You can certainly do a lot more with a rooted device. I think it's a reasonable tradeoff to limit uncommon use cases for devices which haven't been rooted. I think the majority of users would prefer the additional security restrictions in place on non-rooted devices. For those who want more control, you can root at your own risk.
Google's safety net API is used to check if the device is rooted/unlocked/tampered. Many apps are using that now and will in future. There's no way around it.
You can either have a phone for tinkering or general usage. There is no in-between now.
That personally doesn't bother me. I think it's reasonable for developers to want to safeguard the integrity of their apps. I can choose to use an alternative app without this check on my rooted phone. If there's no alternative, then of course you're left deciding which is more important. I am a developer (but not for Android) and I've never really felt the need to root my phone for many years. I think if you're a professional Android developer, it's reasonable to have a second rooted device for development if you really feel you need root.
Yeah I don't think the API is unreasonable but many will use this without a purpose other than for compliance or something they saw somewhere that said it makes their apps more secure.
> I think if you're a professional Android developer, it's reasonable to have a second rooted device for development if you really feel you need root.
Safety net API will also fire on unblocked bootloaders, not just root. Android smartphone market is filled with crappy skin from chinese manufacturers and others. I don't want to be spied on by them so I use a custom rom on my phone. That wouldn't work in future.
Looks like google wants to make virtual wall and gates like that of apple.