclusion, Till Google come up with better solution (and i think they will, People working there are not fools they understand good that this access can do for Android as whole) , banning seems fair to me because security & stability of 95% users comes above 5% demanding modification & features.
Nerdy will always find a way but it's extremely difficultly to help understand average user why their phone suddenly start behaving abnormally
and that's what Google & OEM face daily.
jineshpatel30 said:
As much as i like to sympathize with developers using Accessibility to improve functionality of Android, I can't.
Because in last couple of months i have seen many crappy apps (cleaners n all) also start asking for same permission, and average user don't really understand or even care to read what impact or access they are giving and more than 95% of Android user falls in this category. We at XDA or other nerdy site don't like this fact but it's bare truth.
And from Google perspective, They can't monitor each and every App for eternity that which one is using this permission for good and which one isn't. So hammer of Banning all of it seems only solution for now on their part. especially considering Accessibility service was never meant to use for improving "Device Functionality" (Button Mapper, Battery Saver) it was always meant for "helping hand" in case normal functionally can't be used, not as "Replacement".
Also in my personal option, i think this ban is more due to App developers are trying to bypass each and every thing device manufacturers put (Bexby & Assistant Button) than apps trying to help with routine task (LastPass, Greenify).
Though they may not say explicitly OEM are not happy with their excursive feature are ruined by apps using accessibility as bypass and they (including Google in this case) can force Play Store to make restriction on this. (whether it's is Good practice or not is entire different topic so don't dwell into that debate in replies)
So in conclusion, Till Google come up with better solution (and i think they will, People working there are not fools they understand good that this access can do for Android as whole) , banning seems fair to me because security & stability of 95% users comes above 5% demanding modification & features.
Nerdy will always find a way but it's extremely difficultly to help understand average user why their phone suddenly start behaving abnormally
and that's what Google & OEM face daily.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually Google has fairly simple way to provide a solution, for example, Play services API to provide similar functionality with refined security and proper restriction. The new SMS verification API is a good example for app to avoid requesting SMS permission. Fairly speaking, SMS too was not designed for verification purpose.
They did nothing for a long time, but rush to ban all these apps in just 30 days. I think they just don't care that much about advanced user like the old days when Android was competing with iOS fiercely.
I’m the developer of Battery Overlay Percent. Not one of the big apps out there but it does got 500,000 downloads and about 30,000 active users.
I use accessibility services for hiding overlay when user pull status bar or on later release to resolve overlay breaking permission.
I’m quite sad with Google closing down on legitimate use cases. Personally from an open source OS we now live in a world of 2 pretty closed mobile environments.
And who’s collecting most data? Play Services of course.
Hope there will be a shift from this centerlized dark state we’re in.
oasisfeng said:
Actually Google has fairly simple way to provide a solution, for example, Play services API to provide similar functionality with refined security and proper restriction. The new SMS verification API is a good example for app to avoid requesting SMS permission. Fairly speaking, SMS too was not designed for verification purpose.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I thought something similar and i still think they will implement it but not before 30day timeline.
They did nothing for a long time, but rush to ban all these apps in just 30 days. I think they just don't care that much about advanced user like the old days when Android was competing with iOS fiercely.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True that. When you have 90% of market you don't need to expand it any more you just need to control it.
I don't mean to sound like I'm supporting them, but this what people do in general, when they have control on almost entire market.
Luckily for now (and unlike with ios) Android can still and probaly can always exist without the Google Play Store and Google Play Services and thats still a big win over ios! And as much as I hate this news, this is something I think will ultimately lead advanced users and advanced developers to become less dependant upon Google Play Store and Google Play Services.... and for users/devs like us, thats actually a good thing!
Maybe now Google Play Store will finally get some real competition!! Google has certainly with their actions have now got a significant chunk of users and devs properly motivated to look or create healthy alternatives for app licensing and license management on Android, thats for sure and to also kick it off with a healthly sample of some of the most prized apps android has ever seen, yikes!! Greenify is amazing but Tasker too; bigger yikes!!!
cantenna said:
Luckily for now (and unlike with ios) Android can still and probaly can always exist without the Google Play Store and Google Play Services and thats still a big win over ios! And as much as I hate this news, this is something I think will ultimately lead advanced users and advanced developers to become less dependant upon Google Play Store and Google Play Services.... and for users/devs like us, thats actually a good thing!
Maybe now Google Play Store will finally get some real competition!! Google has certainly with their actions have now got a significant chunk of users and devs properly motivated to look or create healthy alternatives for app licensing and license management on Android, thats for sure and to also kick it off with a healthly sample of some of the most prized apps android has ever seen, yikes!! Greenify is amazing but Tasker too; bigger yikes!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly.
We need to stand our ground.
I have a feeling that alternate app stores are about to see a huge boost in users. Google is going to sorely regret their decisions.
betatest3 said:
Exactly.
We need to stand our ground.
I have a feeling that alternate app stores are about to see a huge boost in users. Google is going to sorely regret their decisions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I admire your optimistic attitude - But... Alphabet is a Juggernaut and if it suits them - They'd probably just buy any potential problem ?
Sent from my SM-G955W ??
shaggyskunk said:
I admire your optimistic attitude - But... Alphabet is a Juggernaut and if it suits them - They'd probably just buy any potential problem ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not to mention the relatively small number of individuals that will be adversely impacted when all is said and done. Bigger players (eg: LastPass) will likely receive some form of dispensation. Niche tools like Greenify might take a hit but that is not where the revenue stream resides. Google ain't catering to the Android enthusiast community.
shaggyskunk said:
I admire your optimistic attitude - But... Alphabet is a Juggernaut and if it suits them - They'd probably just buy any potential problem ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I dont think they'll be buying the amazon app store any time soon.
but to the point of the other user you quoted, you'll likely see the accessibility needing market move to another app store.
cantenna said:
I dont think they'll be buying the amazon app store any time soon.
but to the point of the other user you quoted, you'll likely see the accessibility needing market move to another app store.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sure. There are a handful of reputable alternative app stores that cater to small communities that dare to venture off the beaten path. Niche market; don't think Google is worried. Nor is it likely Amazon will cater to Android enthusiasts.
If Alphabet/Google is serious about reining in potential abuses look for further adjustments in the successor to Android 8.
Can you on XDA Dev put an parallel market on the XDA Labs with PayPal account with less taxes (good for all) to maintaining and update webpage to conventional user going fu*k up the Google to the apps then will not survive on the Google rules on the market?
Put and good design market to the conventional use on XDA please.
Sent from my Asus ZenFone 3 Deluxe using XDA Labs
---------- Post added at 05:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:20 PM ----------
If you on XDA Labs put a inner market in the app with an Market safe with PayPal the developers can update the Apps on the Market with no acessibility but make an link to be updated on the XDA Labs with a plugin or a new full version, we can free more people with xposed solutions to defeat Google Policy
Sent from my Asus ZenFone 3 Deluxe using XDA Labs
---------- Post added at 05:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:31 PM ----------
Dev can update your apps and redirect to the external link in XDA Labs without violated google policy.
Sent from my Asus ZenFone 3 Deluxe using XDA Labs
---------- Post added at 05:50 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:37 PM ----------
XDA Labs have power with an safe and free market scanning and checking malicious new apps to be so respected and Xposed so popular then I believed on the futere ASUS and Samsung make the ZenFone Deluxes and Galaxy S with Xposed on stock on the most expansive "and free" devices, absolutely. Please think renew the XDA webpage and XDA Labs to defeat the enemies of the freedom on coding.
Sent from my Asus ZenFone 3 Deluxe using XDA Labs
---------- Post added at 05:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:50 PM ----------
Its time of the XDA webpage be more like Facebook on design and XDA Labs more like market on the safe and design to receive more redirected links to update and pay by apps on the XDA Labs with PayPal an Google Account if I like. Well if that happen we really will see if Google support free coding on open source.
Sent from my Asus ZenFone 3 Deluxe using XDA Labs
Interesting/digestible read; nothing new if you have been keeping up with the news on this topic.
https://www.howtogeek.com/333365/android-apps-using-accessibility-services-could-disappear/

How to keep an app since SDK 16 running foreground every time?

I’m building an app to monitoring the android device in Kotlin.
I’ve looked in 3 obstacles:
1 - The difference between android under and post 7.0.0 on foreground services
2 - Chinese ROMs, with an agressive kill of apps when user do a simple clean on last apps
3 - which android tool can I use for resolve it.
I’ve seen until now: AlarmManager, permanent notifications, accessibility service… Broadcast receiver to up application when system restart and battery optimization, but all my tries didn’t seem to help me in solving.
For example, the follow tutorial doesn’t work after I clean the lastest apps used in a Chinese ROM (Xiaomi): robertohuertas.com/2019/06/29/android_foreground_services
Showing permanent notification is the only way according to android docs. But chinese rom use there own task management to save battery which even closes permanent notification, If user manual cleans app from resent task. Currently i am ignoring those devices/ limited support. I am looking for better solution.

Categories

Resources