Live data from Hacker News

Android's sideloading limits are its most anti-consumer move

makeuseof.com

11–20 of 564 posts

Re: Android's sideloading limits are its most anti-consumer move

#11
The Android Developer Blog called it "an ID check at the airport which confirms a traveler's identity but is separate from the security screening of their bags."

From the mouths of rubes, I guess. The ID check at the airport has zero to do with safety or security and everything to do with the airlines' business model (no secondary market for tickets), enforced by government.

Re: Android's sideloading limits are its most anti-consumer move

#14
post #4

We need to stop calling it "sideloading", we should call it freely installing software. The term "sideloading" makes it sound shady and hacky when in reality it is what we have been able to do on our computers since forever. These are not phones, they are computers shaped like phones, computer which we fully bought with our money, and I we shall install what we want on our own computers.

I like the term "direct install" which someone suggested in one of the previous threads.

Re: Android's sideloading limits are its most anti-consumer move

#15
post #4

We need to stop calling it "sideloading", we should call it freely installing software. The term "sideloading" makes it sound shady and hacky when in reality it is what we have been able to do on our computers since forever. These are not phones, they are computers shaped like phones, computer which we fully bought with our money, and I we shall install what we want on our own computers.

indeed, but they're not talking about your phone, they're talking about android, which is something you don't buy nor own, you buy a license to use it on the provider's terms.

linux phones can't come soon enough ...

your point about the termn "sideloading" is spot on, though. perverting the language is the first step of manipulation: installing software is "sideloading", sharing files is "piracy", legitimate resistance is "terrorism", genocide is "right to defend oneself" ...

Re: Android's sideloading limits are its most anti-consumer move

#16
post #4

We need to stop calling it "sideloading", we should call it freely installing software. The term "sideloading" makes it sound shady and hacky when in reality it is what we have been able to do on our computers since forever. These are not phones, they are computers shaped like phones, computer which we fully bought with our money, and I we shall install what we want on our own computers.

I wonder where the term started?

Android itself calls it "install" when you open an APK file, there's not mention of "sideload" in Android at all as far as I can tell.

Re: Android's sideloading limits are its most anti-consumer move

#17
post #10

Antitrust action is badly needed in this area. It is ridiculous that I need permission from my device manufacturer to install software on hardware I own. There is no viable alternative than to live in Apple and Google’s ecosystems. This duopoly cannot be allowed to keep this much control of the mobile platforms.

There needs to be a mandatory override for any lock down put in place by a manufacturer. I understand the need for security, but it should be illegal to prevent me from bypassing security if I decide to on my own device. Make it take multiple clicks and show me scary warnings, that's fine.

Technically Android still allows installation of anything if you use the debugging tool. Maybe that is where we have to draw the line, I'm not sure.

Re: Android's sideloading limits are its most anti-consumer move

#18
As with manifest v3, Google is once again misusing their position as a source of open standards to benefit their adware business. Hopefully the EU fines them once again.

A weird hill to choose to die on given that in practice it's not really a meaningful percentage of people that are using adblockers and the negative PR they get from these oversteps is massive.

Re: Android's sideloading limits are its most anti-consumer move

#19
If you want to install software on your Microsoft Windows computer, it has to be signed by a verified developer, otherwise you get an overridable warning that the developer cannot be verified, the software may contain malware etc.

If you want to install software on you MacOS machine, the same thing applies. It must come from a verified developer with an apple account, otherwise you get a warning and must jump through hoops to override. As of macos15.1 this is considerably more difficult to override.

If you want to install iOS apps, the apps have to be signed by a verified developer. Theres no exceptions.

I just dont see a future where being able to create and publish an app anonymously is going to be supported.

Becoming a verified developer is a PITA, and can take a while or be impossible (i.e. getting a DUNS number if you're in a sanctioned country might be not at all possible) but at the same time, eliminating the ability of our devices from running any old code it downloads and runs is a huge safety win.

Re: Android's sideloading limits are its most anti-consumer move

#20
post #4

We need to stop calling it "sideloading", we should call it freely installing software. The term "sideloading" makes it sound shady and hacky when in reality it is what we have been able to do on our computers since forever. These are not phones, they are computers shaped like phones, computer which we fully bought with our money, and I we shall install what we want on our own computers.

I call "running unsigned binaries"
Post reply on HN