> A perfectly privacy respecting app store isn't going to do any good if it doesn't have any apps.
40 years ago apps were sold on floppy disks. 30 years ago they were sold on CD-ROMs. 20 years ago, DVDs.
Online-only apps are a recent thing. A privacy respecting app store certainly can be a thing. Apps being blocked or banned from stores for choosing to not respect your privacy is a good thing.
>Online-only apps are a recent thing. A privacy respecting app store certainly can be a thing.
I'm not sure you're trying say. I specifically acknowledged the existence of f-droid as a "privacy respecting app store" in the quoted comment.
>Apps choosing to not respect your privacy, and being blocked or banned from stores, is a good thing.
"a good thing" doesn't mean much when most people haven't even heard of your app store, and are missing out on all the popular apps that people want. Idealism doesn't mean much when nobody is using it. Apple might not be the paragon of privacy, but they had a greater impact on user privacy than f-droid ever will. To reiterate OP's point: what's the point of having a perfectly private OS and app store, when there's no apps for it, and your normie friends/relatives are going to sell you out anyways by uploading their entire contact list and photos (both with you in it) to google and meta?
40 years ago apps were sold on floppy disks. 30 years ago they were sold on CD-ROMs. 20 years ago, DVDs.
Online-only apps are a recent thing. A privacy respecting app store certainly can be a thing. Apps being blocked or banned from stores for choosing to not respect your privacy is a good thing.