I just lost €12.99 because of Google Play Store, despite having in theory many more rights than the Americans, as the responsible entity in my case is Google Commerce Limited, Gordon House, Barrow Street, Dublin 4, Ireland. Yeah, sure. The European Union is a majestic piece of shit of useless bureaucracy! And Google is the supreme collection of shitheads. 5–10 years ago, they weren’t this way!

Google Play Store policies aren’t what they used to be | The fucking app didn’t work, and Google and the developer didn’t care | Let me (re)state the obvious | There is stealing, and then there is stealing | Other apps they stole from me | Mental retardation in Android software development | Final words

Google Play Store policies aren’t what they used to be

I remember how 5–10 years ago, the refund for a paid app from Google Play Store that didn’t work or didn’t satisfy you had two thresholds:

  • Any request made within 2 hours was automatically granted.
  • Requests made within 48 hours needed human inspection and could be granted or rejected.
  • Beyond 48 hours, only the developer could refund you.

I expected apps that were not compatible with one’s device (or that crashed for any reason), despite Google Play Store’s opinion that they were, to be fully refundable.

In the first 2 hours after purchasing, an automatic “no questions asked” refund also made sense if the respective app didn’t have a free counterpart (with ads or limited functionality), so people couldn’t know what to expect.

Today, Google Play Store has a unique threshold of 48 hours, as per Apps, games, & in-app purchases (including subscriptions) refund policies: “Within 48 hours: You may be able to get a refund depending on the details of the purchase.” This part has not changed, though:

You may get a refund if you request a refund for a paid app shortly after first buying it. The app will be uninstalled as part of the refund.

You can only return an app or game for a refund once. If you buy it again, you can’t get a refund. If a refund is issued, you’ll lose access to the item.

No special rights for people in the EU: Learn about Google Play refund policies in EEA countries & the UK:

Google gives refunds for Google Play purchases that are faulty or don’t match their description on Google Play, and may give refunds for some other Google Play purchases based on the refund policies described below. You can also contact the developer directly. Refund policies are different depending on what you bought, when and how you paid, and where you’re located.

…

Most apps on the Play Store are made by third-party developers, not by Google. The developer can help with purchase issues and can process refunds pursuant to its policies and applicable laws. If you are requesting a refund, contacting the app developer directly is often the quickest way to resolve the issue.

Quickest, my ass.

As I explained in an absurdly long post on dictionaries, dictionary apps, and the English subjunctive, I have a soft spot for the defunct Random House Webster’s Unabridged and Random House Webster’s College dictionaries. They stopped being updated in 1999 or 2000, and the dictionary department was closed in 2002 (later prints were just reprints). I own the RHWUD in software form (Win32 that runs even with WINE under Linux, but a specific font needs to be copied in the fake Windows directory) and the latest RHWCD in printed form, but I wanted an Android app with the last one, as outdated as it were. I just love the definitions, whereas I almost hate Merriam-Webster’s ones.

If the database for the RHWUD got licensed to Dictionary.com for a while, now it’s part of the Collins Online Dictionary, with some definitions mildly updated (look for those signed “Most material © 2005, 1997, 1991 by Penguin Random House LLC. Modified entries © 2019 by Penguin Random House LLC and HarperCollins Publishers Ltd”).

The RHWCD database went to Kernerman Dictionaries aka K Dictionaries (Tel Aviv). As announced in their Kernerman DICTIONARY News, Issue 18, July 2010,

K Dictionaries is proud to announce it has acquired the electronic rights for the latest edition of the world-famous Random House Webster’s College Dictionary (RHWCD). … K Dictionaries has undertaken to revise and update the dictionary and add new words. It will offer the full dictionary and its abridged versions for all types of digital media, and use it as a base for developing bilingual—and, eventually, multilingual—versions. We have started by upgrading the dictionary data into state-of-the-art XML format, and proceeded to convert the phonetic transcription into standard IPA (International Phonetic Alphabet). … The editorial revision is also underway, led by RHWCD’s former Senior Editor, Enid Pearsons. It mainly concerns introducing new entries and updating existing entries with new meanings. This year we aim to complete a good part of the vocabulary that has been added to the English language over the last decade, and we intend to keep the dictionary up-to-date with new words and phrases on a regular basis.

Nothing of the kind happened. Kernerman’s apps flopped, and they never included a dictionary of this size. But I noticed there’s an Android app called Random House K.W. College Dict, by a shitty Korean company, DaolSoft, Co., Ltd. Apparently, the Israelis sold the abandoned database to some retards that don’t even know English (from the description on Google Play Store: “wiclely-used dictionary in the past”).

The screenshots don’t suggest a smart UI design, but I wanted it. Well, €12.99 is not the end of the world, right?

The fucking app didn’t work, and Google and the developer didn’t care

It was too good to be true. The app didn’t work. It crashed on start, with a toast message that the fucking stupid Android couldn’t even display in its entirety, much less let me see long enough:

The app was fully installed (including a ~300 MB .obb), and there were more than 35 GB free. But it’s definitely poorly written. Android 16 does not support the older permissions READ_EXTERNAL_STORAGE and WRITE_EXTERNAL_STORAGE. Developers should use more granular permissions. Only file managers might get the MANAGE_EXTERNAL_STORAGE permission granted. Heck, permissions are restricted since Android 11, if my memory serves me well. How was this app declared by Google Play Store as being compatible with all my devices?! I’m pretty sure it doesn’t work in Android 15 either!

I assumed Google Play Store would refund my €12.99. Even if the app wasn’t developed by them, I didn’t purchase it from the developer or from any third-part, but from Google Play Store, which acted like Amazon’s Marketplace. Note that Apple does the same: it refunds, within a very generous timeframe, all apps purchased from their App Store (for which they take a 30% commission from the developers, or 15% from small ones). Either way, the app was defective, and I was in my right to request a refund from the store I purchased it from!

Mail from Sat, Nov 22, 2:02 PM:

Google Play Order Receipt
Order number: GPA.3316-8114-2105-87144

Mail from Sat, Nov 22, 2:08 PM:

We received your refund request of €12.99 for Random House K.W. College Dict, transaction ID GPA.3316-8114-2105-87144. We’ll review your request and send a response within 1 to 4 business days.

Mail from Mon, Nov 24, 5:55 AM:

We hope this email finds you well. Thank you for contacting Google Play Support.

Issue status

We received your refund request of €12.99 for Random House K.W. College Dict, Transaction ID GPA.3316-8114-2105-87144, but this purchase doesn’t meet with our policy. We understand that this must be frustrating and apologize for any inconvenience caused.

Learn more about our Google Play refund policies.

Next steps

If you need help with an item that you purchased, like activating it, it’s often faster to contact the developer directly. You can find developer contact information on the app’s page in the Play Store under the “Developer” section or on your order purchase receipt.

THE RETARDED MOTHERFUCKERS!

I wrote to the developer (hja@daolsoft.com):

  • On Mon, Nov 24, 10:35 AM, text-only.
  • On Mon, Nov 24, 6:17 PM, attaching the above video.

The Koreans answered me the same way God answered all your prayers.

I had a first chat (Case ID 5-5637000040145) with Christene from Google on Nov 25, 4:17 PM (Pacific Time):

4:25:46 PM Christene: Upon checking on my end, I can see that you requested a refund for this transaction. However, the request was denied. After reviewing the details, it appears that the app developer has already collected the proceeds from this charge. Because of this, our system is unable to process the refund on our end through Google Play.

4:25:57 PM Christene: Please understand that Google serves as a payments platform. You can still request a refund from the app developer, as they are the actual owners of the apps available on the Google Play Store and the Developers have their own policies and legal requirements and may be able to give you a refund.
…
4:28:55 PM Der Ludditus: You know, Amazon DOES refund the user even days later for sales from their Marketplace. How do they “suck” the money back?

4:29:26 PM Christene: The app developer has 3 business days to respond to your query and if the developer isn’t responsive after that duration, then you can get back to us with the screenshot of the email sent to the developer so that we can get this escalated to our experts for not responding and get it sorted.
…
4:32:25 PM Der Ludditus: Your bosses screwed Google Play Store. Maybe 5-10 years ago the payment to the merchant was delayed by 2 hours, so refunds were totally possible within 2 hours. I swear to God my next phone will be an iPhone. (Not your fault.)

4:33:40 PM Christene: Thank you for your patience and for sharing your concerns so clearly. I completely understand how frustrating this situation is, especially when an app is not functioning as expected and you feel stuck between Google Play and the developer. I’m really sorry you’ve had this experience.

4:34:48 PM Christene: To summarize where we are now:
1. Your refund request was denied because the developer has already collected the payment, which limits what we can process directly on our side.
2. Since you’ve already contacted the developer, they have up to 3 business days to respond.
3. If they do not reply within that timeframe, please come back to us with a screenshot of your message to the developer, and we can escalate the case for non-responsiveness.
…
4:35:51 PM Christene: I understand your frustration with how refund policies have evolved over time, and I truly appreciate your feedback — it helps us push for a better user experience. Even though this situation isn’t your fault, I want to make sure we get this sorted out for you as smoothly as possible.

4:36:02 PM Christene: Please let me know if there’s anything else you need in the meantime. I’m here to help.

4:37:06 PM Der Ludditus: Nope. But too much frustration for €12.99. And Google Play Store says the app is compatible with my device, BUT IT IS NOT! So Google shares the responsibility.

4:37:44 PM Christene: I understand, Radu — it’s absolutely reasonable to feel frustrated, especially when an app is listed as compatible but does not work properly on your device. Thank you for explaining your experience so clearly.

4:39:00 PM Christene: Regarding the refund process: since you already reached out to the developer, they do have up to 3 business days to respond. If they don’t reply within that timeframe, please come back to us with a screenshot of your message, and we can escalate the case further on your behalf.

4:39:21 PM Christene: Even though the developer owns and maintains the app, Google Play still wants to make sure you can use what you purchase. Once the 3-day window passes, we’ll be able to take the next steps to help resolve this for you.

Google Play wants my ass.

I had a second chat (Case ID 6-3488000039378) with Sage from Google on Nov 28, 11:22 (Pacific Time):

11:28:18 Sage: I see you need help with refund request. Rest assured, I’m here with you every step of the way as we address this matter together.
…
11:36:35 Sage: I understand that you’ve been working with the app developer regarding your refund request. I know how significant this is for you, as money plays a vital role in our day to day living. Rest assured we’ll do our best to get your situation properly escalated.

11:36:47 Sage: What we can do is file a report to the app developer.

11:37:24 Sage: I will forward your case to our specialist team. Please stay connected within 10 minutes.

11:38:18 Der Ludditus: As long as Google Play Store claimed that the app is compatible with my device. Google shares the responsibility with the developer. Bordering deceitful advertising.

11:38:53 Sage: Please understand that usually after 24-48 hours from the date of purchase, the funds will be forwarded to the app developer.

11:39:01 Sage: Please understand that developers are responsible to support their apps and in-app purchases, including refunds.

11:39:21 Der Ludditus: I REPORTED WITHIN 15 FUCKING MINUTES THAT IT DID NOT WORK.

11:39:52 Der Ludditus: Years ago, refunds were AUTOMATICALLY GRANTED WITHIN 2 HOURS.

11:40:21 Sage: I understand your frustration. What we can do right now is submit and file a report for the app developer for their unresponsiveness for your refund request.

11:40:35 Der Ludditus: Now your colleague claimed that the developer received the money right away, so Google cannot refund. Well, Google was smarter 5-10 years ago.

11:40:49 Sage: Please be aware that app developers have their own policy as well.

11:41:50 Der Ludditus: I don’t care. I reported ASAP that it doesn’t work. But the refund was rejected by you. TEN YEARS AGO GOOGLE AUTOMATICALLY REFUNDED 3RD PARTY APPS!

11:42:13 Der Ludditus: Google is complicit with the developer to fraud.

11:42:22 Sage: Please understand that I’ve thoroughly reviewed your account and can confirm that you already have requested a refund for the transaction. However, we can’t grant this request under our refund policies. You can learn more about our Google Play refund policies here at https://support.google.com/googleplay/answer/2479637?p=refund_policy_cr&visit_id=1-636567369364390695-2650095025&rd=1.

11:42:46 Sage: In light of this, I would humbly apologize for the situation that has cropped up and trust me, if only we had another option here, I would have taken care of it long back.

11:44:27 Der Ludditus: I don’t give a shit on your company’s policies. I did not purchase directly from the developer, as it’s possible in some cases. I purchased from GPS assuming that YOU WILL FUCKING HONOR WHAT YOU DID YEARS AGO, meaning that reporting within 2 hours that the app DOES NOT WORK entitles the user to a refund.

11:44:58 Sage: I want to help you, but I will have to end this conversation if you continue to speak in that manner.

11:45:06 Der Ludditus: I hope your bosses who reverted this fair policy die from colorectal cancer. And the Korean developers too.

11:45:37 Der Ludditus: I should report Google Ireland to some EU authority, because this is what you deserve.

11:46:06 Sage: As I’ve said before, I need you to stop using offensive language. If not, I’ll have to terminate this chat.

11:46:19 Der Ludditus: Stealing money is polite? Not refunding is polite? CONSUMERS HAVE RIGHTS.

11:46:44 Der Ludditus: Oh, I must not be offended when my rights are not observed.

11:47:04 Sage: As I have already provided you with all the necessary help that I can offer, still the result cannot be changed. I will be needing to end our conversation for me to assist the next customer. Thanks for contacting Google Support.

HOW CAN ONE WORK FOR SUCH A SHITTY COMPANY?! They’re fucking robots that need to be replaced by chatbots!

Let me (re)state the obvious

❶ When an app store is the front end for your purchases, it shares the responsibility with the developer. Google Play Store is not merely a payment processor: it’s a store! Therefore, regardless of who developed an app, the store is legally responsible when an app does not work.

In Europe, if you purchased something from a supermarket, you complain to the supermarket (in the first 30 days), not to the manufacturer! If you get food poisoning, you definitely complain about the supermarket, because it’s the respective supermarket chain that sells contaminated food!

UPDATE: If it was “Offered by Google Commerce Ltd,” then Google should reimburse me, not the developer! They are thieves!

❷ In the case of the Google Play Store, the mere fact that the app was shown as compatible with my device adds to Google’s responsibility. They’re supposed to perform some automated tests in a virtual machine.

They don’t assume any responsibility, the bastards.

❸ When an app does not have a free counterpart (either with ads or limited functionality, or with full functionality for a limited time), or an app whose functionality can be upgraded through in-app purchases, anyone should be allowed to request a full refund, no questions asked, within a reasonable timeframe.

That timeframe was 2 hours for the Google Play Store many years ago (5-10 years in my experience).

❹ Should an app be defective, the refund should be available for a longer period of time. An initial limit of 48 hours is reasonable, but in some cases requests for refunds should be accepted for much longer.

From what I heard, Apple is very generous with regard to this issue. They’re monopolistic; they don’t want you to buy from outside of their store, and they take huge commissions from the developers, but they acknowledge [some of] their customers’ rights.

❺ One Google Play Store representative claimed that they can’t refund because the merchant got my money right away. If that’s the case, then whoever at Google decided to axe that policy of “automatic refund if requested within 2 hours, even if not defective” was a complete shithead and severely retarded. That was approved along a chain of command, so I reckon that most managers at Google are mentally retarded. Typical corporate retardation.

If that old 2-hour limit meant that the payment to the merchant was delayed so that a refund would be possible, why scrap such a good mechanism?

The only explanation: Google doesn’t want to refund you, like never ever, be it for their products or others’. That greedy they are. Even a small commission shouldn’t be lost.

Consumers rights? Google never heard of such a concept!

❻ That representative also claimed that Google could help me once the developer didn’t reply within 3 business days. But a second representative said, “What we can do right now is submit and file a report for the app developer for their unresponsiveness for your refund request,” but then, “still the result cannot be changed.”

Google never wanted to refund me for a defective app!

That second representative was also highly incompetent: “Please understand that usually after 24-48 hours from the date of purchase, the funds will be forwarded to the app developer.” If the funds were not forwarded to the developer on the spot, then why wasn’t I refunded?! I reported the app and requested a refund 5 minutes after it failed to run!

❼ Note that Amazon behaves in a completely different way, so it’s not only the likes of Apple or PayPal that side with the customer. Amazon exploits its warehouse workers and their drivers, and they abuse the marketplace sellers, but they side with the customer by default!

And yes, they can refund you even for goods sold and shipped by third parties, and even after as long as 30 days. Because you purchased them on one of Amazon’s websites!

❽ Google Play Store will never refund me, nor will I pursue them using one of the so unpractical means offered by the retarded European Union’s legal framework. I should be able to report Google online, on an official EU website, without much fuss. Who can afford a lengthy procedure for €12.99? But this is how Google gets rich: from commissions applied to purchases going from €0.99 to, I don’t know, how much are people going to accept losing because any meaningful fight would be too much for too little?

❾ In conclusion, my advice to you: boycott Google! Don’t purchase anything from them!

Some people might prefer to go along with more “sensible” advice, such as:

  • Only purchase apps that have a free counterpart that can be tested. No free or trial version? Fuck it!
  • Only purchase outside the Google Play Store, when this is possible (in the aforementioned post I mentioned how Zanichelli doesn’t sell any more licenses via Google, but only on their website, and their products can be accessed in any web browser, not just in apps).
  • Only purchase apps that have an abundance of comments able to suggest that the developer is responsive and honest.

Think twice, because next, I’ll show you how Google steals your purchases in more than one way, so literally you shouldn’t trust Google and stop purchasing apps from them!

There is stealing, and then there is stealing

Standalone software for Windows that’s not subscription-based still typically has downloadable kits that one can archive for later reinstalls. And Microsoft is known to have valued backward compatibility much more than Apple or Linux. I have Windows software from 2000 that still runs in 2025. The same binaries. This never happens on any other OS.

App stores are meant to destroy this concept. Microsoft Store is a failed concept (it was OK for Windows Phone, but once they killed the best mobile OS in history, they failed to enforce it on Windows), but Google’s and Apple’s are the major ways to install apps on their mobile OSes.

Any mobile platform, meaning Android and iOS, is the acme of the lack of freedom. Oh, but this applies to macOS and to Apple’s hardware, too. Anyway, the only “platform of freedom” is the “IBM PC” architecture born in 1981 and released with PC DOS 1.0. Later, manufacturers of compatible hardware used MS-DOS 1.0. That platform is still the freest one: MS-DOS and clones (not directly on recent hardware), Windows, Linux distros (the GNU/Linux name failed to stick), FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, DragonFly BSD, MidnightBSD, OpenSolaris/OpenIndiana, Haiku, ReactOS.

Try installing something else on a smartphone. The bootloader is locked, and nobody develops alternative OSes, bar from a very limited number of Android devices, most of them obsolete and out of production.

OK, but let’s say we only want official apps from the official store. Can we save the APK or the APKS (split APK) or whatever the shit is needed, XAPK with OBB and whatnot? So we could reinstall them at a later point?

① Yes and no. Knowledgeable people can do that, but there are caveats:

  • Some apps require Google Play Services and won’t work without compatible Google Play Services.
  • Some apps require Google Play Services to confirm that the user has purchased a license. Should an app be removed from Google Play Store, in most cases the app would refuse to run.
  • The backward compatibility in Google is abysmal, and under the pretense or pretext (that is, false claim or false excuse) of “enhancing your security and privacy,” Google has been implementing for almost ten years a policy of making older apps incompatible with newer Android versions, for no good reason.

② So what happens when an app disappears from the Google Play Store?

  • In many cases, apps that don’t require license verification (or that have been patched) can be reinstalled from the archived APK, APKS, XAPK, or APK + OBB that you manually extracted and archived.
  • In some cases, people who have purchased such an app can still reinstall it and use it from Google Play Store, but the app would be available and visible only to them.
  • In some cases, people who have purchased it can still use it, but once uninstalled, it cannot be reinstalled.
  • In most cases when the app checks for a license, it would stop working.

③ And then, there is this kind of apps:

  • If you have them installed on your device when you upgrade it to Android version N+1, then N+2, etc., they would still work for a few upgrades, but on the first post-upgrade launch they’d complain they’re developed for an older version of the OS.
  • Many such apps would not be able to reinstall if uninstalled, despite being able to run perfectly if the OS upgrade was performed with them already installed!
  • Eventually, these apps will stop working!

④ Sometimes, the developer simply abandons an app and doesn’t release versions adapted to Google’s requirements for newer versions of Android. Google never cared about backward compatibility. So when they remove an app from the Google Play Store, who cares about your money or, if the app was free, about your need to keep using it? (Hint: not Google!)

⑤ Even worse, Google can hide an app from you because that app “is no longer compatible” with your device’s OS. In so many cases that app is still perfectly able to run on your device, but Google doesn’t want you to use it! “Oh, the app does not target at least this version of Android, and it does not know to request this or that permission in this new way we decided everyone should do it!”

Fuckers.

Other apps they stole from me

This is about three apps I purchased in January 2014 for exactly €5.00 each. But let me first show you how these official Larousse dictionaries evolved over time as apps in the Google Play Store.

❶ Larousse French (monolingual):

  • 1st generation: pack.LarDicoFR ended with version 5.0.10 in 2018 (purchased for €5.00).
    • DISCONTINUED & REMOVED. It cannot be accessed even if you previously purchased it!
    • BUT: If you purchased it AND if you archived the APK + .obb (or the extracted databases), it can still be installed under Android 16, where it runs perfectly!
  • 2nd generation: fr.larousse.dico.francais – launched at version 1.0 in 2022 (at €5.49).
    • The new UI and UX were and still are catastrophic at version 3.3.
    • Owners of the 1st gen are required to purchase the 2nd gen if they want to access the updated database (which most likely corresponds to the online version).

❷ Larousse French↔German:

  • 1st generation: pack.LarDicoFrDe ended with version 5.0.4 in 2019 (purchased for €5.00).
  • 2nd generation: surprisingly, released in 2011 under the same package name pack.LarDicoFrDe at version 6.0.0 but stuck at version 6.0.1 from 2014. New price: €6.99.
    • Whoever purchased the 1st gen was automatically upgraded to the 2nd gen.
    • The new UI and UX are catastrophic but partially different from the UI of the monolingual Larousse.

❸ Larousse French↔English:

  • 1st generation: pack.LarDicoFrEn ended with version 5.0.4 in 2019 (purchased for €5.00).
    • DISCONTINUED. It cannot be accessed unless you previously purchased it!
    • BUT: Even if you purchased it, it can’t be installed under Android 16! “This app is not available for any of your devices” because it targets a too old Android version!
    • However, if you had it installed when your device upgraded from Android 14 to 15, then from 15 to 16, the app still runs! But it cannot be reinstalled once you uninstall it, not even from a saved APK!
  • 2nd generation: fr.larousse.dico_fr_en – launched at version 1.0 in 2020 (current version 1.2.1 from 2023; price €6.99).
    • Owners of the 1st gen are required to purchase the 2nd gen if they want to use it.
    • Being last updated in 2023, it should have been recent enough to run under Android 16, but it cannot be installed! The app shows up in a browser, but… “This app is not available for your device.” On the device, the text is longer (see the screenshot below).
    • LUCKY ME: I could install version 1.0.4 (not the latest one) of the APK only because I had a backup of a cracked version of it that I found somewhere!

❹ Larousse French↔Spanish (not purchased, shown for completeness):

  • 1st generation: pack.LarDicoFrEs ended with version 5.0.4 in 2019 (not purchased, but the price was €5.00).
  • 2nd generation: surprisingly, released in 2011 under the same package name pack.LarDicoFrEs, at version 6.0.0, but stuck at the same version, despite being updated in 2024. New price: €6.99.
    • Whoever purchased the 1st gen was automatically upgraded to the 2nd gen.
    • The new UI and UX are catastrophic but partially different from the UI of the monolingual Larousse.

Let’s notice that Larousse never issued an app for a French↔Italian dictionary. They never liked les ritals. (On their website they only advertise the apps for the monolingual and for the French↔English dictionaries. Utter morons.)

To recap:

  • I was only stolen €10.00 this time:
    • I was deprived of the French↔English dictionary app I purchased in 2014 and which ended (under the purchased package name) in 2019. It cannot be installed from Google Play Store or from a saved APK on devices running Android 16. That happens even as, if the update was performed with the app already installed, the app kept running, so the claimed incompatibility is artificial! €5.00 stolen. (To ease my loss, I could use a cracked version 1.0.4 of the 2nd-gen app, but only because someone offered it. However, it looks like shit. But I couldn’t even purchase the 2nd-gen app if I run Android 16!)
    • I am still able to run the purchased 1st-gen monolingual French dictionary ONLY BECAUSE I was able to extract and archive the APK + .obb + extracted databases. How many customers did that? Anyway, it will most likely stop running under Android 17. Or, should I need to uninstall it or to use a new smartphone, it will refuse to install. Technically, another €5 stolen from me.
  • The French↔German app was forcefully upgraded to a stupid UI/UX designed by mentally retarded developers. Had I purchased the French↔Spanish one, it would have followed the same path.

Technical explanations of Google’s killing apps based on targetSdkVersion:

  • For apps on Google Play Store:
    • New apps must target at least API 35 (Android 15).
    • Existing apps must target at least API 34 (Android 14).
    • Existing apps that target API 33 (Android 13) or lower will be hidden from users of Android 14, 15, and 16, although they could be perfectly able to run on the respective devices!
  • For apps sideloaded (also via ADB), Android itself imposes a floor on how old an APK may be to be allowed to install:
    • On Android 14, the minimum target is API 23 (Android 6).
    • On Android 15 and 16, the minimum target is API 24 (Android 7).

From the discussed apps:

  • pack.LarDicoFrEn 5.0.4 targets API 17, so the APK cannot be installed!
  • pack.LarDicoFR 5.0.10 targets API 26, so the APK can be installed.
  • fr.larousse.dico_fr_en 1.0.4 (cracked) targets API 28, so the APK can be installed.
  • pack.LarDicoFrDe 6.0.1 targets API 33, so it’s hidden from users of Android 14+ on Google Play Store, unless they previously purchased it!

Bypassing such requirements is possible via ADB, should you have the APKs:

adb install --bypass-low-target-sdk-block somepackage.apk

This is how I was able to eventually install the archived APKs for pack.LarDicoFrDe 5.0.4 (the version CSS-hacked by me; API 17), pack.LarDicoFrEn 5.0.4 (also CSS-hacked; API 17), and even pack.LarDicoFrEs 5.0.4 (with the original CSS; API 9).

Funny thing, pack.LarDicoFrEs worked even if not purchased, but I did have the databases on the device.

Interaction with the device is required in such cases, because Android will try to prevent the installing of older APKs!

There are many cheap apps that I purchased back in the day that were removed from the store, but I just forgot about them. If a developer did not keep updating an app to conform with Google’s absurd requirements, the respective app was hidden or removed! As previously mentioned, I have Windows software from 2000 that still runs in 2025, but such a thing would be considered a blasphemy in the “open” Android ecosystem!

A free app released on Dec. 13, 2021 and installed from Google Play Store. It’s not there anymore!

Android is the worst operating system in the history of mankind. And Google is beyond evil: it’s maleficent!

Mental retardation in Android software development

Recently, I started to believe that it’s better to avoid using apps. Android apps, because I couldn’t use an iPhone even if my life depended on it! And Windows Phone is dead.

Yes, you need a smartphone for banking apps, for Microsoft Authenticator, for Bolt, Uber, and whatnot, and obviously for Google Maps or something similar. Maybe some small utilities. Oh, a dozen apps from supermarkets and retail chains that have “fidelity membership cards.” Perhaps a couple of e-book reader apps. Gee, even without my obsession for dictionaries, you might still “need” social networking apps, AI apps, and, who knows, Spotify, Duolingo, a chess-playing app, and a shit that connects to your fitness band. We’re doomed; we cannot live without apps!

And yet, using the mobile version of a website can sometimes be a great alternative to installing another app that would add to the other 200. Sorry, my phone says: 441 System Apps + 178 User-Installed Apps. Yes, this is how bloated the marvelous Android is! Most of the “system apps” are services, but still bloatware!

But an increasing number of apps are worse and worse, with less and less ergonomic user interfaces. These bloody insignificant Larousse apps can, however, serve as examples.

Let’s clarify some aspects:

  • The 1st-gen apps from the above list used to be available both as genuine and cracked APKs on specific sites (now the cracked ones might have disappeared). I do have some archived APKs, but apparently not the cracked ones (you’ll see later why I believe that).
  • From the 2nd-gen apps, I managed to grab a cracked APK for the monolingual Larousse in version 1.0 (think of it as 6.0). The current version 3.3 is somewhat different, but 1.0 is fine to show you the differences between the generations.
  • The 1st-gen apps can be installed on older Android versions. Despite using Google’s verification services, they fail graciously on Google-free Android, and they just run! (If you provide either the corresponding .obb or the databases.)
  • I hacked the 1st-gen apps for French↔English and French↔Spanish using apktool so that they report being built for Android 15. They do install, but they do not run, despite having all the required files already in place: the French↔English app still tries to download something, but the downloader service fails, and the French↔Spanish app complains that I didn’t purchase it, which is true! But it worked when the Google Play Services weren’t available!
  • The reason I archived such APKs is that the 1st-gen apps had too small fonts on high-res screens, so I needed to hack the CSS to improve the readability. This is how I can still run the purchased 1st-gen monolingual French dictionary. With an edited CSS, then repacked and re-signed.

Now, let the show begin!

① The following set (remember that the 1st-gen app is slightly hacked by me) shows you:

  • How the vertical spacing is absurdly huge in the 2nd-gen app in the index (the search results).
  • How the pronominal verbs are not displayed anymore when you search for a base verb. The 1st-gen app also shows “faire (se)” when you search for “faire” (although you can also search for “se faire”). In the 2nd-gen app you must specifically search for “se faire”… but what if you don’t know that “faire” can be used pronominally?!
  • I then show you the intransitive values of “faire” because the entry is much shorter (it’s the transitive “faire” that means “to do”). Note how in the old app it’s much easier to switch between sections and between conjugations (the 6 buttons at the bottom).

② The 1st-gen French↔English can’t be installed on my phone, but I managed to get some screenshots. (These screenshots were taken before I used adb install --bypass-low-target-sdk-block to install the older APKs.) And I’ll start with screenshots from the 2nd-gen app and some new design choices, obviously bad:

  • In the search result list, all words start with a capital letter. All of them!
  • They separated the transitive and intransitive values that were unified in the 1st-gen app. Now not only is the number of entries artificially boosted, but the user has to visit several entries instead of simply scrolling down!

The artificial increase in the number of entries occasionally borders mental insanity: instead of one “faire” entry, there are 5, and instead of one “se faire” entry, there are another 5, of which the first 3 are completely identical in the list! Only the conjugation screen has an improved usability compared to the monolingual Larousse.

③ From the French↔German apps, I only want to show you a comparison between the 2nd-gen app that completely lacks color in the definitions and the 1st-gen app in two flavors: the original one; then the hacked one (with larger fonts).

Since we’re at hacking APKs, some fun:

  • The APK for 2nd-gen fr.larousse.dico.francais version 1.0 includes two SQLite databases! Which one is in use? God knows! Great programmers!
    • 2021dicoLarousseSQLite.db: 90,487 entries
    • 202112dicoLarousseSQLite.db: 90,423 entries
  • The APK for 2nd-gen fr.larousse.dico_fr_en version 1.0.4:
    • English to French: dicoLarousseAnglais_en.db: 61,614 new entries corresponding to 46,380 old entries.
    • French to English: dicoLarousseAnglais_fr.db: 47,604 new entries corresponding to 35,837 old entries.
    • Explanation: As seen above, where abate, intransitive verb and abate, transitive verb are displayed as 2 entries, but abate, intransitive verb is marked in the DB as “sous-article” of the first one. That was inherited from the first generation, where both entries were displayed as a single one.

Let me put it as it is: the “new-gen” Larousse apps are simply unusable! I cannot and could not use any of them! They might believe they’re using “the iOS app metaphor,” but the result is catastrophic!

But the purchased apps were usable when purchased, both in terms of usability and of compatibility.

A last case for which I cannot provide screenshots. WordWeb Software has a free and a paying edition of WordWeb (updated by Antony Lewis) and paying editions of the Chamber Dictionary (the 13th Ed.) and the Chamber Thesaurus (the 5th Ed.). The Chamber Dictionary now costs €8.99, but it was €5.89 in Dec. 2015, when I purchased it. The Chamber Thesaurus still costs €5.89.

Antony Lewis constantly updates the apps (“compatibility fixes”): the apps are all at versions 6.x, and recently updated.

Since Android 16, there’s an annoyance with these apps: if an entry is long enough to fill the entire screen (or more), I can’t see the last couple of lines because they are displayed under the navigation bar, which becomes semi-transparent, but not transparent enough to read the text covered by it!

I did not set a semi-transparent navigation bar in Android. Normally, the navigation bar is:

  • completely transparent on the home screen;
  • completely black in any normal app;
  • completely hidden in the apps that know how to hide it (usually, the e-book reader apps).

But here… it gets confused and breaks WordWeb Software’s apps!

The irony is that, should those apps have stopped being updated, the issue wouldn’t have manifested itself! I have an archived copy of the APK for the thesaurus, in version 4.0, and it installs and works perfectly, with a completely black navigation bar and all the text unaffected!

Android 16 is so fucked up! Android per se is a complete failure, yet we have no alternative! (I can’t use iOS; it’s designed for retards, and it drives me crazy. Make me try using an iPhone, and within 15 minutes I’ll smash it against a wall!)

Final words

DO NOT PURCHASE ANYTHING FROM GOOGLE PLAY STORE!

DO NOT TRUST GOOGLE IN REGARD TO ANYTHING!

Just fucking don’t.