I agree that there are monopoly issues with the FAANGs. But I don't get why people seem to put so much energy into this particular issue.
> Any app that could be a direct threat to its advertising model can be deleted, even if it exist outside of its playstore.
Today, apps that don't live on the Play Store don't really exist. Almost nobody ever sideloads stuff. So we should have ways to contest those decisions by Google, with big fines when they do it to reinforce their dominance. But that's orthogonal to Google verifying the developers.
> When you purchase a device, you should control it completely - including the right to modify it and install software from sources you trust
I agree with that: when I buy a device, I should be able to install GrapheneOS or LineageOS. Not that Google or Apple should do it for me, but they should not technically prevent it. E.g. I should be able to unlock and relock the bootloader.
> Encourage development of and migration to truly open-source alternatives like /e/OS or LineageOS
I find it a very interesting way to end the article, that started with "they say it's for security reasons, but it's probably bullshit". Because /e/OS (which I have been using for years) is notoriously worse than Stock Android in terms of security, and LineageOS as well. The only alternative OS that is better than Stock Android is GrapheneOS. If you can't have GrapheneOS, the next best mobile OS in terms of security is... iOS.
Disclaimer: I don't like the monopolies either.
