[HN Gopher] Android and iPhone users can now share files, starti...
___________________________________________________________________
Android and iPhone users can now share files, starting with the
Pixel 10
Author : abraham
Score : 315 points
Date : 2025-11-20 17:04 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (blog.google)
(TXT) w3m dump (blog.google)
| netsharc wrote:
| Ah, makes me think of MacOS system 7 days. MacOS formatted the
| 3.5" disks with its own filesystem, so if you copied a file onto
| it, and put the disk in a Windows PC (or DOS?), the PC would go
| "Huh?".
|
| 3 decades later, hooray, now we can share files between Android
| and iPhone!
| fmbb wrote:
| System 7 had built in tools to read and write DOS disks:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_File_Exchange
| coupdejarnac wrote:
| I distinctly remember how it was the bare minimum. You'd
| mount a disk or open a plain text file, and there'd be a lot
| of strange characters that weren't decoded properly.
| swiftcoder wrote:
| And that's why we all had to buy a copy of MacLinkPlus!
| rconti wrote:
| What does this have to do with System 7?
|
| Operating systems have always used their own filesystems, and
| it persists to this day.
|
| The only obvious exceptions that come to mind are iso9660 as a
| standard for CDs, and people generally go out of their way to
| use FAT/FAT32/whatever on USB keys and SD cards for
| compatibility with cameras or whatever device they're plugging
| the card into. But the latter is a choice users actively make
| to ensure the FS is compatible with the device, rather than a
| default.
| moi2388 wrote:
| Eww, green files?
|
| /s
| leshenka wrote:
| What would it take to make it work when reception is set to
| "contacts"?
| bilal4hmed wrote:
| not supported right now, but seems they might be able to make
| it work in the future
|
| https://security.googleblog.com/2025/11/android-quick-share-...
|
| To ensure a seamless experience for both Android and iOS users,
| Quick Share currently works with AirDrop's "Everyone for 10
| minutes" mode. This feature does not use a workaround; the
| connection is direct and peer-to-peer, meaning your data is
| never routed through a server, shared content is never logged,
| and no extra data is shared. As with "Everyone for 10 minutes"
| mode on any device when you're sharing between non-contacts,
| you can ensure you're sharing with the right person by
| confirming their device name on your screen with them in
| person.
|
| This implementation using "Everyone for 10 minutes" mode is
| just the first step in seamless cross-platform sharing, and we
| welcome the opportunity to work with Apple to enable "Contacts
| Only" mode in the future.
| Aloisius wrote:
| That would probably require cooperation with Apple.
|
| The contact-only mode is authenticated using an Apple-signed
| device certificate and a signed record of those contact
| identifiers (as hashed UUIDs) that have been registered for a
| particular Apple ID associated with the device.
|
| Someone with a Mac can extract those from the keychain (the
| people behind OpenDrop have a tool to do this), but otherwise
| you'd need to register a new apple ID, get Apple to register
| the contact information, register a device of some sort and
| then do all the key exchanges.
| OptionOfT wrote:
| The fact that I get excited about this is actually a good
| representation much vendor lock there is.
|
| We used to be able to send files over Bluetooth before the iPhone
| came out.
| rckt wrote:
| And even via IR port.
| tormeh wrote:
| Looks like this is an Apple problem that can ve solved by not
| using Apple products. Every once in a while I look at some
| Apple device and think it's nifty. Shortly after I'm made aware
| of some thing or other that they can't do because Apple just
| doesn't like standards, open source, or just freedom itself.
| hhh wrote:
| Like what?
| dnissley wrote:
| On iPhones you can't install software except through the
| app store
| nkozyra wrote:
| Well Android is going to be the same way now, too.
| StopDisinfo910 wrote:
| Certainly not. Google is only mandating signing. That's
| already extremely bad but that's still infinitely better
| than what Apple offers.
| stavros wrote:
| Nah, they rolles that back.
| miloignis wrote:
| No, that's not true - the change was that you could only
| install software from verified developers, not only from
| the app store, and now they've partially walked that back
| too and "are building a new advanced flow that allows
| experienced users to accept the risks of installing
| software that isn't verified." ( https://android-
| developers.googleblog.com/2025/11/android-de... )
| fainpul wrote:
| Like sharing your WLAN. It works great between iPhones,
| _if_ you know how it works and the preconditions are
| fulfilled (it 's undiscoverable). You can't share with
| Android devices by showing them a QR code - which I would
| consider the "usual" way and which is easy to do on Android
| devices.
|
| Edit:
|
| Here is the procedure I was talking about and all
| prerequisites for it to work:
|
| https://support.apple.com/en-us/102635
| cosmic_cheese wrote:
| iOS hotspots are discoverable by non-Apple devices if you
| have "Allow Others to Join" enabled and have the Personal
| Hotspot settings panel open on the iOS device. Otherwise,
| it's hidden to help prevent unintended connection
| attempts.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| I suspect they mean sharing the password for a regular
| wifi network, not running a hotspot.
| stavros wrote:
| It has never worked for me on iOS. Everyone kept saying
| "I can just share the password" but the prompt never
| popped up, and there was no way to do anything.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| IIRC it only works if you are on their contact list. And
| I think you need to be in the settings app. Something
| like that. It's a handy feature but Apple could make it
| easier to understand, and they could do way better
| communicating why it isn't working, when it does not
| work.
| bigyabai wrote:
| Bluetooth LDAC would be cool.
| bhelkey wrote:
| Lets just zoom into a single use case. The ability of the
| user to buy a 3rd Party watch that integrates with their
| phone:
|
| * Apple doesn't allow 3rd Party watches to send text
| messages. The Apple Watch is allowed to do so.
|
| * Apple doesn't allow 3rd Party to take actions on
| notifications. The Apple Watch is allowed to do so.
|
| * If you want to use the internet on your watch, you must:
| 1) install a 3rd party app, 2) keep that app open. Closing
| the app closes the connection to the internet. The Apple
| Watch does not have this restriction.
|
| * 3rd Party watches cannot detect if you are using your
| phone. This means that they will notify users of
| notifications even if the user is looking at the
| notification. The Apple Watch does not have this
| restriction.
|
| * Apple does not have 'interprocess communication'(IPC)
| like Android.
|
| * Apple restricts making 3rd Party App Stores. This makes
| it difficult to make a community of people making watch
| faces.
|
| All points come from Pebble's blog [1]. This is just a
| single type of integration that Apple intentionally makes
| difficult, there are many others (e.g. 3rd Party Photos
| App, ...)
|
| [1] https://ericmigi.com/blog/apple-restricts-pebble-from-
| being-...
| excalibur wrote:
| It's not enough to not use Apple products. You either have to
| convince everyone around you to not use them either, or you
| have to have compatability.
| creaturemachine wrote:
| Ever since the iphone apple has been trying to make you believe
| files aren't a thing.
| Angostura wrote:
| Because Apple realised that phone users are interested in
| photos, videos, contacts, documents, appointments etc. not
| files
| babypuncher wrote:
| A file system and its files are a very simple abstraction
| that lets us organize these exact things.
|
| I understand that some people get confused and overwhelmed
| by a directory structure, but I see that as an education
| problem, not a UX problem. I was taught all of this in
| elementary and middle school computer classes in the '90s
| and early '00s. Having this knowledge early on made me less
| afraid of my computer, made it feel less like a magical
| black box, and gave me the confidence to learn more complex
| topics on my own.
|
| Computers become way more capable when the people using
| them understand fundamentals like directory structures and
| command line usage. I don't think either of these things
| are as difficult to learn as reading, writing, and
| arithmetic (especially if you already have a base level
| education in those three things).
|
| If more "everyday people" just had a little bit more
| knowledge about these things, they would be able to do way
| more with their computers with less of a reliance on
| proprietary solutions that funnel them down whatever path
| makes someone else the most money.
| 8note wrote:
| its a UX probpem insofar as service providers will decide
| that since they give you a view over the file system,
| thats enough.
|
| i want file system access, but as a power tool. the 50
| clicks through different folders is irrelevant to my most
| common 5 patterns of use. those should be a single click,
| or 0 clicks
| wkat4242 wrote:
| iOS isn't just a phone OS.
| 1-more wrote:
| It is. The other OSes have different names.
| iknowstuff wrote:
| Only so they could pretend that iPhones and iPadas are
| separate platforms under DMA
| Marsymars wrote:
| I generally agree that iOS/iPadOS aren't two different
| operating systems, but "iPadOS" predates the DMA.
| giobox wrote:
| Barely... the iPadOS brand was introduced in 2019, the
| European Commission proposed the DMA in 2020, and even
| prior to this there were obvious noises being made in
| Europe with regards to future regulation. Maybe its
| coincidence, but the timing still lines up for this being
| a response to the threat of EU changes.
| kakacik wrote:
| One reason I'll never own an apple device, and prefer
| buying more expensive more open competition. Its just a red
| line - I own the device by law, if you bend backwards to
| prevent me from using it via ways that it supports by
| principle, your product doesn't exist for me.
| digdugdirk wrote:
| ... This is a joke... Right?
| supertrope wrote:
| "Dad, download the PDF and then email it to me."
|
| "The file disappeared. I can't find it."
|
| "Look in the download folder."
|
| "How do I get to that?"
| tuetuopay wrote:
| Despite others thinking you're crazy, I think you are
| right. I remember the start of the smartphone era where
| many of my relatives switched to iPhone because "you know
| where the pictures are going and where to find them". The
| worst offender was my dad that had a Samsung phone running
| windows phone 6 (with an actual start menu) where you had
| to dig through folders to find jpeg files.
| Gud wrote:
| And files...
| standardUser wrote:
| But what they _own_ is files. Most users aren 't interested
| in mutual funds, but that doesn't mean they don't want them
| in their retirement portfolio.
| rpdillon wrote:
| The file system is the ultimate API, and it gives the user an
| enormous amount of control to take data, copy it, back it up,
| transform it, encrypt it, send it places, restore it, etc.
|
| Apple likes to have far more control than that.
| sussmannbaka wrote:
| Im not sure if Android has caught up but the iOS file
| explorer app is excellent.
| bigyabai wrote:
| I'm pretty sure that iOS only has a file explorer app
| because Android supported it.
|
| There was almost a whole decade there where Apple pretended
| that the feature just didn't need to exist.
| kevin_thibedeau wrote:
| To be fair, Android lacked a stock file browser for much
| of its existence.
| stavros wrote:
| The difference is that iOS _still_ doesn 't show you the
| files on your device. It only shows you files in a small
| area.
| wkat4242 wrote:
| I love Android but Android does that too. Apps have their
| internal storage area which you can't access
| unfortunately (not without root anyway). Nor system
| files.
| stavros wrote:
| When I had an iPhone (a few months ago), there was no way
| for apps to see files in the filesystem. I wanted to play
| some music and I had to copy it over to each of the music
| player apps separately. Is that not the case any more?
| sussmannbaka wrote:
| That's entirely up to the app developer. Of course apps
| can see files if they're developed to do that.
| badc0ffee wrote:
| VLC for iOS uses the filesystem. You can add files with
| Finder (newer macOS), iTunes (older macOS), or the Files
| app on the phone.
|
| You are correct that each app can only see a specific
| part of the filesystem, unless the apps are by the same
| developer and part of an App Group.
| TheGoddessInari wrote:
| There's a difference between "can't see 'special'
| folders" & "can't access anything but the app-specific
| storage". iOS loves the latter, while Android lets you
| organize files mostly normally even if doing highly
| stupid/discouraging things for power users & some app
| developers making questionable non-default choices.
| sussmannbaka wrote:
| While I bet there's some technicality I'll get gotcha'd
| on, iOS apps do the exact same nowadays.
| bigyabai wrote:
| iOS apps _didn 't_, for the majority of the iPhone's
| lifespan. I explained this "technicality" upthread:
|
| > There was almost a whole decade there where Apple
| pretended that the feature just didn't need to exist.
| sussmannbaka wrote:
| The history lesson is appreciated but how does this
| relate to the current state of the stock file explorer
| that ships with the OS? I'm using my phone now and not
| ten years ago.
|
| edit: oh, I think I get it. My original post wasn't
| intended to be read "iOS invented the file explorer, has
| Android also a file explorer app" (which would be silly,
| of course) but "when Files app released, the AOSP file
| explorer that commonly ships as the default was lacking,
| has this improved (caught up to Files app)"
| creaturemachine wrote:
| Remember folks, the iphone was released in 2007, and the
| files app in 2017. Cut & paste? Apple didn't give ios a
| clipboard until 2021.
| joshstrange wrote:
| > Apple didn't give ios a clipboard until 2021.
|
| Apple added copy/paste in iOS 3.0 in 2009
| sussmannbaka wrote:
| Am I supposed to be mad about them not supporting a
| feature during a time when I didn't use iOS or is this
| somehow supposed to impact my current day use of Files
| app?
| rcMgD2BwE72F wrote:
| Try connecting to a WebDAV server on File. It's possible
| but it's shitty. And try using Syncthing on iOS to keep
| your files synced across devices without having them
| uploaded to servers you don't control.
|
| Also, on Android, you can choose _any_ file explorer. You
| 're stuck with Files and it sucks (but it _looks_ nice).
| sussmannbaka wrote:
| I don't have one of those! I do have an SMB share mounted
| that I'm currently playing music from, though, and it's
| working perfectly fine.
| stavros wrote:
| Saying "I'm not sure if Android has caught up" when Android
| is decades ahead of Apple in that regard is some kind of...
| something.
| sussmannbaka wrote:
| Certainly wasn't ahead with the stock file manager that
| came with my last Android phone.
| stavros wrote:
| What about after you spent the two seconds to install a
| different file manager?
| sussmannbaka wrote:
| Ghost Commander was better but I think I still prefer the
| iOS Files app.
| DANmode wrote:
| Your Samsung or whatever manufacturer bloated trash [?]
| Android.
| sussmannbaka wrote:
| I used the AOSP app I think? I'd usually agree with you
| but in this case I really wanted some more bloat because
| that one was dire :)
| BoredPositron wrote:
| Still no smb/webdav/sftp somehow...
| DANmode wrote:
| https://sites.google.com/site/ghostcommander1
| MangoToupe wrote:
| Ios has an app called "Files".
|
| Now "bluetooth" I could buy (and I do not miss at all).
| crooked-v wrote:
| They did a pretty hard reverse on that. There's now a full
| Files app with integration with other apps (cloud storage,
| asset managers like Adobe, terminals for SSH transfers, etc).
| Unfortunately a lot of apps have never caught up and will
| only save stuff in the pre-Files sandboxes and not the shared
| local or cloud containers.
| nosrepa wrote:
| What's a computer?
| kotaKat wrote:
| I miss being able to plug my phone (of any kind) in and getting
| it mounted as a drive letter.
|
| Android misses the mark so much with MTP and iPhone... _waves
| frantically at iTunes_.
|
| (At least, in a weird bizarre twist, the iPhone's Files app is
| actually really useful for me. I find myself formatting flash
| drives, copying stuff from network shares, etc, all from my
| phone and it's so nifty to have nearly-first-class features
| there.)
| cosmic_cheese wrote:
| MTP is really, really bad. I have a better experience
| managing files on iOS devices using Linux than I do managing
| files on Android devices using macOS simply because available
| MTP implementations are so awful.
|
| I know that read/write conflict concerns are what got USB
| Mass Storage mode removed from Android, but surely there's
| some way to resolve that. Like it wouldn't bother me a bit if
| Android just locked the device and put it in "file transfer
| mode" when it's mounted on a computer, similar to how iPods
| used to and how Kobo e-readers do now. It'd be worth the
| universal robust multi-platform support.
| Gys wrote:
| > We used to be able to send files over Bluetooth before the
| iPhone came out.
|
| Cross platforms, really? So for example between a Blackberry
| and a Windows CE phone?
| msh wrote:
| I don't know about blackberry, but it worked fine between
| feature phone Nokias and windows pdas / phones (before
| windows phone 7).
| marcodiego wrote:
| Most of what are called "dumbphones" allowed easy file
| sharing over bluetooth. Even the cheapest ones.
| kcb wrote:
| Yea, there's a Bluetooth protocol for it called OBEX.
| _shantaram wrote:
| > Cross platforms, really? So for example between a
| Blackberry and a Windows CE phone?
|
| Yes, it was part of the Bluetooth file transfer spec[0] and
| possible between any two devices that implemented it
| correctly.
|
| 0: https://www.bluetooth.com/specifications/specs/file-
| transfer...
| input_sh wrote:
| You could do it even before phones came with Bluetooth via
| Infrared. Granted, the two phones had to be placed
| perfectly for the IR sensors to connect, if you moved them
| the file transfer would break.
|
| Bluetooth was a huge upgrade because you no longer needed
| to do that.
| magicalhippo wrote:
| I recall getting very surprised when my sister got one of
| the first Windows phones (one with the tile menu) and it
| didn't support this feature.
| adrianmonk wrote:
| Yes. When my mom got her first Android phone, she wanted to
| transfer all her photos from her Motorola Razr flip phone.
| She said the guy at the AT&T store had a device that would
| plug in to the data ports of various phones and transfer
| stuff between them, but it wouldn't do it, so he declared it
| impossible.
|
| My mom was upset that she would lose her photos, so I puzzled
| over it for a long time trying to figure out a way. Finally,
| I realized I was being stupid and missing the obvious: both
| phones had Bluetooth! I paired them with each other, dug
| through Razr menus, selected the photos, and did a Bluetooth
| file send. As expected, the photos went right over. Well, I
| shouldn't say _right_ over because it was very slow, but it
| worked just as it should.
| randunel wrote:
| Yes, even "dumb" phones could share files with computers back
| then. Apple users have no idea how much harm their masters
| have done to society.
| trelane wrote:
| And you could tether, though it was complicated. And slow
| (1xRTT)
| rescbr wrote:
| When I was in high school we chatted exchanging notes/txt
| files between Nokias, LGs, Samsungs and Sony Ericsson feature
| phones and Windows Mobile (I had an HP one) and Symbian (two
| friends who had a N95) smartphones.
|
| This was just as broadband was getting popular, so those who
| had it usually downloaded MP3s and then distributed them at
| school through Bluetooth. I remember one friend using her
| phone as a bridge to copy files from me using Bluetooth and
| sending to another friend's phone using IR.
|
| This was across all the classroom, this definitely wasn't
| restricted to the nerdy clique. We found out that chatting
| through notes exchange worked pretty well and then it spread
| like wildfire. SMSes were expensive in my country!
|
| This was like 20 years ago. Maybe 2006-2007. Twenty years
| later we're commemorating that Bluetooth File Exchange over
| WiFi is now interoperable between the only two major mobile
| OS as if it were a revolutionary technology. How backwards it
| is.
| kccqzy wrote:
| Not just phones, the Mac as well. So it's not like Apple
| doesn't know about this feature of Bluetooth. They just chose
| not to do it on the iPhone.
| kevincox wrote:
| It's really an embarrassment to our society that it took this
| long. And still only by seemingly by reverse engineering with
| no cooperation from Apple.
| pavo-etc wrote:
| You can still send files over bluetooth on devices that aren't
| iPhones. Even Macs support this
| mcoliver wrote:
| Why only the pixel 10? What piece of hardware is the pixel 9 (one
| year old) missing?
| p0w3n3d wrote:
| Yay if you pay additional fee you will maybe get Bluetooth file
| sending to PC
| evanjrowley wrote:
| The answer to your 2nd question might be Google's custom
| silicon: https://blog.google/products/pixel/tensor-g5-pixel-10/
|
| The answer to your first question may simply be they want to
| sell more Pixel 10 phones.
|
| The investment into custom silicon is more likely to pay off
| when new and exiting features are exclusive to the newer
| platform.
| russianGuy83829 wrote:
| previous pixel phones also had custom Google silicon, just
| with some Samsung IP
| arghwhat wrote:
| That hardware is completely unrelated to such a simple
| feature. Something like AirDrop will only use fairly trivial
| crypto, which most likely ciphers with full acceleration
| available but even without it would work fine with plenty of
| performance headroom.
|
| Neither Apple nor Google is doing anything revolutionary with
| their silicon for such a standard compute task. It's really
| mostly minor tuning to get a more optimal part instead of an
| off-the-shelf chip catering to other uses too, with die area
| and power consumption "wasted" in your setup.
| bilal4hmed wrote:
| It says starting with pixel 10, so I assume itll roll out to
| the others after some time
|
| https://security.googleblog.com/2025/11/android-quick-share-...
| Maxious wrote:
| From the linked security report in that post
| https://www.netspi.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/google-
| fea... it seems like they implemented something similar to
| https://github.com/seemoo-lab/opendrop (which was also used
| to test interoperablity
|
| Also `we welcome the opportunity to work with Apple to enable
| "Contacts Only" mode in the future` doesn't make it sound
| like Apple actually helped implement this
| input_sh wrote:
| That's just how they roll out features these days, in about 6
| months it'll be on every Pixel and in about a year or so on
| every Android.
| dktp wrote:
| I think specifically latest Pixels are often Google's beta
| testers. The enthusiasts owning them are happy to get features
| first and won't complain too much if it's rough around the
| edges. The phone is also not big enough revenue driver for them
| to be afraid that too many people would abandon it due to buggy
| new features
|
| Then I assume they'll roll it out further
|
| For better or worse, I do own Pixel 10
| dlcarrier wrote:
| We've reached the point where a program that simply links file
| selection dialog APIs with network identity broadcast and file
| transfer APIs is so difficult to get working, that you can't
| expect it to be functional without the exact specified hardware
| and software version it was written for.
| gostsamo wrote:
| We get the early worm. At the same time, as a screenreader
| user, I wished that I didn't miss the responsiveness and ease
| of use of my old Samsung Galaxy S9+. I fail to comprehend how
| Google managed to make a phone which is harder to use than
| something produced 7 generations ago.
| bigyabai wrote:
| Duopoly _who_?
| prmoustache wrote:
| Aren't most people just sending files over
| whatsapp/signal/whatever instant messaging apps they use?
| rahimnathwani wrote:
| Large files.
| swiftcoder wrote:
| or images, which WhatsApp insists on recompressing, which
| tends to really impact the quality
| Almondsetat wrote:
| Whatsapp doesn't insist anything. You just send the photos
| as files
| swiftcoder wrote:
| You can indeed! For some reason, I'm having trouble
| teaching various relatives how to do that
| add-sub-mul-div wrote:
| That's my first thought too, as an Android user. But Apple
| culture is about using what's built in, the path of least
| resistance, and Android/Windows are more for tinkerers who seek
| out their favorite solutions from a wide variety of third party
| options.
| Angostura wrote:
| ... and sharing files locally at high speed when you aren't
| on a network
| vscode-rest wrote:
| AirDrop is cool because it works offline with relatively high
| bandwidth using local RF. If you want to wait for you and the
| target to transmit all the data to/from some server 1000 miles
| away (using up your precious bandwidth quota along the way)
| that's always been an option.
| skunkworker wrote:
| I've used it multiple times while hiking and outside normal
| cell phone tower range. Need to transfer 500mb of images and
| videos? easy.
| rconti wrote:
| I just airdropped 130 photos from my phone to my coach and I
| was sure it would take forever. The preparing stage on my
| phone took maybe 10 seconds, and the actual transfer took
| what looked like 2 seconds. I couldn't believe it.
| array_key_first wrote:
| Yes, it turns out computers are extremely fast when we're
| not doing backflips through networks and servers all over
| the country to do simple tasks.
| emaro wrote:
| Another use case is to share pictures with people you just
| met / don't know without giving them your phone number.
| prmoustache wrote:
| I know there are better ways to transfer stuff. I am just
| saying that a majority of people don't tend to use them
| regardless of how easy/compatibles alternatives are.
|
| They naturally choose to transfer stuff from the same app
| that they are using to communicate with others.
| vscode-rest wrote:
| Not everything needs to be tailored only to the most
| trivial use case.
| rcMgD2BwE72F wrote:
| Of course, only because Apple and Google did everything in
| their power to prevent people sending files directly between
| devices. When you have a duopoly that splits the population in
| two parts and they can't send files between them, of course
| users will rely on messaging apps to share stuff.
|
| Short story: I did a long trip across two continent with my
| wife. Me with an Android devices, her on iOS. We did backup our
| photos in our own private cloud but guess how we had to quick
| exchange photos while in the wild (no wifi and sometimes no
| network)? We couldn't. Because Google and Apple did everything
| so we couldn't.
|
| Google wants to your data and fought for the cloud. Apple don't
| want Android users to easily partake in some data exchange with
| iOS users (you gotta buy your ticket to their jail). So sad you
| don't realize how backward that is.
| prmoustache wrote:
| I don't think that is the reason. I think people tend to
| choose by default the same app they are communicating on. It
| just feels more natural and straightforward.
|
| The same thing used to happen (and still continues) with
| emails. Even with shared cloud drives synchronized to their
| computers an awful lot of people are still sending files by
| email/teams/ticketing systems.
| pmontra wrote:
| Yes, because it's almost the only cross-platform way to do it.
| It used to be email, then pictures become almost too big to fit
| into attachments (and bandwidth, think about the days of 3G)
| and messages have less friction anyway.
| Marsymars wrote:
| Besides what others have mentioned, it's also nice for moving
| files between your own devices - I use AirDrop all the time for
| transferring files between my iPad and Mac.
| olly994 wrote:
| Just use Wormhole for file transfer. Small and easy to use. I
| have put on all my computers, laptops and phones.
| __jonas wrote:
| 100% of the time when I want to share a file from my phone to
| another phone, the other phone is not owned by me and I can't
| just install some software on it
| polishdude20 wrote:
| Wormhole can be run in the browser easily.
| RenThraysk wrote:
| Yep https://webwormhole.com/
|
| Just needs a WebRTC capable browser.
| __jonas wrote:
| That's cool, I actually didn't know that!
| averysmallbird wrote:
| What are the chances that this is made possible because of the
| DMA?
| layer8 wrote:
| Around 1.0, I would say.
| rckt wrote:
| At the same time as we have companies trying to push their
| humanoid robots with AI and all, we finally have devices able to
| communicate with each other again. Vendor locking is such a
| stupid thing.
| somanyphotons wrote:
| Am I right to assume that they simply implemented AirDrop without
| discussing with Apple?
| jhogervorst wrote:
| I was wondering the same. Looking at the statements in the
| posts, I think so?
| do_not_redeem wrote:
| Reading between the lines, it seems like Google is playing a
| bit of chess here. Reminds me of the Beeper Mini stunt, except
| this time by a trillion-dollar company they can't just sweep
| under the rug.
|
| > we welcome the opportunity to work with Apple to enable
| "Contacts Only" mode in the future.
|
| > I applaud the effort to open more secure information sharing
| between platforms and encourage Google and Apple to work
| together more on this.
|
| Your move, Apple.
| GeekyBear wrote:
| I am reminded of Microsoft implementing a YouTube app for
| Windows Phone, and Google repeatedly blocking it.
| wiseowise wrote:
| Because Google is an underdog here. In your memory Google
| is Microsoft and Apple is Google.
| somanyphotons wrote:
| I think Apple will be ok with this, it clearly shows Android
| being less capable/compatible than other iPhones, a bit like
| blue/green bubbles
| thewebguyd wrote:
| That's how it reads to me. They made a big deal during the
| Pixel 10 launch to talk about Apple/iOS features, and
| switching from iPhone to Pixel. They called the blue/green
| bubbles childish, and they put Magasafe in the Pixel and
| explicitly said "you can use all your Apple accessories."
|
| Google is going hard after iPhone users by trying to punch
| holes in Apple's walled garden anytime they can. AirDrop is
| another hole in the wall, as was Magsafe, and RCS.
|
| If Google can get other AWDL features working between macOS
| and Android, particularly universal clipboard and universal
| control, I'd seriously consider switching back to Android
| after many, many years on iOS purely for the ecosystem
| integration. iMessage doesn't bother me, but I use AirDrop,
| AirPods auto switching on calls, and universal clipboard
| daily and those are all blockers for my considering a switch.
| rescbr wrote:
| I remember reading somewhere Apple had/has to make AirDrop
| interoperable due to EU's DMA.
| raw_anon_1111 wrote:
| Well since absolutely no one buys Pixeld to a first
| approximation and mostly in the US. Looking at different
| sites it's from 3-6% marketshare.
|
| I doubt this was done for the DMA.
| input_sh wrote:
| > Developers will be able to integrate alternative
| solutions to Apple's AirDrop and AirPlay services on the
| iPhone. As a result, iPhone users will be able to choose
| from different and innovative services to share files with
| other users and cast media content from their iPhones to
| TVs.
|
| https://digital-markets-act.ec.europa.eu/questions-and-
| answe...
| raw_anon_1111 wrote:
| You realize that doesn't say what you think it says _in
| your own quote of the citation_?
|
| Apple has to allow alternate solutions on the iPhone -
| not that they have to allow AirDrop interoperability.
| concinds wrote:
| That's a different thing, but the EU _did_ force Apple to
| implement Wi-Fi Aware which is what allows Google to do
| this.
| input_sh wrote:
| Feel free to click on a PDF directly below that quote, I
| don't have to serve you everything on a silver platter.
|
| I promise you you will find what you're looking for right
| there.
| raw_anon_1111 wrote:
| So you posted a citation supposedly refuting my comment
| then when you are called out about it instead of
| admitting you misinterpreted your own citation, you say
| "look somewhere else"...
| tencentshill wrote:
| So is Airdrop now less secure or private? I don't trust any
| standard Google had their hands in.
| dlcarrier wrote:
| I don't think it's possible for it to get less secure or
| private.
| rescbr wrote:
| Eh... there is an open source AirDrop implementation, it's
| 6 years old now.
|
| https://github.com/seemoo-lab/opendrop
| wiseowise wrote:
| First time I hear about Google tech being insecure or not
| private. Sure they siphon all the info THEMSELVES, but
| never have I heard about them implementing insecure
| protocols.
| thewebguyd wrote:
| > but never have I heard about them implementing insecure
| protocols.
|
| That's because they don't. Google takes security
| seriously. There's a reason GrapheneOS is only supported
| on Pixel devices currently as well, because of certain
| hardware security features.
|
| Nothing you do with Google is private _from Google_ but
| it 's certainly designed to belong only to Google, your
| data is one of their most important assets. Of course
| they are going to secure it and prevent others besides
| themselves from getting or using it.
|
| It's the most common misconception with Google, that they
| "sell your information." They don't, they never have.
| They use your info, aggregated with all other Google
| users, to sell targeting for ads. They don't sell the
| actual data.
| amelius wrote:
| How long until Apple disables it outside of the EU?
| jack_tripper wrote:
| They won't, they'll just do another Green-Bubble/Blue-
| Bubble shenanigan to signal when Apple royalty is
| transferring a file with an unwashed Android peasant via a
| gimped experience.
| trollbridge wrote:
| And if Google does this as well as the RCS rollout, I can look
| forward to attempts to use AirDrop to send me viruses and other
| spammy junk.
| thewebguyd wrote:
| AirDrop & QuickShare are "contacts only" by default. You have
| to explicitly enable "receive from anyone" and it's only
| active for 10 minutes.
|
| The old days of being able to AirDrop something to everyone
| on a plane because it was set to "everyone" by default are
| over.
| standardUser wrote:
| Key quote from The Verge article:
|
| When we asked Google whether it developed this feature with or
| without Apple's involvement, Moriconi confirmed it was not a
| collab. "We accomplished this through our own implementation,"
| he tells The Verge. "Our implementation was thoroughly vetted
| by our own privacy and security teams, and we also engaged a
| third party security firm to pentest the solution." Google
| didn't exactly answer our question when we asked how the
| company anticipated Apple responding to the development;
| Moriconi only says that "...we always welcome collaboration
| opportunities to address interoperability issues between iOS
| and Android."
|
| https://www.theverge.com/news/825228/iphone-airdrop-android-...
| reactormonk wrote:
| Shoutout to https://localsend.org/ - it can even open a local
| webserver if needed.
| aagha wrote:
| I prefer https://pairdrop.net/ ; nicer interface
| 85392_school wrote:
| To continue the thread, my favorite is https://drop.lol
| serial_dev wrote:
| I'm using FilePizza when I need it, saw it on HN recently.
| All this AI magic allegedly taking our jobs, but we still
| can't transfer files from one device to another, or print a
| document reliably.
|
| https://file.pizza/
| doublerabbit wrote:
| > we still can't transfer files from one device to
| another
|
| Nor send text message with images.
| stronglikedan wrote:
| Or react to images sent by those that can.
| throwaway290 wrote:
| Is replying not enough? I always feel like react is a
| lazy way to avoid replying
| kulahan wrote:
| A text is already a lazy way to avoid speaking.
| stronglikedan wrote:
| reactions are richer than a word
| mulmen wrote:
| Why would a _text_ message support _images_?
| catlikesshrimp wrote:
| Drop.lol works in android-firefox. File.pizza isn't, for
| me.
| Hnaomyiph wrote:
| To continue to continue the thread relaysecret.com and
| relaysecret.com/tunnel Found it on hn years ago, still use
| it all the time. Perfect replacement for Firefox send, rip
| worldsavior wrote:
| It's slow as suffering in hell.
| layer8 wrote:
| LocalSend requires the devices to be on the same local network.
| TFA is about file sharing using a direct device-to-device
| wireless connection.
| wiseowise wrote:
| Not the same.
| hshdhdhj4444 wrote:
| Of course, AirDrop is absolutely awful.
|
| Is the Android equivalent any better?
| sahaskatta wrote:
| Curious, why do you think AirDrop is so bad?
|
| As for Android, it works fine, but I've probably used that
| feature only once in the past ten years. I haven't seen others
| use it either.
| ChadNauseam wrote:
| AirDrop works very infrequently for me. I will open AirDrop
| and not see someone who's sitting right next to me, or then
| I'll send them the file and it'll get stuck on "waiting" and
| they'll never get the notification, or it'll send some of the
| files then seem to get stuck partway through.
|
| This is all with modern day iPhones, like iPhone 15 and
| above, and just using it in what should be the happy path.
| I'm actually really surprised every time I hear people say
| it's so good, because I almost always have to end up just
| imessaging a picture instead and finding that it works much
| better.
| jddecker wrote:
| One thing I like about Android Quick Send is that you can
| generate a QR code, that the other person scans, and it'll send
| the file to them. I use it so rarely, and most people I know
| are the same, so usually it's just turned off and I find a lot
| of other Android users are the same.
| wiseowise wrote:
| Airdrop is great when it works.
| TheAceOfHearts wrote:
| Long overdue, there should really be an open standard for
| wireless sharing of files. Windows? macOS? Linux? Android? iOS?
| Switch2? PS5? Doesn't matter, just open the wireless file
| transfer window and it should just work. Having to install third-
| party apps for such basic functionality is ridiculous.
|
| If we had a functional government every major tech CEO would get
| called by congress, grilled about this bullshit, and told to sort
| it out unless they want to get some bullshit legislation shoved
| down their throat.
| nicolaslem wrote:
| I am with you. How is it that in the past we got major
| successes like TCP/IP, 802.3, HTTP and WiFi but somehow in the
| past decade big tech decided that was too much collaboration
| and it would be better for everyone to stop doing that?
| alistairSH wrote:
| Is the benefit transferring "local" via BT instead of across the
| internet as a text message attachment? Because I do the latter
| plenty, but pretty much never AirDrop anything to anybody, even
| if they're sitting next to me.
| t-writescode wrote:
| I AirDrop files between my different Apple devices pretty
| regularly.. I guess everyone has their own system for doing
| things.
| jampa wrote:
| I used them. Compression is an issue in other protocols
| (sending via WhatsApp, for example). Another benefit is that
| photos sent by Airdrop get automatically backed up. It also
| works well in areas with poor internet connectivity. For
| example, some beaches have weak cellphone signals due to their
| surroundings, so when meeting friends, we generally use
| Airdrop.
| cosmic_cheese wrote:
| AirDrop uses P2P wifi for the actual transfer which can make it
| significantly faster than transferring through the internet,
| which makes a big difference for photos, videos, and other
| large files. It also works out in the middle of a forest where
| there are no wireless connections as well as it works in the
| middle of NYC.
| kayodelycaon wrote:
| It's great. I used it to move entire folders from my Mac to
| an account-less iPad with no Internet connection.
|
| I thought it was going to be slow, but hundreds of gigabytes
| was fully transferred in less than a minute.
| bochoh wrote:
| It seems that this is directional, flowing from Android to Apple
| but not necessarily back (e.g., me airdropping a photo to my
| parent who uses Android). I'd love for this to work in the other
| direction as well.
| somehnguy wrote:
| The demo shows it working both ways, so you're in luck
| evanreichard wrote:
| The video shows both directions.
| emaro wrote:
| There's a gif on the blog showing file sharing in both
| directions. Apparently "Contacts only" sharing doesn't work
| yet, as mentioned in another comment:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45995586
| commandersaki wrote:
| I came to the same conclusion when I clicked the link to try it
| out, just watching the video now to verify that the flow is
| both ways.
| marcodiego wrote:
| Around 2008 I saw two girls, not too versed in technology, share
| a mp3 song over bluetooth. At the time I thought that if
| technology finally arrived at the point where "normal people"
| could be able to do things that required lots of technical
| knowledge just a few years ago then we were very close to a
| future where technology could be a giant enabler of powers to
| everyone.
|
| I am really ashamed by how wrong I was and how WE allowed things
| to became so artificially limited.
| MiddleEndian wrote:
| In high school (2003-2007) it was super easy for any of my
| friends and I (varying technical levels) to send arbitrarily
| large files to each other with AOL Instant Messenger's Direct
| Connect. Honestly not even sure how a non-technical person
| would do that nowadays.
| DANmode wrote:
| They wouldn't.
|
| This is intentional.
| Telaneo wrote:
| The closest I've seen is 'send file over message service or
| e-mail', but this has a decently low maximum file size.
|
| The alternative for larger files is Dropbox or Google Drive
| or similar and share a link, but there are limits to how full
| you can have those be, so sending a 5 GB file might be
| inconvenient if you don't pay for the upgraded service.
|
| For anything larger than that again, I don't think I would do
| anything than pass a physical flash drive, since there's
| nothing else that has a lower barrier of entry and I can rely
| on a random person to be able to use and understand.
| MiddleEndian wrote:
| I have upgraded dropbox and google accounts and also a VPS,
| so it wouldn't be hard for me. But for people who aren't
| big fucking nerds, nothing exists that's as easy as that.
| Email's limit is crazy low.
| array_key_first wrote:
| Nowadays it's done by uploading something to Google drive and
| then sharing the link so someone can then download it.
|
| Expensive, overly complex, and stupidly slow.
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| You might enjoy this new initiative:
| https://aol.codeberg.page/eci/
| theoldgreybeard wrote:
| Nice.
|
| I can also recommend LocalSend.
| lazyeye wrote:
| The Localsend app is the way
|
| https://localsend.org/
| layer8 wrote:
| LocalSend requires devices to be on the same local network,
| which this doesn't, it establishes a direct Wi-Fi connection.
| marcodiego wrote:
| If you're using android, you can easily share files over local
| network (or using your phone as hotspot) with this app:
| https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.MarcosDiez.shareviahttp/
|
| If you're not close, telegram fork allow easy sharing of files
| too.
| hackernewds wrote:
| but I have to download and app which is the same as downloading
| Google drive
| adenta wrote:
| Now we just need universal clipboard between Android and OSX
| emaro wrote:
| Fucking finally. I just really hope is also lands in AOSP and
| will be available on all Android phones in the future.
| dlcarrier wrote:
| Why is this part of the OS?
| flexagoon wrote:
| Because it can't be implemented without low level hardware
| access. But also, it seems like it's a part of GMS, not of the
| OS itself.
| dlcarrier wrote:
| Low level hardware access for opening a file and a network
| port? Those are some of the first lessons in any programming
| tutorial. If they aren't available, what is the OS even
| doing?
|
| Also, for all intents and purposes, GMS is part of the
| Android OS, but Google had to branch it off, to keep it
| closed source.
| spiznnx wrote:
| AirDrop doesn't open a network port, it creates a WiFi
| Aware advertisement and a WiFi Direct connection. However I
| thought this also should not need OS-level changes, just
| android.permission.NEARBY_WIFI_DEVICES permission.
| Aman_Kalwar wrote:
| Finally! Interoperability like this should've existed years ago.
| Curious how they're handling privacy & bandwidth
| kgwxd wrote:
| Until they decide we can't again.
| happosai wrote:
| https://xkcd.com/949/
|
| ...still relevant
| layer8 wrote:
| This is based on Wi-Fi Aware: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wi-
| Fi_Alliance#Wi-Fi_Aware
|
| Some background: https://www.ditto.com/blog/cross-
| platform-p2p-wi-fi-how-the-...
|
| On the Apple side, this was prompted by the EU Digital Markets
| Act: https://digital-markets-act.ec.europa.eu/questions-and-
| answe...
| josephg wrote:
| This is great! I notice that's on the ditto blog. I can see why
| the ditto developers are watching with keen eyes!
|
| I have a modern digital camera complete with wifi and
| bluetooth. There's an app that lets me connect the camera to my
| iPhone for monitoring, remote shooting and copying photos. Very
| useful! But right now the only way for the camera to connect to
| my phone is through some super complicated song and dance,
| involving my phone requesting a connection over Bluetooth, then
| the camera running a wifi access point that my phone connects
| to (during which time my phone disconnects from my home wifi).
| It'll be wonderful when my camera can use wifi aware instead,
| and this can all happen instantly, without permission prompts
| and without booting me off wifi in the process.
| pzo wrote:
| It's interesting that apple released 3rd party Wi-Fi Aware SDK
| for iOS and iPadOS but no for MacOS...
| praseodym wrote:
| MacOS doesn't have a gatekeeper status in the Digital Markets
| Act (DMA), so Apple doesn't need to provide it. This shows
| that they only provide the SDK because of regulatory
| pressure, and try to maintain their vendor lock-in where
| possible.
| amelius wrote:
| At this point I don't even want to share files with Apple users.
| lloydatkinson wrote:
| In some ways we're gone backwards. Sharing MP3 via Bluetooth on
| non-smart phones in 2007 was a common event when I was at school,
| that and burning CDs.
| keane wrote:
| Possibly relevant comment from a few years ago:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26893693
|
| _> AirDrop also shares your full name (seemingly the one
| associated with your Apple ID, not what you have set for yourself
| in your contacts), both by displaying it in the sharing interface
| on the involved devices and by attaching it as an extended
| attribute to uploaded files._
|
| _> So if you AirDrop some files to your computer and then zip
| them up, anyone you send that zip to (a journalist, a public
| file-hosting site, w/e) will have your full legal name to go with
| them._
|
| Linked article from that thread is moved to
| https://medium.com/@kieczkowska/introduction-to-airdrop-fore...
| (but is archived).
|
| I wonder if Google is adding metadata as well. Otherwise there
| does seem to be the problem of, for example, threats being
| AirDropped in a public place.
| hoherd wrote:
| Using macOS 26 and iOS 26 I was unable to reproduce their
| findings. I airdropped a photo from my iOS device to my laptop,
| and nothing in `mdls`, `xattr -l`, `exiftool -s`, `rg -i`
| showed my name.
| NaomiLehman wrote:
| Just a tip - You can put any string as your name for your Apple
| ID. you can also change it at any time. I have it as Mac Book.
| It's not checked when making any credit card payment, AFAIK.
| jamescrowley wrote:
| I wonder if this works more reliably than airdropping between my
| iPhone and MacBook... which seems to be 50% success rate at best.
| Retr0id wrote:
| I was _never_ able to make it work, for some reason.
| PunchyHamster wrote:
| I'm sure Apple will slap some annoy-a-trons to it any moment
| urbandw311er wrote:
| This sounds great but I can't even get Airdrop to work reliably
| between my Apple devices, let alone Android.
| hollow-moe wrote:
| is it just the proprietary quickshare that no other rom or even
| os can implement ? sure won't care to open to read that shit from
| g**gle and assume it is.
| gwbas1c wrote:
| Why is quick share buried in the settings menu, instead of being
| an app?
|
| Especially when receiving a file, it makes no sense to start by
| going into settings.
| abraham wrote:
| Generally, you don't have to open settings. The the built-in
| share menu from a file has quick share as an option and if
| someone shares something with you, you'd get a notification.
| codethief wrote:
| Do we know yet whether this will require Google Play Services and
| the like on Android? Or, worse, SafetyNet? I dream of using this
| on GrapheneOS without any Google stuff.
| supportengineer wrote:
| Does anyone remember the old YouSendIt? That was a really easy
| way to share files with anyone. You uploaded a file to their
| site, and you should share a secret link.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-11-20 23:00 UTC)