it is atrocious to use. there is "glace wallpaper" which cannot be disabled. yellow pages for sharing contacts to third parties ala truecaller, no way to disable stock apps or xiaomi apps. ads and "recomendations" in each and every system application, why the fuck should default file manager share data or have recomendations or share data. same for gallery that has xiaomi cloud.
do people really need "cloud" ? what is wrong with vcf file when switching phones? i use a small "backup all" app on android to export and import contacts, messages and call details in text files. why do you need to be plugged into a "cloud" all the times?
the level of dark patterns in the system ui is just disappointing
i bought a motorola g30 and was pleasantly surprised with the stock feel. i could uninstall any app and i did. i am not forced to any dark patterns or forced to see ads or recommendations or asked to give consent to data sharing. not signed in to any google or any system account. the software "hides" between me and the work be it calls or apps or browsing. i want that, not being reminded to be stuck with a beacon.
i understand the whole hacker culture arond xiaomi and devs. i had an xiaomi mi pad 1. someone here on HN told me about a custom rom and in less than 3 hours i managed to brick the device. now i am unable to use it.
please help me understand one thing, what is with android custom os companies and locking down bootloader and making the process so finicky ? why isn't the system designed to be as easy as installing windows or linux or even how raspberry pi installs the os? why is android so fucked up bad in this regard?
Also, what definition of "unlawful" are they using? If they are blocking installation of apps which are against the laws of the country it's being used in, I don't see the issue. On the other hand, using this as an avenue to extend reach outside the jurisdiction would be bad.
But if there's a law that says cars have to do this, yes, of course. Or rather, we can get angry at the law or the legislator or the system or whatever, but it seems silly to get angry at the carmaker because they didn't arbitrarily break some laws that you personally don't agree with.
Which is also why I don't really understand the scare quotes around "unlawful" in the title.
If the carmaker built such a feature on their own without any obligation, or if the feature went beyond what the law mandates, that would be something else.
