Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

makeuseof.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 564 posts

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

#101

Post by api »

ta1243 wrote: post #37
HiPhish wrote: 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.

> when in reality it is what we have been able to do on our computers since forever You do realise that's been changing right? Slowly of course, there's no single villain that James Bond could take down, or that a charistmatic leader could get elected could change. The oil tanker has been moving in that direction for decades. There are legions defending the right to run your own software, but it's a continual war of…

> The vast majority of people on this site (especially those who entered the industry post dot-com crash) ridicule Stallman.

I've been in tech and startup culture for over a thousand programmer-years (25-30 normal years). It wasn't dot-com or the crash. It was mobile. The mobile ecosystem has always been user-hostile and built around the exploitation of the customer rather than serving the customer. When the huge mobile wave hit (remember "mobile is the future" being repeated the way political pundits repeat talking points?) the entire industry was bent in that direction.

I'm not sure why this is. It could have been designed and planned, or it could have evolved out of the fact that mobile devices were initially forced to be locked down by cell carriers. I remember how hard it was for Blackberry and Apple to get cell carriers to allow any kind of custom software on a user device. They were desperately terrified of being commoditized the way the Internet has commoditized telcos and cable companies. Maybe the ecosystem, by being forced to start out in a locked-down way, evolved to embrace it. This is known as path-dependence in evolution.

Edit: another factor, I think, is that the Internet had no built in payment system. As a result there was a real scramble to find a way to make it work as a business. I've come to believe that if a business doesn't bake in a viable and honest business model from day zero, it will eventually be forced to adopt a sketchy one. All the companies that have most aggressively followed the "build a giant user base, then monetize" formula have turned to total shit.

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

#102

Post by mariusor »

kypro wrote: post #9

As someone who doesn't really care about apps, if I wanted to move away from Android what phones and OSs are worth considering?

I've been using Sailfish OS for quite some time, but I don't do all of my computing on the phone. There's quite a high friction for using any of the mainstream Android apps, so usually you have to find an alternative if possible.

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

#103

Post by wkat4242 »

HiPhish wrote: 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 your point. Never thought of it that way. Totally agree

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

#104

Post by raw_anon_1111 »

billev2k wrote: post #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.

This is nonsensical. The minute the government doesn’t check ID to get on a plane that coincides with your ticket, the airline will start doing ID checks before getting on domestic flights just like they do for international flights.

And some airports are now allowing non fliers inside the terminal.

Even hotels force you to verify your ID to check in even though the reservation I’d transferable - just add a guest to your room when you make the reservation.

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

#105

Post by bigwheels »

tomall wrote: post #14
HiPhish wrote: 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.

Or just "install". This word was sufficient my entire life until the Apple App Store came along and hijacked it.

"Why should I change my name? He's the one who sucks"

https://youtube.com/watch?v=ADgS_vMGgzY&t=3s

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

#106

Post by wkat4242 »

ta1243 wrote: post #37
HiPhish wrote: 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.

> when in reality it is what we have been able to do on our computers since forever You do realise that's been changing right? Slowly of course, there's no single villain that James Bond could take down, or that a charistmatic leader could get elected could change. The oil tanker has been moving in that direction for decades. There are legions defending the right to run your own software, but it's a continual war of…

Yeah in the name of "security".

Unfortunately it also means giving the key to the Kingdom to a company like Microsoft or Google which are definitely adversaries in my book. Keeping them in check was still possible with full system access.

Even Apple I don't trust. They're always shouting about privacy but they define it purely as privacy from third parties, not themselves.

And they were the first to come up with a plan where your phone would spy on you 24/7.

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

#107

Post by mariusor »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #91
mariusor wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any of the BSDs (well 2BSD is the oldest on a quick search), the linux project, the GNU C lib and GCC, etc. Just because you can't think of it, it does not mean it doesn't exist.

> Any of the BSDs (well 2BSD is the oldest on a quick search), the linux project, the GNU C lib, etc. Just because you can't think of it, it does not mean it doesn't exist. Did BSD defeat Linux? No. Which BSD is even the right one? BSD's biggest success is living on as the foundation of Apple's Cathedral in XNU, and PlayStation's Cathedral in the PS4 and PS5. Did Linux stay a bazaar vendor? No - 90% of code has been…

I feel like you're moving the goal posts and using the greed caliper for measuring open-source success. Open-source doesn't need "to win", because as long as they have developers, projects go on, and as long as they have any users they are still relevant.

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

#108

Post by [deleted] »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #42
ta1243 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> when in reality it is what we have been able to do on our computers since forever You do realise that's been changing right? Slowly of course, there's no single villain that James Bond could take down, or that a charistmatic leader could get elected could change. The oil tanker has been moving in that direction for decades. There are legions defending the right to run your own software, but it's a continual war of…

If you want a real blackpill (I think this is the right word), consider the famous Cathedral and the Bazaar . I recently had a realization: I can name Cathedrals, that are 800 years old, and still standing. I can't name a single Bazaar stall more than 50 years old around any Cathedral that's still standing. The Cathedral's builders no doubt bought countless stone and food from the Bazaar, making the Bazaar very usefu…

[deleted]

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

#109

Post by iamnothere »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #91
mariusor wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any of the BSDs (well 2BSD is the oldest on a quick search), the linux project, the GNU C lib and GCC, etc. Just because you can't think of it, it does not mean it doesn't exist.

> Any of the BSDs (well 2BSD is the oldest on a quick search), the linux project, the GNU C lib, etc. Just because you can't think of it, it does not mean it doesn't exist. Did BSD defeat Linux? No. Which BSD is even the right one? BSD's biggest success is living on as the foundation of Apple's Cathedral in XNU, and PlayStation's Cathedral in the PS4 and PS5. Did Linux stay a bazaar vendor? No - 90% of code has been…

Wtf is a bazaar vendor? A bazaar-style project is a project with a variety of contributors who aren’t necessarily affiliated with a central org, where decisions are made at least partially through consensus. Linux still fits this description although it’s more of a hybrid model at the moment, as decision-making is highly centralized. But as a free/open source project, that centralization exists with implicit community consensus. If a substantial portion of the community decided that Linus and his team were making poor decisions, a fork would emerge. This process of periodic de-/re-centralization is a common attribute of many long-term FOSS projects and is usually not possible with proprietary software, absent generosity or neglect from IP “owners”.

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

#110

Post by m4rtink »

mariusor wrote: post #102
kypro wrote: post #9

As someone who doesn't really care about apps, if I wanted to move away from Android what phones and OSs are worth considering?

I've been using Sailfish OS for quite some time, but I don't do all of my computing on the phone. There's quite a high friction for using any of the mainstream Android apps, so usually you have to find an alternative if possible.

I also use Sailfish OS - its not perfect, but useable. :) And the way Android and iOS goes to shit, its current state might already be better than them soon. ;-)

(Sailfish OS is improving over time, if a bit slowly. :) )

Post reply on HN