@@BlackHatnwl it's not issue related, they don't keep the docs updated, everything is disorganized. The company now is facing another law issue, and the only thing that Sunder Pichai is good is "optimizing" meaning he simply cuts off costs. He should not be there and now is more evident than ever for us
@Di_Gra Your point? If you don't want to complain about it, no one is stopping you. If you think complaining about it is not gonna do any good, you're free to think.
I may be wrong, but it seems to me that this feature is a simplification of the multi-user feature that existed in previous versions. For those who use their cell phones for work and personal use, especially in Brazil where there are many Sales Force Automation and Delivery applications with User Tracking, using Private mode is a relief for the user that will make the applications really stop working when the cell phone is used only for private functions. I am a developer of Line of Business applications, more specifically Sales Force Automation in Brazil, and from a developer's point of view, it is bad for notifications or background tasks.
See we have few apps which i am daam sure that doesn't require those permission example cred , paytm, phonepe, gpay etc they explicitly take those permission else they refused to turn on . But on the ios side they works fine because there ios locked down the api access . Now a days many known apps use unnecessary permission which we don't want to provide and i don't want those apps to run in the background . For me its the best feature i have got in android 15 . without changing user to access those apps its better now . Love the feature a lot .
Every other version of Android does this to us. Of course, you should have a team of developers and testers, and plenty of time and money, so you can easily update your app. It's just that I don't and I imagine many of us don't either!
They replied on their docs : " For these reasons, if you develop a medical app, review how this feature might impact your app and take appropriate actions-such as informing your users not to install your app in the private space-to avoid disrupting critical app capabilities " So there's nothing to do other than to inform
@@GilTheCohen to me this is not a good enough reason. Because before launching Google reviews our apps. If we set the wrong permissions, or something, they block us from publishing. If we set this theoretical manifest flag DONT_WORK_WITH_PRIVATE_SPACE, Google would review, check if you have foreground services and the like, and if not, forbidden you from from setting the flag.
I fully disagree. A healthcare App uses to fit the PRIVATE concept because of its sensible (medical) data management. The private space behavior might provide wider functionalities because the user explicitely decide to install the App in that area.
This is another episode of the war against background processing. On the surface, the API tells you it's easy to implement but I'm reality they make it difficult, permission ridden and unfriendly so that apps using this are more likely to get bad reviews. This has been going on for years. Sad, because it cripples the usefulness of the device under the (partly justified) pretense of user and battery protection.
google's war on indie developer continues, first they wanted all indie developers to popularize their platform while they themselves failed at security and broken or unavailable api and they continue on this path. Past few years developing apps for Android has turned into a nightmare just because they bring out a feature without thinking out through all the requirements are fulfilled, who remembers the changes they made to scoped storage and we were unable to pick multiple files or imagine developing an app now which requires 3 different types of permissions for various versions of Android for accessing videos and images and with notifications for that app.
You are all wrong here. If Google lets developer check if the app is in private space, it will give developers ability to block the app "YOU CANT USE THE APP IN PRIVATE SPACE", so it made deliberately.
Thank you for raising this concern, this reminds me of Splash Screen API that they are forcing us to adapt yet it does not behave across multiple versions of Android if you really test it from 21 to 34. Looks like new assigned engineers didn’t do enough study on use cases or edge cases as usual.
Do we actually need to care about this? If user locks a private space they should to know that it leads to kill all of the app's process. It's just logically correct, so I think don't worry.
Technically its one app on both spaces (if you update app in one space it is also updated on the other), so you use app build from the one codebase im each case (and it take less space on device) but its launched instance is indeed in completly separate process and memory space is also separeted (so it feels like two different apps).
I may have an unpopular opinion that this problem is nothing new, but it will just become more prominent starting with Android 15. Even if there was no "Private Space", still it has always been a good idea to design your app to be resilient to sudden process death. Some manufacturers, like Xiaomi for example, have long been known as very liberal with killing user app processes, so apps have been living on the verge of death for ages. What else can I say? "Memento mori", I guess.
Oh boy. Imagine you're running foreground job in work manager (which doesn't show a push notification starting from android 12 or something) and user closes private space. As if the work manager never closed silently leaving you alone with disappointed user and 0 information whatsoever. I wonder what can go wrong? 🤔🤔🤔
I think it will depend on your app niche/category, more dangerous for browser apps, you know why user want browser app in private space. For restt of the apps I dont think it will be the big issue.
See we have few apps which i am daam sure that doesn't require those permission example cred , paytm, phonepe, gpay etc they explicitly take those permission else they refused to turn on . But on the ios side they works fine because there ios locked down the api access . Now a days many known apps use unnecessary permission which we don't want to provide and i don't want those apps to run in the background . For me its the best feature i have got in android 15 . without changing user to access those apps its better now . Love the feature a lot . And second thing normal user will not use private space by default . Normally they will go to play store and install the apps . If someone is using private space means user explicitly want that app not to gain access to other files or data . So its ment to be work like that only .
Correct. This is going to be used by some smart**s users who always think they know better than the developer and post some insulting one star rating on Google Play.
I don't think that the not so-tech-savvy users will even be able to distinguish between a system misfunction or an app misfunction so I don't think it's that bad
I refuse to believe Google didn’t think about the right way to handle this: all apps should not be available on this private incognito mode, if you build an app and want it to be available on this private mode you should request that to google and they make sure you comply with everything you should comply with (handling process killing in a way that’s user friendly, etc) in order to be allowed on the private mode
Google has a LOOONG history of not-really-well-thought-out features and rolling them out and making developers scramble to get it working without tanking their company first!
Google engineers thought about that in my opinion. They probably had no option to do it better. Save state , start process put process table in room database with start state, update every sec. When reopen check unfinished business , if restartable, restart finish business.
@@TheBlackManMythLegend I just wonder what kind of security downsides it would have if an app could know where it's installed. I imagine there are some, but I can't think of any
@@PhilippLackner Android Private Space feature 1. Current Implementation: - Likely a policy decision, not a technical limitation ( possible to execute with a flag in user preference saying -> you are in a private space, but developer will create different app and that's not the goal of the feature ) - Executes the app in a protected sandbox ( that looks like a virtual device which is protected from the data and process point of view ) - Accessible via biometric or passcode challenges 2. User Experience Issues: - Confusing for less tech-savvy users (e.g., elderly) ( is my app locked or stopped? , and why in my normal phone when my app is stopped sleeping my service still run but not in locked state?) - "Lock" terminology may imply pausing rather than terminating processes 3. Suggested Improvements: - Visually represent opening/closing a "second phone" - Replace "Lock" with "Shut down" for clarity - Use color changes or text indicators (e.g., "shutting down") to signify state - Add an icon representing a second phone for the locked app 4. Conclusion: - Feature is technically sound but needs UI/UX refinement - Goal: Make it clear that the private space is fully terminated when locked ( the problem is that it introduce a difference in the behavior from a locked app versus a normal app )
@@PhilippLackner I think they should create an icon of a phone when they open they do the private stuff when they Shutdown that virtual phone everything stop. It's a UI/UX issue. Not a technical issue and they can't indicate via API that you are on a virtual (data and process private ) phone because developer will create a different app for the two env and that's not the goal of the feature. So it's not a technical limitation it's a feature design limitation and the engineers just implement because will all the layoff in the USA at the moment they do not have time to talk too much to the management ( that's my not educated guess )
@@TheBlackManMythLegendwell people will get used to it. As users explicitly closing private space. And as the name says "private" so it make sense user will use their phone in private mode for a specific time or for specific app. So the user knows all the activities of an app will hide once they close their private space... And most of the user put their secret apps in the private folder. These is no way someone will put food ordering app in private space but if they are intentionally putting then they have to handle their consequences and keep opening the private space for the extended time until they are using it... I just want to see for video chatting apps will you get notifications when you are not in private space?? I actually have no idea about the documentations...
Towards developers, android can get away with making things more confusing and even more overengineered and and even more rapidly deprecated, because, let's face it, we programmers are masochists. But if users suddenly start loosing their data without understanding why...they are going to be mad and blame android!...wait...they wouldn't know who's fault this is...they are going to blame us. Shoot...we're screwed anyway.
any users who have used separate work profile and using container like insular, know such things and what will happen when they kill app or closing entire container. Whether user is using app in normal or private is not to be known by the app.
I second that. I'll also add that any "noobish" user, like Philipp's grandpa to use his exemple, if he already have such a hard time installing an app on his own, I don't see any world where he'll want to use the private space, so the problem spoken in this video seems non-existent to me.
I think it would be better to lift some restrictions and not killing the apps when locking the Private Space, like the Samsung Secure Folder. It's obvious that Google wants to restrict the Android OS as much as possible. Android slowly becomes iOS (in terms of limitations).
Well that makes no sense. User should have control to use any app privately otherwise this feature is of no use. In that case each app should have private space implementation of their own like for browsers there is incognito mode...
I also hate that Google on every new version just reduces customisation options. It's like on Android 14 i just can't change icons shape. For some stupid reason they decided to force all icons to be round. Where actual icon maybe less 25% of area and the rest is stupid coloured circle. For this simple thing i need to use 3rd party launcher. Argh... Sadly user choice is shitty samsungs with tons of bloatware, chinese devices, etc. And htc completelly thrown away smartphones, last true htc device was HTC U12+ with really cool htc Sense and have almost everything out of the box. After 5+ years of use switched to Sony Xperia 1 VI. It comes with clean Android 14, almost no preloaded shit with it. Just few apps uninstalled. Perfect Android device, sadly because of stupid Android 14 customisation added Nova launcher to customise icons...
Google is slowly being like it want to control everything and get everything by giving it the name of '"User's Privacy". Google clearly no longer have a connection with the developers anymore and is just being a control freak nowdays. For new developers it is kind of overwhelming (I am a beginner). I also hate the 20 tester's policy, after all this time I was like "Ok now that i have a project i could make a google dev account and do whatever it wants and upload my app on google play store" and now google wants 20 testers for uploading a normal app. Day to day google is making me stray away from it. And now with every Android Version new "Privacy" feature added that will pretty much break your app or make you spend hours to change your app to follow privacy guidlines etc etc. With all the lawsuits google had, the more Google talks about "Privacy" it just feels more suspicious.
This doesn't seem like much new territory for us. All apps should already deal with sudden process death. Similar to how closing incognito chrome leads to forgetting all tabs, cookies and other associated data; users should be able to understand that locking their private space would lead to loss of any app data currently being used. Or what would be the alternative? Keep the foreground service running but hidden from the user?
I don't think so there is any problem as user is intentionally locking the private space so technically app process should be stopped. All we can do is pause download and resume it later from the same place in case of download service...
Pretty dumb move by Google The Feature itself is pretty cool but yeah...as the video says, makes no sense to not giving us the tools for checking out all the cases where our app can just break, I'm guessing with the time they will give us an API or something but still pretty dumb not giving it to us Right now
@Philipp Lackner in samsung device, secure folder i have tried downloading the file it got download even if i close the secure folder it just stop showing to the user.
This whole feature at first glance looks 100% useless. Private from WHO? No one's unlocking the whole fucking phone without your fingerprint/code. And when you have "multiple users", this exact shit becomes even less useful than useless...
I see no point in supporting the very recent versions of Android devices unless the app is extremely, extremely popular. Android 15 will probably run on 0.00005% of devices in the entire world.
It does make the matters a bit worse, but essentially it is an age old problem really, so I only partly agree. And also, Philipp Lackner wanting to make videos is actually a great thing.
Does anybody feel google keeps tightening noose around developers' neck with every release?
More difficult more skills
@@BlackHatnwl it's not issue related, they don't keep the docs updated, everything is disorganized. The company now is facing another law issue, and the only thing that Sunder Pichai is good is "optimizing" meaning he simply cuts off costs. He should not be there and now is more evident than ever for us
It's what it's
@@marcoduma2600 Only Flutter docs are organized and friendly for beginners.
@Di_Gra
Your point? If you don't want to complain about it, no one is stopping you.
If you think complaining about it is not gonna do any good, you're free to think.
I may be wrong, but it seems to me that this feature is a simplification of the multi-user feature that existed in previous versions. For those who use their cell phones for work and personal use, especially in Brazil where there are many Sales Force Automation and Delivery applications with User Tracking, using Private mode is a relief for the user that will make the applications really stop working when the cell phone is used only for private functions. I am a developer of Line of Business applications, more specifically Sales Force Automation in Brazil, and from a developer's point of view, it is bad for notifications or background tasks.
See we have few apps which i am daam sure that doesn't require those permission example cred , paytm, phonepe, gpay etc they explicitly take those permission else they refused to turn on . But on the ios side they works fine because there ios locked down the api access . Now a days many known apps use unnecessary permission which we don't want to provide and i don't want those apps to run in the background . For me its the best feature i have got in android 15 . without changing user to access those apps its better now . Love the feature a lot .
Google has lost the connection to developers a long time ago
???
Multi-user has been a thing for a decade nearly, feel free to open a ticket if you don't like it
not only to developers, but to the reality as well
That's true
Every other version of Android does this to us. Of course, you should have a team of developers and testers, and plenty of time and money, so you can easily update your app. It's just that I don't and I imagine many of us don't either!
One day we may decide to collectively boycott Play Store and publish apps on other platforms with whatever target SDKs we want.
They replied on their docs :
" For these reasons, if you develop a medical app, review how this feature might impact your app and take appropriate actions-such as informing your users not to install your app in the private space-to avoid disrupting critical app capabilities "
So there's nothing to do other than to inform
This is so stupid. Why not make a manifest flag to indicate that the app does not support private space instead?!
@@ArthurKhazbs Because then all apps would set that flag. This is a privacy feature targeted for the end user.
@@GilTheCohen to me this is not a good enough reason. Because before launching Google reviews our apps. If we set the wrong permissions, or something, they block us from publishing. If we set this theoretical manifest flag DONT_WORK_WITH_PRIVATE_SPACE, Google would review, check if you have foreground services and the like, and if not, forbidden you from from setting the flag.
I fully disagree. A healthcare App uses to fit the PRIVATE concept because of its sensible (medical) data management. The private space behavior might provide wider functionalities because the user explicitely decide to install the App in that area.
Yep totally agree, Google should be handling these edge cases themselves
I think there is some kind of notification that your task or app will stop working when you close private space...
This is another episode of the war against background processing. On the surface, the API tells you it's easy to implement but I'm reality they make it difficult, permission ridden and unfriendly so that apps using this are more likely to get bad reviews. This has been going on for years. Sad, because it cripples the usefulness of the device under the (partly justified) pretense of user and battery protection.
google's war on indie developer continues, first they wanted all indie developers to popularize their platform while they themselves failed at security and broken or unavailable api and they continue on this path. Past few years developing apps for Android has turned into a nightmare just because they bring out a feature without thinking out through all the requirements are fulfilled, who remembers the changes they made to scoped storage and we were unable to pick multiple files or imagine developing an app now which requires 3 different types of permissions for various versions of Android for accessing videos and images and with notifications for that app.
I am still mad why didn't they think of older versions compatibility when bought new permissions
You are all wrong here. If Google lets developer check if the app is in private space, it will give developers ability to block the app "YOU CANT USE THE APP IN PRIVATE SPACE", so it made deliberately.
Thank you for raising this concern, this reminds me of Splash Screen API that they are forcing us to adapt yet it does not behave across multiple versions of Android if you really test it from 21 to 34. Looks like new assigned engineers didn’t do enough study on use cases or edge cases as usual.
Do we actually need to care about this? If user locks a private space they should to know that it leads to kill all of the app's process. It's just logically correct, so I think don't worry.
Android should just prompt the user if there are background processes running when they try to close the private space.
Love that you picked up this edge case for long running service. I didn't think of this ! Great work
Technically its one app on both spaces (if you update app in one space it is also updated on the other), so you use app build from the one codebase im each case (and it take less space on device) but its launched instance is indeed in completly separate process and memory space is also separeted (so it feels like two different apps).
I think sometimes google developers eat something wrong and start developing features and API parallel 😂😂😂😂
I may have an unpopular opinion that this problem is nothing new, but it will just become more prominent starting with Android 15. Even if there was no "Private Space", still it has always been a good idea to design your app to be resilient to sudden process death. Some manufacturers, like Xiaomi for example, have long been known as very liberal with killing user app processes, so apps have been living on the verge of death for ages. What else can I say? "Memento mori", I guess.
I just target the sdk to 34 and told my leader sdk 35 will be handle next year :)
Lol same. 31st is the deadline of android 14 target 😂😂😂
And now in next sprint I have to tell them we should start migrating to android 15 early.
Me to 1 of my customer: "The migration to API 35s is about 200 hours"
My customer to me: "APIs 34 are fine"
🤣
This is the same that happens when turning on/off work profile. Apps being killed at any point is nothing new.
Oh boy. Imagine you're running foreground job in work manager (which doesn't show a push notification starting from android 12 or something) and user closes private space.
As if the work manager never closed silently leaving you alone with disappointed user and 0 information whatsoever. I wonder what can go wrong? 🤔🤔🤔
I think it will depend on your app niche/category, more dangerous for browser apps, you know why user want browser app in private space. For restt of the apps I dont think it will be the big issue.
Feels like Android is getting more and more complicated just to be used by typical users.
See we have few apps which i am daam sure that doesn't require those permission example cred , paytm, phonepe, gpay etc they explicitly take those permission else they refused to turn on . But on the ios side they works fine because there ios locked down the api access . Now a days many known apps use unnecessary permission which we don't want to provide and i don't want those apps to run in the background . For me its the best feature i have got in android 15 . without changing user to access those apps its better now . Love the feature a lot .
And second thing normal user will not use private space by default . Normally they will go to play store and install the apps . If someone is using private space means user explicitly want that app not to gain access to other files or data . So its ment to be work like that only .
this type of feature already exist in samsung devices called secure folder.
The difference is that foreground services are not canceled once the folder is locked again
Instead of resolving, what they do is get in the way.
Your grampa wouldn't use the private feature in the first place.
Correct. This is going to be used by some smart**s users who always think they know better than the developer and post some insulting one star rating on Google Play.
I don't think that the not so-tech-savvy users will even be able to distinguish between a system misfunction or an app misfunction so I don't think it's that bad
I refuse to believe Google didn’t think about the right way to handle this: all apps should not be available on this private incognito mode, if you build an app and want it to be available on this private mode you should request that to google and they make sure you comply with everything you should comply with (handling process killing in a way that’s user friendly, etc) in order to be allowed on the private mode
Google has a LOOONG history of not-really-well-thought-out features and rolling them out and making developers scramble to get it working without tanking their company first!
Google engineers thought about that in my opinion. They probably had no option to do it better. Save state , start process put process table in room database with start state, update every sec. When reopen check unfinished business , if restartable, restart finish business.
@@TheBlackManMythLegend I just wonder what kind of security downsides it would have if an app could know where it's installed. I imagine there are some, but I can't think of any
@@PhilippLackner
Android Private Space feature
1. Current Implementation:
- Likely a policy decision, not a technical limitation ( possible to execute with a flag in user preference saying -> you are in a private space, but developer will create different app and that's not the goal of the feature )
- Executes the app in a protected sandbox ( that looks like a virtual device which is protected from the data and process point of view )
- Accessible via biometric or passcode challenges
2. User Experience Issues:
- Confusing for less tech-savvy users (e.g., elderly) ( is my app locked or stopped? , and why in my normal phone when my app is stopped sleeping my service still run but not in locked state?)
- "Lock" terminology may imply pausing rather than terminating processes
3. Suggested Improvements:
- Visually represent opening/closing a "second phone"
- Replace "Lock" with "Shut down" for clarity
- Use color changes or text indicators (e.g., "shutting down") to signify state
- Add an icon representing a second phone for the locked app
4. Conclusion:
- Feature is technically sound but needs UI/UX refinement
- Goal: Make it clear that the private space is fully terminated when locked ( the problem is that it introduce a difference in the behavior from a locked app versus a normal app )
@@PhilippLackner I think they should create an icon of a phone when they open they do the private stuff when they Shutdown that virtual phone everything stop. It's a UI/UX issue. Not a technical issue and they can't indicate via API that you are on a virtual (data and process private ) phone because developer will create a different app for the two env and that's not the goal of the feature.
So it's not a technical limitation it's a feature design limitation and the engineers just implement because will all the layoff in the USA at the moment they do not have time to talk too much to the management ( that's my not educated guess )
@@TheBlackManMythLegendwell people will get used to it.
As users explicitly closing private space.
And as the name says "private" so it make sense user will use their phone in private mode for a specific time or for specific app. So the user knows all the activities of an app will hide once they close their private space...
And most of the user put their secret apps in the private folder. These is no way someone will put food ordering app in private space but if they are
intentionally putting then they have to handle their consequences and keep opening the private space for the extended time until they are using it...
I just want to see for video chatting apps will you get notifications when you are not in private space??
I actually have no idea about the documentations...
Towards developers, android can get away with making things more confusing and even more overengineered and and even more rapidly deprecated, because, let's face it, we programmers are masochists. But if users suddenly start loosing their data without understanding why...they are going to be mad and blame android!...wait...they wouldn't know who's fault this is...they are going to blame us.
Shoot...we're screwed anyway.
Correct. No matter what happens, it is ALWAYS the fault of the developer and needs to be punished at least with a one star rating on Google Play.
any users who have used separate work profile and using container like insular, know such things and what will happen when they kill app or closing entire container. Whether user is using app in normal or private is not to be known by the app.
I second that.
I'll also add that any "noobish" user, like Philipp's grandpa to use his exemple, if he already have such a hard time installing an app on his own, I don't see any world where he'll want to use the private space, so the problem spoken in this video seems non-existent to me.
I have to admit that letting the app know that it is running in Private Space is a bit of a privacy leak in itself.
I think it would be better to lift some restrictions and not killing the apps when locking the Private Space, like the Samsung Secure Folder. It's obvious that Google wants to restrict the Android OS as much as possible. Android slowly becomes iOS (in terms of limitations).
at least it should be opt in and google can't list ur app in the private space list
This makes sense. Make it an option to support it and allow us to check if we are running inside of it so we can take the necessary precautions.
Well that makes no sense.
User should have control to use any app privately otherwise this feature is of no use.
In that case each app should have private space implementation of their own like for browsers there is incognito mode...
Google is making hard for developer in every update 😢
Can't a feature request be put to them to implement this option?
Sure you can. They will look at it after Android 17 got released.
I also hate that Google on every new version just reduces customisation options.
It's like on Android 14 i just can't change icons shape. For some stupid reason they decided to force all icons to be round. Where actual icon maybe less 25% of area and the rest is stupid coloured circle. For this simple thing i need to use 3rd party launcher. Argh... Sadly user choice is shitty samsungs with tons of bloatware, chinese devices, etc. And htc completelly thrown away smartphones, last true htc device was HTC U12+ with really cool htc Sense and have almost everything out of the box. After 5+ years of use switched to Sony Xperia 1 VI. It comes with clean Android 14, almost no preloaded shit with it. Just few apps uninstalled. Perfect Android device, sadly because of stupid Android 14 customisation added Nova launcher to customise icons...
Can't wait to see the Android reddit posts complaining about apps "crashing" when this releases...
Would be great an option to unable to use the app in the private space
Google is slowly being like it want to control everything and get everything by giving it the name of '"User's Privacy". Google clearly no longer have a connection with the developers anymore and is just being a control freak nowdays. For new developers it is kind of overwhelming (I am a beginner). I also hate the 20 tester's policy, after all this time I was like "Ok now that i have a project i could make a google dev account and do whatever it wants and upload my app on google play store" and now google wants 20 testers for uploading a normal app. Day to day google is making me stray away from it. And now with every Android Version new "Privacy" feature added that will pretty much break your app or make you spend hours to change your app to follow privacy guidlines etc etc. With all the lawsuits google had, the more Google talks about "Privacy" it just feels more suspicious.
That's the effect of ultra large corporations ruled by psychopaths, narcissists, sociopaths and dark triads
still update into android 14 and google release android 15 this year , so why google updating SDK every 6 months ??
How do you install an app from Android Studio to the private space?
I also think that will all the layoff the engineers just implement whatever the mangement say without thinking too much they want to keep their job.
This doesn't seem like much new territory for us. All apps should already deal with sudden process death. Similar to how closing incognito chrome leads to forgetting all tabs, cookies and other associated data; users should be able to understand that locking their private space would lead to loss of any app data currently being used. Or what would be the alternative? Keep the foreground service running but hidden from the user?
That feature is chaos friendly.
just about makes you not want to do specific android apps anymore
Next video on Kmp please ❤🎉
I don't think so there is any problem as user is intentionally locking the private space so technically app process should be stopped.
All we can do is pause download and resume it later from the same place in case of download service...
Pretty dumb move by Google
The Feature itself is pretty cool but yeah...as the video says, makes no sense to not giving us the tools for checking out all the cases where our app can just break, I'm guessing with the time they will give us an API or something but still pretty dumb not giving it to us Right now
@Philipp Lackner in samsung device, secure folder i have tried downloading the file it got download even if i close the secure folder it just stop showing to the user.
that it is downloading or download anything
Thanks for the info
I like Google, I want to work there.
Now its time to craete our own OS
Sounds like they need some advice from Samsung
"All I wanna say is that they don't really care about us" - Micheal Jackson
Epic shit - epic beans 😂
I mean, users can already stop the app at any time.. by shutting off the phone
That's unrealistic
mobile oses made full circle and now have user profiles like desktops have
These already exist in other Android Brands, it haven't killed any app xd
yes first comment finally
there is nothing to upgrade in the Android platform
so, there are adding unnecessary things
1:46 😂🤣
I didn't knew that you are a German .
This whole feature at first glance looks 100% useless. Private from WHO? No one's unlocking the whole fucking phone without your fingerprint/code.
And when you have "multiple users", this exact shit becomes even less useful than useless...
This feature is absolutely useless. If you want another set of space just create another user profile
Say "toaster streudal"
😢😢😢
I see no point in supporting the very recent versions of Android devices unless the app is extremely, extremely popular. Android 15 will probably run on 0.00005% of devices in the entire world.
@@technophile_ until Google forces you to update or your app will be rejected :)
@@PhilippLackner Or to boycott the Play Store and publish on other platforms! >:)
@@PhilippLackner This is unfortunately true. That's why when the moment 15 comes out I'm going to make sure my apps are up to date
Google is losing creditability day by day
Yeah, Bad implementation of a new feature.
Dude did you just want to make a video ? This isn’t anything bad. You’re just nitpicking
It does make the matters a bit worse, but essentially it is an age old problem really, so I only partly agree. And also, Philipp Lackner wanting to make videos is actually a great thing.
431st..Thanks Philipp
How can I find the passwords online of apk is created in sketsware and firebase?
"Force Stop" was there already so ?