as soon as they have a map app that works with car play i'm switching to linux phone.

GNOME Maps is good enough for me. I don't know what Carplay is and at this point I'd rather not ask.

Framework for using your cars infotainment system as your screen/input device. Android has something similar called Android Auto.

Don't car play and android auto rely on proprietary libraries? I doubt it will come to Linux phones unless they take off or something like microg reimplements the proprietary parts.

There are boxes you plug to your CarPlay enabled car that run Android. Run Google Maps on that and you're golden. No need to carry/connect your phone to the car anymore

I don't think you mean a wired-to-wireless dongle, which is all my searches turn up. Can you give me an example of such a device?

Oh, there's plenty of these, here's just one example: https://www.amazon.com/ATOTOOUT-Magic-Box-Built-Bluetooth/dp...

Thanks! What a fantastic keyword salad that product serves up. Not cheap, but then again why should a magic AI box be cheap?

I use another app from F-Droid called Skytube for occasional downloads. I like it.

https://f-droid.org/en/packages/free.rm.skytube.oss/

https://f-droid.org/en/packages/free.rm.skytube.legacy.oss/

"If Google ever stops signing apps like that, I'll be switching to a LInux phone."

Is this another way of saying, "I will keep using it until it stops working"

What do you mean by signing? Application signing on android is done by the developer, with their own key. Or by fdroid, in the case of apps built by fdroid in the default repository.

Things have changed.

Google is doing what Apple does and implementing Gatekeeper-like signature checks to ensure only apps by Google-approved developers can run on Android.

Microsoft does something similar with Windows Defender: you need to buy a developer certificate that can be revoked at any time if you want to distribute your app and have users be able to run it.

We're at a point where we need permission from trillion dollar companies to run the apps we want on the hardware we own.

>Microsoft does something similar with Windows Defender: you need to buy a developer certificate that can be revoked at any time if you want to distribute your app and have users be able to run it.

Clarifying: you CAN run an unsigned app just fine on Windows. A lot of freeware/"indie" (for lack of a better term for small software) programs run just fine, the only thing that happens is the user recieves a warning they have to press "Yes" on (which 95% of people do, because That's The Windows UX[patent pending]).

Depends, I ran into this issue[1] a while ago with unsigned binaries.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40815488

They obfuscate it more than just pressing "Yes". You get a big warning saying Microsoft Defender has protected you, and the only clear option is "Don't run"

https://cdn.advancedinstaller.com/img/prevent-smartscreen-fr...

In order to run, you have to click on "More info", and then a second "Run anyway" button appears.

There's way more than 5% of the Windows userbase that gets confused and can't get past this warning.

In that case they wouldn't be stopping anything, since they haven't started signing anything yet.

I also haven't seen any specifics on how that system is supposed to work, but have seen a lot of speculation and (perhaps not unwarranted) fearmongering.