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.
Apple is going to leave the EU market anytime now, and US is even a bigger market, they didn't leave EU and will for sure not leave US, they could be a positive force for the world instead of just saying "noooo but the rich will leave uuuus"
Apple will never leave the EU market, that would be a stupid decision. EU is barely smaller than the US market if looking at GDP per capita, it's only a difference of ~$16,000. If looking at population, EU is larger than the US.
Hopefully they keep cracking open the walls of Apple's garden and Apple stops region locking the changes to just those markets.
>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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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.
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.
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 with a gimped experience.
> 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.
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.
> 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.
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.”
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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).
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.
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?
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.
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?
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.
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.
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, ...)
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... )
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:
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.)
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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...
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.
>> this was prompted by the EU Digital Markets Act
> But muh straws and bottle caps.
EU – cracking Apple’s ass one finger at a time. The only ray of sanity left in the world.
Apple is going to leave the EU market anytime now, and US is even a bigger market, they didn't leave EU and will for sure not leave US, they could be a positive force for the world instead of just saying "noooo but the rich will leave uuuus"
Apple will never leave the EU market, that would be a stupid decision. EU is barely smaller than the US market if looking at GDP per capita, it's only a difference of ~$16,000. If looking at population, EU is larger than the US.
Hopefully they keep cracking open the walls of Apple's garden and Apple stops region locking the changes to just those markets.
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.
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.
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.
Shoutout to https://localsend.org/ - it can even open a local webserver if needed.
LocalSend requires the devices to be on the same local network. TFA is about file sharing using a direct device-to-device wireless connection.
I prefer https://pairdrop.net/ ; nicer interface
To continue the thread, my favorite is https://drop.lol
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/
> we still can’t transfer files from one device to another
Nor send text message with images.
Or react to images sent by those that can.
Is replying not enough? I always feel like react is a lazy way to avoid replying
reactions are richer than a word
A text is already a lazy way to avoid speaking.
It's slow as suffering in hell.
Not the same.
Why only the pixel 10? What piece of hardware is the pixel 9 (one year old) missing?
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
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-...
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
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.
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.
previous pixel phones also had custom Google silicon, just with some Samsung IP
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.
Yay if you pay additional fee you will maybe get Bluetooth file sending to PC
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.
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.
Am I right to assume that they simply implemented AirDrop without discussing with Apple?
I remember reading somewhere Apple had/has to make AirDrop interoperable due to EU's DMA.
How long until Apple disables it outside of the EU?
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 with a gimped experience.
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.
> 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...
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.
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.
That's a different thing, but the EU did force Apple to implement Wi-Fi Aware which is what allows Google to do this.
So is Airdrop now less secure or private? I don't trust any standard Google had their hands in.
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.
> 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.
I don't think it's possible for it to get less secure or private.
Eh... there is an open source AirDrop implementation, it's 6 years old now.
https://github.com/seemoo-lab/opendrop
I was wondering the same. Looking at the statements in the posts, I think so?
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-...
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.
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.
I am reminded of Microsoft implementing a YouTube app for Windows Phone, and Google repeatedly blocking it.
Because Google is an underdog here. In your memory Google is Microsoft and Apple is Google.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
Ever since the iphone apple has been trying to make you believe files aren't a thing.
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.
Because Apple realised that phone users are interested in photos, videos, contacts, documents, appointments etc. not files
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.
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.
And files…
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.
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
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.
... This is a joke... Right?
"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?"
iOS isn't just a phone OS.
It is. The other OSes have different names.
Only so they could pretend that iPhones and iPadas are separate platforms under DMA
I generally agree that iOS/iPadOS aren't two different operating systems, but "iPadOS" predates the DMA.
Im not sure if Android has caught up but the iOS file explorer app is excellent.
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.
Certainly wasn’t ahead with the stock file manager that came with my last Android phone.
What about after you spent the two seconds to install a different file manager?
Ghost Commander was better but I think I still prefer the iOS Files app.
Your Samsung or whatever manufacturer bloated trash ≠ Android.
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 :)
Still no smb/webdav/sftp somehow...
https://sites.google.com/site/ghostcommander1
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).
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.
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.
To be fair, Android lacked a stock file browser for much of its existence.
The difference is that iOS still doesn't show you the files on your device. It only shows you files in a small area.
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.
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?
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.
That’s entirely up to the app developer. Of course apps can see files if they’re developed to do that.
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.
While I bet there’s some technicality I’ll get gotcha’d on, iOS apps do the exact same nowadays.
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.
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?
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.
> Apple didn't give ios a clipboard until 2021.
Apple added copy/paste in iOS 3.0 in 2009
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.
Ios has an app called "Files".
Now "bluetooth" I could buy (and I do not miss at all).
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.
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.
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.
Like what?
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-...
On iPhones you can't install software except through the app store
Well Android is going to be the same way now, too.
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... )
Nah, they rolles that back.
Certainly not. Google is only mandating signing. That’s already extremely bad but that’s still infinitely better than what Apple offers.
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
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.
I suspect they mean sharing the password for a regular wifi network, not running a hotspot.
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.
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.
Bluetooth LDAC would be cool.
> 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?
> 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...
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.
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.
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.
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.
Most of what are called "dumbphones" allowed easy file sharing over bluetooth. Even the cheapest ones.
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.
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.
And you could tether, though it was complicated. And slow (1xRTT)
I don’t know about blackberry, but it worked fine between feature phone Nokias and windows pdas / phones (before windows phone 7).
Yea, there's a Bluetooth protocol for it called OBEX.
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.)
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.
And even via IR port.
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.
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
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.
The video shows both directions.
The demo shows it working both ways, so you're in luck
This sounds great but I can’t even get Airdrop to work reliably between my Apple devices, let alone Android.
Finally! Interoperability like this should’ve existed years ago. Curious how they’re handling privacy & bandwidth
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.
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.
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.
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.
They wouldn’t.
This is intentional.
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.
You might enjoy this new initiative: https://aol.codeberg.page/eci/
I wonder if this works more reliably than airdropping between my iPhone and MacBook… which seems to be 50% success rate at best.
I was never able to make it work, for some reason.
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.
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?
What are the chances that this is made possible because of the DMA?
Around 1.0, I would say.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I AirDrop files between my different Apple devices pretty regularly.. I guess everyone has their own system for doing things.
I'm sure Apple will slap some annoy-a-trons to it any moment
At this point I don't even want to share files with Apple users.
What would it take to make it work when reception is set to "contacts"?
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.
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.
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.
but I have to download and app which is the same as downloading Google drive
Duopoly who?
Of course, AirDrop is absolutely awful.
Is the Android equivalent any better?
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.
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.
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.
Airdrop is great when it works.
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.
Fucking finally. I just really hope is also lands in AOSP and will be available on all Android phones in the future.
Nice.
I can also recommend LocalSend.
Until they decide we can't again.
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!
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.
System 7 had built in tools to read and write DOS disks: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_File_Exchange
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.
And that's why we all had to buy a copy of MacLinkPlus!
Now we just need universal clipboard between Android and OSX
The Localsend app is the way
https://localsend.org/
LocalSend requires devices to be on the same local network, which this doesn’t, it establishes a direct Wi-Fi connection.
https://xkcd.com/949/
...still relevant
Eww, green files?
/s
Why is this part of the OS?
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.
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.
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.
Just use Wormhole for file transfer. Small and easy to use. I have put on all my computers, laptops and phones.
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
Wormhole can be run in the browser easily.
Yep https://webwormhole.com/
Just needs a WebRTC capable browser.
That’s cool, I actually didn’t know that!
Aren't most people just sending files over whatsapp/signal/whatever instant messaging apps they use?
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.
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.
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.
I've used it multiple times while hiking and outside normal cell phone tower range. Need to transfer 500mb of images and videos? easy.
Another use case is to share pictures with people you just met / don't know without giving them your phone number.
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.
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.
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.
Large files.
or images, which WhatsApp insists on recompressing, which tends to really impact the quality
Whatsapp doesn't insist anything. You just send the photos as files
You can indeed! For some reason, I'm having trouble teaching various relatives how to do that
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.
… and sharing files locally at high speed when you aren’t on a network