https://www.osnews.com/story/133647/google-sunsets-the-apk-format-for-new-android-apps/ * Originals * FAQ * Sponsorship * Contact * Submit News OSnews * Menu Home > Android > Google sunsets the APK format for new Android apps Google sunsets the APK format for new Android apps Thom Holwerda 2021-06-30 Android 27 Comments For as long as Android has been around, Android apps have been launched in the APK format (which stands for Android Package). However, in 2018, Google introduced a new format called Android App Bundles, or AAB (with the filename *.aab). Google touted that this new format would result in smaller app file sizes and easier ways to control various aspects of apps. Of the millions of apps on the Google Play Store, thousands of them already use the AAB system. Today, Google announced that the AAB format will now officially replace Android APKs. This means that starting in August of this year, all new apps submitted to the Google Play Store must come in the AAB format. Apps that are currently APKs can stay that way -- at least for now. Alright, where's the catch? There's going to be a catch, right? Unlike APKs, Android App Bundles cannot exist outside of Google Play and cannot be distributed outside of it. This means that developers switching from APK to App Bundles can no longer provide the exact same package or experience on other app sources unless they opt to maintain a separate APK version. This naturally puts third-party app stores at a disadvantage, but Google will most likely play up the Play Store's security as a major reason to avoid those sources anyway. There it is! Of course any technological step forward in the modern monopolised world of technology has to come with anti-consumer features or limitations that take control away from users. It's like a law. About The Author [52f39b066] Thom Holwerda Follow me on Twitter @thomholwerda 27 Comments 1. [4e5fa6ab] 2021-07-01 12:52 am Alfman This raises a few questions for me. Is it merely the case that google will have the first android store with the new packages and others will be able to add support over time? Or is google doing something more nefarious by actively blocking others from implementing the new package format? I wonder what this means for AOSP alternatives like lineage OS? I'm afraid that google could effectively kill the competition by ensuring that software won't be available outside of google play. Log in to Reply + [dbede2ba] 2021-07-01 1:39 am friedchicken Those are very valid concerns. I can't imagine though that if Google is attempting to play dirty, that it will not be met with significant backlash. Then again, consumers have a habit of getting used to the beatings they receive rather than standing up against them. Log in to Reply 2. [a342ede1] 2021-07-01 2:53 am The123king https://xkcd.com/927/ Log in to Reply + [c5471428] 2021-07-01 3:45 am Kochise Well, no, not exactly, needs evolves, hence technology adapt. It's like saying wood wheel then rubber wheel, then pneumatic wheel are competing standards while they are just evolution to adapt to the need with more proper technological solution. Otherwise 640KB would be enough for everyone. Log in to Reply o [a342ede1] 2021-07-01 8:53 am The123king I imagine Microsoft will be sticking with APK's in Windows 11, so if Android developers want to keep compatibility with Windows 11, or other 3rd party app stores, they're now going to need to package their application in 2 different ways. This leads to fragmentation and more con fusion in the Android space (when there's already enough confusion anyway) Log in to Reply # [5765f44a] 2021-07-01 4:25 pm HollyB There's nothing wrong in theory with a new more "efficient" distribution mechanism. I'm not sure what the motive is but it may be Google wanting to minimise the load on servers. Perhaps other reasons too. The real loss will be people with Android wanting to archive an APK and sideload. The new distribution format will make sideloading on multiple Android phones pain. I have a couple of Android apps available on newer versions of Android but not distributed for the older version on one of my older phones. Android devices earlier than 4.4 can only support APK. It is an interesting quirk of Windows 11 that it will support Android and possibly older Android at that while cutting off its own historical users of its own platform. As usual the last people they ask or consider are the end users. Log in to Reply # [e38f656c] 2021-07-01 4:30 pm leech Windows 11 uses Amazon's app store. So I guess the burden would be for Amazon to try to get devs to support APK or they would need to support the new thing. Log in to Reply 3. [a88880fd] 2021-07-01 4:20 am oiaohm How this works is not exactly new at this point. https://developer.android.com/studio/command-line/bundletool bundletool build-apks -bundle=myapp_bundle.aab -output=myapp.apks -mode=universal unzip myapp.apks -d apks Now in that extracted apks directory you have the old apk version what was in the aab file. Yes that bundletool -mode=universal is same mode for making testing apk for sideloading its not as space effective as having the aab file generate the exact apk for the device. I don't see this as google playing dirty. Google did include means to convert aab back to old school APK without rebuilding application. Problem is making app store support the per device nature of aab is a lot more trick. Yes it really simple to miss that aab is used with bundletool to generate a targeted to device APK that is small or a full feature APK that is a universal that is like the old APK that we are use to. Fun point what is installed in the Android devices themselves does not change as in APK files. If a developer wants to provide the same application on third party stores outside google store that does not accept aab files and application is not using google play parts they take aab run it though the steps to make universal and upload it to the third party store. Please note lot of cases if your application is using google play parts and you are wanting to put it on stores outside google store you normally have to rebuild without using them. If a third party store wants to accept aab files yet their store systems has not been updated to support aab files they can and keep their setup the way it is and they can run the bundletool to turn aab from developers into a universal APK file or into multi targeted APKs depending on how their store works. Up until this point nothing is really that complex. If a party who is not the developer want to raid google play for a application and put it on a different store or device think google play does not have to send device the raw aab file just the device targeted apks file(with device targeted apk files to install the applications in a zip file) they are in trouble here. Lot of ways this is stolen works. End users attempting to backup already downloaded applications from google play to use on different devices in trouble here. Please note End users with what the aab does makes application backup harder for reduced download usage doing updates. Google changing over to aab also saves on network traffic due to only sending devices the amount of software need for that device instead of sending out for all of a particular cpu type or the like. The big effect here of the change to aab is there are lot of third party android app stores that when you look closer its not the developer of the application in fact putting applications in their stores. They are raiding google play store use of aab ruins that due to now having device targeted APK files because of aab. The side effect on users who backup their applications could be classed as a problem. Log in to Reply + [c9991b32] 2021-07-01 11:56 am Jeeves OK, but really this is a problem created by the fact that APK (AKA a zip file with some metadata) is a garbage package format carelessly borrowed from Java in Android's infancy and they're doubling down by layering more crap on top. Imagine instead they just invented a new package format that was designed to be streamed. You could have small manifest that listed all the files in the package, configuration data, hashes and a signature block and the offset to the data. The installing device downloads the manifest, plans the install and then issues HTTP byte range requests to download only the parts of the data needed. Then if you wanted to back up the whole package you could request and download the whole thing. Lets be super original and call this obviously utopian design SISX. One package for all devices, signed once by a key the developer owns, and the end user downloads only the data needed for their device. Everyone is happy. Log in to Reply 4. [a8309963] 2021-07-01 4:44 am Logout 1. Windows 11 will run Android apps, but (most probably) won't have Google Play, so you'll have to use alternative sources. 2. Google announces a new package format, which won't be outside Google Play, making developers either not support alternative sources or maintain two package versions. All this can for sure be just a coincidence, couldn't it? Log in to Reply + [a88880fd] 2021-07-01 5:24 am oiaohm Android App Bundles is a master format to produce APK files. The reality as a developer you upload as AAB file to the google play store as the end user you download APK files. Logout developers don't need to maintain two different package versions. Why AAB files can make universal APK files the result is two files of exactly the same version.. AAB files can make universal APK files and device targeted APK files. Of course device targeted APK files are smaller. The work for AAB future started before windows 11 said Microsoft was going to have android support. Log in to Reply 5. [c7277bc8] 2021-07-01 9:08 am kurkosdr The reason the AAB format exists is so all the different "localizations" (that is, translations and locale-specific icons) can exist as different "APK slices", downloaded separately from the "main" APK. This saves bandwidth for the Play Store servers and saves space on the user's phone. Which sound all nice and neat, until you realise you can't programmatically request APK slices for different locales from the Play Store. You have to change your Android device's language every time and re-download. Sites like APKMirror simply can't do this for all locales. This means that unless your locale is English, Russian, Chinese or some other "big" locale, APKMirror is useless for you, since it's highly unlikely APKMirror will have the APK slice for your locale. For example, I tried downloading an old version of Google Maps from APKMirror and was stopped dead in my tracks because of this issue. You see, for navigation apps, having road names spoken in poor English instead of the native language makes the app unusable. But anyway, if APKMirror has the APKslices relevant to you, they have created an "apkm" format and an installer that helps you install them. Yes, the installer is proprietary, but this is the smartphone space, just be glad you can still install apps outside the store. Log in to Reply + [4e5fa6ab] 2021-07-01 10:49 am Alfman kurkosdr, For example, I tried downloading an old version of Google Maps from APKMirror and was stopped dead in my tracks because of this issue. You see, for navigation apps, having road names spoken in poor English instead of the native language makes the app unusable. I don't use google apps (on purpose) and did not know this is how it worked, but if so that's a terrible design limitation on google's part. TTS is done via an external process that I've seen working completely independently from device localization in other 3rd party applications. OSM maps handles this much better and allows the user to install/use whatever TTS language is desired without having to download a new localized version of OSM maps. Heck a lot of programs allow the user to download & install new localization features (like spell checking etc) without having to download a localized installer. I'm surprised google did that. But anyway, if APKMirror has the APKslices relevant to you, they have created an "apkm" format and an installer that helps you install them. Yes, the installer is proprietary, but this is the smartphone space, just be glad you can still install apps outside the store. I noticed that, and unfortunately their proprietary installer will not work on my lineage device where I needed APKMirror the most. I don't know if this was a bug or limitation, maybe I can try it again. At least there are other alternatives. Log in to Reply o [c7277bc8] 2021-07-01 7:20 pm kurkosdr OSM maps handles this much better and allows the user to install/use whatever TTS language is desired without having to download a new localized version of OSM maps. Heck a lot of programs allow the user to download & install new localization features (like spell checking etc) without having to download a localized installer. I'm surprised google did that. BTW I admit I wasn't too clear in my first message. If you change your device's language setting, it will (re) download the apk slice for your language (I am almost sure it doesn't re-download and re-install the main apk). But still, Android devices take some dozen seconds to switch language, which apparently it makes it hard enough for APKMirror to not download all locales. Google making the voice navigation audio of Google Maps available as standalone files would mean they would have to commit to a file format, which would mean third-party apps could benefit from it (Google's voice navigation is surprisingly good even for semi-obscure languages like Greek, so it's a competitive advantage of theirs), so they prefer to make it available as a semi-opaque apk slice. To be fair, this also allows them to innovate on the code side without worrying about backwards compatibility. I noticed that, and unfortunately their proprietary installer will not work on my lineage device where I needed APKMirror the most. What do you mean "not work"? It's probably not an API level thing, since you are using Lineage OS, so I assume you have the minimum API level required (Lollipop, MinAPI 21), because Lollipop ROMs exist even for ancient devices. I also assume you are savvy enough to figure unknown sources and make sure you have 10-15% of disk space free so the APK Package Manager doesn't fail. So, I assume you got some other error message? What is it? If you don't get a message, try sideloading via adb (there are guides on the web) which might give you a more detailed message. Haven't seen any APK randomly failing on devices that meet MinAPI requirements and have the required space, so I am curious. PS: You can also install Play Store and Play Services on LineageOS, assuming you want them. There are guides online. Log in to Reply # [4e5fa6ab] 2021-07-01 11:11 pm Alfman kurkosdr, What do you mean "not work"? It's probably not an API level thing, since you are using Lineage OS, so I assume you have the minimum API level required I tried the latest beta just now and it seems to work fine, so never mind. Thanks for your suggestions! PS: You can also install Play Store and Play Services on LineageOS, assuming you want them. There are guides online. Yes, but IMHO the major selling point for LineageOS is to get away from google. I would think the majority on LineageOS's users are there for exactly this reason otherwise it's not really worth the effort. Log in to Reply + [a88880fd] 2021-07-01 11:02 am oiaohm This is the catch. bundletool build-apks -bundle= myapp_bundle.aab -output=myapp.apks -mode=universal if you have the aab file it self you can use bundletool to generate what ever APK you need. Include the universal what is every translation and every bit of binary for every device support by Android in one APK. Its not only translations that bundletool can do custom splitting on it. Like your application might have X work around library for old versions of Android since users phone is newer version of android it does not need that library. Or can be that you phone does not have X physical feature as well. So APKMirror and other services like it that have not been dealing with the maker of applications instead raiding play store for content are in trouble. So yes you have a English local and the apkm file may not work for you because you android device is not in the profile APKMirror or equal used to raid their APK files from Google Play store. The reality if APKMirror starts going after developers to send them their aab files they could use bundletool to generate all the APKs to make their apkm files. The f-droid repositories are that effected effected by google change aab because the developers are just make universal APK using the bundletool from the aab file. Its part of the SDK any how. Also note unlike the apkm format the aab format is open source and open specification. Log in to Reply o [4e5fa6ab] 2021-07-01 1:43 pm Alfman oiaohm, So APKMirror and other services like it that have not been dealing with the maker of applications instead raiding play store for content are in trouble. ... The reality if APKMirror starts going after developers to send them their aab files they could use bundletool to generate all the APKs to make their apkm files. The reality is other app stores are niche and will never have consideration from the overwhelming majority of android developers who typically have very little interest in targeting << 1% of the market. For better or worse, google is the defacto supplier of android software and everyone else is expendable. You and I might want it to be different, but you and I don't make up a critical mass. Log in to Reply # [a88880fd] 2021-07-01 9:44 pm oiaohm Alfman it also means for the developers that don't target amazon store or any of the other stories they have no interest in supporting those applications properly either. Next if developer sells their application on google play and its being mirrored for free this is another problem. Security flaws/updates is another problem. The sites mirroring so not having to deal with the developers of the application has their fair share of problems. There is a problem stores like Amazon store, F-droid and Applivery that deal directly with applications developers have been mixed with stores like APKMirror that depend on mirroring a lot. You hear repeatedly from anti-virus vendors don't use a third party store with android because your risk of malware will go way up. The reality here is the third party stores that deal with developers directly generally just as safe as google play store or safer. Those who deal with mirror majority have been caught with malware modified versions of applications. Yes APKMirror has put a lot of steps in place to prevent this but nothing really beats having direct link to the developer themselves to be informed of security issues and other things before they are public knowledge. The reality here is not all android third party stores are created equal. Making it harder to host applications in an android third party store without having to deal with the developer long term is most likely a good thing. Will this mean users who are not using google play will not be able to get particular application yes this is true. Will it make those users generally safer also most likely true. Please be aware that with amazon store on Windows 11 its likely that its going to be more than 1% market you are missing out on without targeting at least 1 third party store to google play. At this stage Amazon store is still mandating you upload universal APK. Please remember APK/aab files upload to google play store are allowed to presume you have google play services installed so fail when you get those applications for a mirror site on a device that does not have google play services these applications fail as well. Stable well behaving applications on devices that don't have google play services you want those applications form developers who built the application for that. Not taking random pot luck with files mirrored google play store. Also this is not the only difference before aab the google playstore had max sizes of APK files they supported so you had to perform splitting and amazon did not. So developers have been need to make a split APK files and single APK file when supporting google play store and amazon store(and other third party stores). Yes this still had AAB file being made as well as the middle man file. So google play change in fact saves developers hosting on multi stores time. Why google play store was only store for android that you had file size limits on APK files. Alfman this is not as simple as it sounds. The third party android app stores that have been dealing with developers directly this change to google play basically means nothing. These stores have also been providing users with applications of predictable quality. The third party android app stores depending on mirroring from google play or others these have had higher rates of malware issues and have had higher rates of applications that don't work on people devices who do not have google play services or what ever is that app store they are mirroring from equal. Yes amazon store you mirror from that you can get a file that depend on amazon payment services that may or may not be installed. Yes if you have not installed the amazon store the payment services of amazon is most likely missing. There is a fun extra side to this problem. Yes having mirrors of questionable quality does discourage application developers from releasing on more stores. Does result people who would want to use that application not asking for that application to be outside google play. The idea that a APK file works everywhere is not true. APK files in google play store, Amazon Store... before AAB if you mirror them they were not promised to work without the store they came from and its mandatory installed parts. We need third party stores that build relationships with developers to be more successful to make uses of android without google play life better and to give sales competition to google. APKMirror for example that not a market for a application developer to sell their application with a different margin level than Google play. Amazon store does provide a different market that developers can sell applications. Log in to Reply @ [4e5fa6ab] 2021-07-02 12:13 am Alfman oiaohm Alfman it also means for the developers that don't target amazon store or any of the other stories they have no interest in supporting those applications properly either. You're right, developers may not be interested in targeting the amazon app store either. It depends if their android store can reach critical mass. The sites mirroring so not having to deal with the developers of the application has their fair share of problems. You're trying to convince me of things that I already know. But my point still stands: typical developers are focusing on stores with massive market share, everyone else is pretty irrelevant. If you've got a cash cow and billions of dollars to break into the market, you might have a chance. But a small company on it's own merits will not have much of a shot against the giants at this point. I'd leave an exception for corners of the market that the giants have chosen not to cater to. As a crude example: an app store that specialized in pornographic content would probably do well. The third party android app stores depending on mirroring from google play or others these have had higher rates of malware issues Naturally, whatever source you use needs to earn your trust. We need third party stores that build relationships with developers to be more successful to make uses of android without google play life better and to give sales competition to google. The problem is it's far easier to say that than to make it happen. Competition is losing out as markets keep becoming more and more consolidated. There are many of us who protest this just like you. But without a realistic plan to overcome the economic imbalances and dismantle the positive feedback loops that keep yielding more and more power to the very top, we're not going to be able to change the status quo. So I understand your opinion, but do you have a plan? @ [a88880fd] 2021-07-02 1:39 am oiaohm Alfman I don't have a 100 percent plan. But those mirroring what is on google play store don't help. https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.apk.editor/ Take this application I referenced on f-droid the version on Google Play Store has particular features disabled so that it can be submitted to Google Play Store. Lets say we look at APKMirror people say over and over again to use. The version that APKMirror will have is the Google Play Store version even if the developer of the application wish them to host the f-droid version instead because the f-droid version does not match the Google Play version. Even in cases when for people like you using line LineageOS or equal where google play store APK will not work. -You're right, developers may not be interested in targeting the amazon app store either. It depends if their android store can reach critical mass.- Lets look at this a bit closer. Ok I release on google play store I do nothing and get the user base of APKMirror and others like it for nothing for nothing because other people do the work. Of course the users using APKMirror or equal have major issues with my application I get to ignore them because they download the application from a non approved source right. The horrible reality is items like APKMirror just increase the critical mass of google play store because they are a mirror of it. Yes at the same time increasing google play store critical mass APKMirror and ones like it fill in the market spaces for possible proper competition. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm? abstract_id=2728248 There has been many studies into Software Piracy/ Copyright infringement and its effects on markets. Yes places like APKMirror are technically copyright infringement. If places like APKMirror have to start doing proper arrangements with developers to host their applications places like APKMirror are going to be for a while short content. People may find their way instead to f-droid and other places where the developers are interested in supporting their applications. -It depends if their android store can reach critical mass.- The reality a legal above board competition to the google play store from smaller vendors will not be possible while we have illegal vendors in the market. The illegal vendors: 1) Are in effect providing users with second grade applications this results in third party markets having constant referred to as bad. 2) The mirror process just makes google critical mass a large problem to get over. 3) Covering markets that google play does not directly cover so that developers don't have to deal with other third party market to get that market share. Yes lets just copy from google play store against the term of use has been a fast and easy way for them fill out their stores without having to do the hard work of getting developers with the mirror of removing the reason for developers in google play to properly work with third party stores to get more market share. There is a horrible fact scary there is just as many devices out there without google play as with. Yes without mirroring from google play covering those markets there would be quite a huge market for application developers to make a profit in. This just need items like APKMirror to go away. Users complaining in those areas that google play does not cover complaining about applications on android not being quality and the case is because they are google services applications requiring being install on devices that do not have it also does not do google market of Android to device makers any good either. Alfman I don't have a lot of niceness for taking short cuts that are illegal to attempt to make a market for yourself. The illegal route normally end up hurting everyone in the end. Yes end users are hurt by items like APKMirror because they get applications that don't work properly. Google is hurt because the poor quality applications do kick back on google. Of course this was going to at some point result in google to change something that would make APKMirror and like it life a lot harder as legal action would take far too long. Remember the change to aab the vendor of phone app stores are not effect, f-droid not effected, amazon store not effected, itch.io android store not effected... All the third party stores with direct deals with developers that are not google play not effected at all by the aab change. Effected parties by the change to aab are all the mirroring places of APK off of the google play store that don't have the legal right to-do that in the first place. The other effect is on users who wish to back up their APK files. The illegals have had a good run at some point it was going to change. Getting rid of the illegals mirrors should open up market space for the developers who are willing to release outside the google play store and support what they provide so make in the end those who don't want google stuff life better. Of course I am not saying that the short term will be nice. @ [4e5fa6ab] 2021-07-02 4:58 am Alfman oiaohm, Alfman I don't have a 100 percent plan. But those mirroring what is on google play store don't help. But that's just it. They are not doing it because it's ideal. We all know that it isn't. They are doing it because it's the most effective way to bring apps to android devices that don't have google services. And until that changes, I want them to continue to provide reasonably usable mirrors than become desolate stores that don't have the applications we need. Let's not kid ourselves here, If we loose the ability to install application via mirrors, the lack of application support would be the demise of google-free android distros. Many mobile platforms have experienced this fate because they didn't have applications. There is a horrible fact scary there is just as many devices out there without google play as with. You're talking about android right? Claims like this needs a reference. @ [a88880fd] 2021-07-02 9:14 am oiaohm https://www.pocketgamer.com/articles/083365/ what-its-like-to-abandon-google-play-for-taptap/ -You're talking about android right? Claims like this needs a reference.- Alfman if I had asked you the second biggest android application market you answer would not have taptap. The reality is inside China you get a phone the most common appstore is not google play its taptap. Google service don't exist on your common android phones in china. -They are doing it because it's the most effective way to bring apps to android devices that don't have google services.- This is not in fact true. China cracked down on stores a long time ago that were doing just google play mirrors inside china this results in markets like taptap getting a solid foothold inside china. Of course those markets don't have a solid foot hold outside china. -Let's not kid ourselves here, If we loose the ability to install application via mirrors, the lack of application support would be the demise of google-free android distros.- Really Alfman stop kidding yourself. China proved that you crack down on mirrors from google play and you then get other market able to form. Of course when you have large number of customers in the China case that you are not getting because you are only on google play so are not getting into the China market.... The will to deal with non google play market has appeared. Yes china crackdowns caused a brutal lack of applications in china android application market for a while. But long term it has result in the China being way more competitive with application stores than our market. Alfman I am not kidding with the idea that roughly 50% of android phones don't have google play or google services. There is a huge volume of phones in china. @ [4e5fa6ab] 2021-07-02 11:33 am Alfman oiaohm, Alfman if I had asked you the second biggest android application market you answer would not have taptap. The reality is inside China you get a phone the most common appstore is not google play its taptap. You still haven't linked to marketshare data to back the facts you were claiming. I find that you do that a-lot, but at least now I know what you were talking about. In any case china have a similar problem regarding market monopolization, it just so happens that their government have intervened in order to make sure their monopolies are chinese rather than foreign. I'm pretty sure the USA would do the exact same thing if the situation were reversed. This is not in fact true. China cracked down on stores a long time ago that were doing just google play mirrors inside china this results in markets like taptap getting a solid foothold inside china. Of course those markets don't have a solid foot hold outside china. Well yes obviously if you have a government willing & able to intervene in the market, you can clearly change the balance of corporate power. I don't know where you live, but here in the US that is not happening and isn't likely to happen either. If anything our governments and corporations have a symbiotic relationship, which is part of the feedback loop I was talking about. 6. [c7277bc8] 2021-07-01 9:26 am kurkosdr tl;dr: AAB apps can exist outside the Play Store (thanks to the third-party "apkm" format and installer), but usually not in a complete form. Log in to Reply + [a88880fd] 2021-07-01 11:13 am oiaohm https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.apk.editor/ This here is not the name you would look for. But if you can get your mits on aab file the complete thing. Using the APK Explorer & Editor you can directly side-load the aab file. AAB can exist outside the Play Store without the apkm format and installer. Yes outside the Play Store in the complete form. Yes APK Explorer & Editor is a tool where you don't want the google play version because the google play version is crippled to obey google rules to be uploaded. Yes be it the developer be it the store be it the end user all 3 parties can use tools to convert a aab into the install-able APK files that users need. That is of course if you can get the aab file from the developer. The aab installers exist they could be made more user friendly. Reality open specification aab format should allow closed formats like apkm to die. Log in to Reply o [c7277bc8] 2021-07-01 7:29 pm kurkosdr Developers have no reason to distribute the aab when they can also distribute an "full" apk (see another person's post above for how), but whatever, it doesn't matter. This change is not really targeted at developers but targeted at making it harder for services like APKMirror to "mirror" the PlayStore fully. Which is why I said you won't be able to usually get an AAB-type app outside the PlayStore in its complete form. Your mirror has to make sure they get every locale (plus whatever other reasons exist for splitting, don't know) from PlayStore by visiting with different device settings each time. And no, not every developer of popular apps will play ball with APKMirror and give them the AAB file or a "full" APK, Google themselves being such a developer. This is where the problem is: A few developers will send the AAB file of a "full" APK to APKMirror, for most developers you will usually be unable to get a complete form of the app from APK Mirror. Log in to Reply # [a88880fd] 2021-07-01 9:11 pm oiaohm -And no, not every developer of popular apps will play ball with APKMirror and give them the AAB file or a "full" APK, Google themselves being such a developer.- Yes this is true but there are catches to it. This also means that since you are mirroring with the developer consent means you are not in the loop to be informed directly from the developer about new versions. Also not directly in the loop to be informed if a new version has a new feature requirement. -A few developers will send the AAB file of a "full" APK to APKMirror, for most developers you will usually be unable to get a complete form of the app from APK Mirror.- Already there are issues with services like APK Mirror not being up on updates and other changes made by the developers as well. Yes a few developers don't want to have a bar to-do with APKMirror as well because in the past they shipped malware infected version of their apps before they got their act together. Yes I agree this mirror sites will be hit hard by this change but the parties like f-droid that dealing with developers to get source access the AAB change means nothing. People have been asking f-droid to support AAB for the last 4 years because this would make f-droid application installs smaller but this also would screw up f-droid means to work device to device installs. Developers releasing on Amazon store the AAB change means in fact less work because they need to upload a APK univerisal that they have had to be producing anyhow. Google for a long time has had APK file size limits and Amazon does not so you have required to make the AAB two sets of APK files the google change now means you make the AAB and 1 set of APK files. Parties like Applivery already support developers uploading the AAB to them and they convert it to universal they are already work on server side support with their install application to do device targeted. One of the hard facts is over time we will see more and more of the android app stores dealing straight with developers move over to AAB and dynamic installs. Google in this case is just the first to move. Log in to Reply Leave a Reply Cancel reply You must be logged in to post a comment. [ ] [Search] OSnews Account + Register + Log in + RSS (Articles) + RSS (Comments) Support OSnews + OSnews Patreon + Support OSnews Topics Topics[Select Category ] Related Posts + Developers can't update apps to Material Design just yet July 2, 2014 * 2 Comments + Leaving Apple and Google: /e/ first beta is here September 15, 2018 * 11 Comments + Samsung's new One UI Android skin February 19, 2019 * 7 Comments + Running Swift code on Android October 14, 2015 * 9 Comments + Google Play Services no longer supports Android 4.0 December 8, 2018 * 28 Comments Popular Posts + A few thoughts on Fuchsia security June 14, 2021 * 98 Comments + Windows 11 with new UX confirmed in a leak June 15, 2021 * 86 Comments + Microsoft remains vague and unclear about Windows 11's minimum requirements June 26, 2021 * 77 Comments + Microsoft unveils Windows 11 June 24, 2021 * 65 Comments + Microsoft confirms TPM 2.0 is a hard floor for Windows 11 June 28, 2021 * 49 Comments About OSnews OSnews Privacy Statement (c) OSnews Inc. All Rights Reserved. OSnews and the OSnews logo are trademarks of OSnews. Theme Customizations by Adam Scheinberg Proudly powered by Wordpress Reader comments are owned by the poster. We are not responsible for them in any way. All trademarks, icons, and logos shown or mentioned in this web site are the property of their respective owners. Reproduction of OSnews stories is permitted only with explicit authorization from OSnews. Reproductions must be properly credited. Important Links * Sponsorship * OSnews Privacy Statement * Notice to Bulk Emailers * Contact From the Archives From the Archives [Select Month ] OSnews Copyright (c) 2021. (c) OSnews Inc * Theme by Adam Scheinberg