Deceptive language frequently used against consumers: Difference between revisions

{{ToneWarning}}{{Incomplete}}

Deceptive language used by companies to impede the rights of consumers comes in many forms. Many of them can be boiled down to a few principles.

Developers applying for approval are required to violate their privacy by disclosing their real-life identity to Google.

Google used false benevolence to excuse this restriction:

</blockquote>

<ref>[https://www.phonearena.com/news/Google-will-make-sideloading-apps-way-more-difficult-from-next-year_id173542 Google will make sideloading apps way more difficult from next year - PhoneArena]</ref>

 

The only "security" storage access framework actually gives the user is that it prevents them from granting access to the root directory of the external storage (not to be confused with "root access" which gives you superuser privileges). So an imaginary app that does "bad stuff" can still do it inside the directory picked by the user.

 

 

Storage Access Framework is no replacement for legacy storage access given its slowness from its large processing overhead. It is a soydev{{Citation needed}} technology. The performance loss may be concealed to some extent from the fast hardware smartphones have nowadays, but even then, it increases battery usage.<ref>[https://www.xda-developers.com/android-q-storage-access-framework-scoped-storage/ The Storage Access Framework is the only way for apps to work with all your files in Android Q. And it's terrible.] - XDA developers</ref><ref>[https://archive.today/2025.08.23-201715/https://www.reddit.com/r/androiddev/comments/65dn8x/horrible_access_storage_framework_performance/ Horrible access storage framework performance] -  androiddev - Reddit</ref>

Google has a conflict of interest as a provider of cloud storage. Imagine SanDisk owned Android and blocked Google Drive. Everyone would recognize the obvious conflict of interest. And when Android restrictions break applications like file managers, end users complain to the app developers even though it is not their fault. So these restrictions also caused headaches to innocent app developers.

Samsung couldn't just switch to non-replaceable batteries without losing a word about it, so these words at the keynote by Justin Denison, Samsung's public relations person, filled that gap:

<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8mfEud8n4c Samsung Galaxy Unpacked 2015 - Livestream (Replay] ([https://ghostarchive.org/varchive/youtube/20211117/U8mfEud8n4c archive]) at 27:37</ref>

These are the words Samsung used to excuse making the shortest-living part of the smartphone not replaceable, removing one of the long-standing selling points of Samsung smartphones at that time.

Mr. Denison is implying that the anticipation of not being able to replace a dead battery, at least not without great difficulty, is supposed to make the user "confident" about charging their phone. However, replaceable batteries provide the peace of mind that one is able to replace it at any time when (not if) it expires.

===OnePlus "encrypted" batteries===

The OnePlus Pad has a serialized battery, meaning the device detects repairs not approved by OnePlus, which can result in functionality being disabled. This is an anti-repair practice first seen on Apple iPhone 11.

However, OnePlus marketed this practice as "encrypting" the battery. Given that people associate "encryption" with something positive (for example end-to-end encryption on a messaging service), OnePlus attempted to "recycle" this word to glorify an anti-repair practice.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgtFSHCGNIk Oneplus' tablet uses an encrypted battery; how's that for repairability?] - Louis Rossmann</ref><ref>[https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/02/oneplus-takes-on-the-ipad-with-the-oneplus-pad/ OnePlus takes on the iPad with the OnePlus Pad - Ars Technica]</ref>

==="Web Environment Integrity API" by Google===

Despite using benevolent-seeming phrases such as "enhance our service" and " offer additional content", the actual aim of the change was to place large and obtrusive adverts in users' homes.

==Removing practicality and usefulness to "clean" up or "streamline" the experience==

In the 2000s and early 2010s, three or four USB ports built into laptops were not uncommon. Modern laptops in contrast usually feature one or two USB-A ports and might feature an USB-C port, in addition to less modular and less upgradeable parts. In reality, this has the opposite effect: due to fewer built-in ports on their laptops, the user is forced to carry hubs and adapters to be able to use the same functionality as before, which outweighs any portability benefit that the thinness might have afforded. Netbooks already existed as the category of laptops for people primarily interested in thinness.<ref>[https://archive.today/2022.12.17-000103/https://www.easydongle.com/why-do-new-laptops-have-less-ports/ Why are so many laptops having less ports?] </ref>