Android's sideloading limits are its most anti-consumer move • Hacker News Board

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

#511

Post by jerojero » Tue, Oct 14, 2025, 2:45 PM UTC

terminalshort wrote: post #218

pkulak wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What part of cheaper The iPhone 17 is the same price as the Pixel 10 > better But the iPhone 17 has better hardware features, like UWB, better cameras, and a _far_ faster CPU. > open source Only if you install Graphene, and then never install anything that requires Google Play Services, which is basically every commercial app.

In terms of cameras, my pixel takes way better pictures than any iphone, and people I know with iphones (which is basically everyone) admit it.

I have an 8 pro.

A month or so ago I went to NYC, I visited some of the museums.

Although I managed to get some great pictures, framing wise and sharpness wise. The color resolution was absolutely ridiculously bad.

I couldn't figure out a way in that moment to fix the issue, but seriously, the colors were so far off it kinda ruined this phone for me.

My friend had an iphone, we took the same pictures of the same paintings and his photos looked much closer to life than mine. Huge disappointment.

In the iphone its very easy to shoot raw and the camera app has a lot of very good intuitive controls. Not to even begin talking about video.

At some point I think Google did make really good photography phones but it seems to me like they've basically stopped trying to stay ahead of the competition whereas apple is always trying to improve. Thats my impression anyway.

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

#512

Post by jezek2 » Tue, Oct 14, 2025, 2:47 PM UTC

ptrl600 wrote: post #200

JohnTHaller wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can still side-load signed apps. It's a similar limitation to macOS which won't let you run apps that Apple hasn't signed without command line or control panel shenanigans. Compared to iOS, Android still has the advantage of installing your own full browser (like Firefox) with full-fat ad blocking (uBlock Origin, not Lite). iOS is Safari-only right now though, in theory, some alternative engines may be available…

With macOS you run "sudo spctl --master disable", and then you can run whatever you want without sending PII to Apple. Is that the case with the new Android stuff?

MacOS can run unsigned apps with GateKeeper active, no need to disable it. Attempt to run the app, then go into security settings, scroll down and click on "Open anyway". And before Sequoia a right click -> Open was sufficient.

On M1+ devices it might also need "ad-hoc signing" if the developer hasn't done it (not required for Intel binaries). This is not a true signing, it just inserts a cryptographic checksum into the binary, no actual signing is involved.

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

#513

Post by ohman876 » Tue, Oct 14, 2025, 2:57 PM UTC

benjaminoakes wrote: post #505

ohman876 wrote: post #59

I know this is side topic but if buying the Android or iPhone hardware gives us hardware we don't control, then what alternatives we realistically have? I do own pinephone (and I was recently reading that they kinda staled with development of new phones hardware), I know about librem.. is there anything else on the market?

LineageOS? /e/OS? ArrowOS? Android has so much momentum that seems like it would be difficult to avoid a fork. I know Waydroid exists, but I'm not sure that's good enough. Ubuntu Touch sounds really cool too, but I've put effort into it with a used Google Pixel 3A and it's not an easy, cheap thing to try out right now. And it's still dependent on binary blobs for drivers, as far as I know. Not a great situation. Rega…

Thank you for taking your time to list all the options!

I have no requirement to use apps other than calls, navigation, something to let me view pdf, take photos and maybe browse HN :) (already a big bunch)

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

#514

Post by uhsarp1 » Tue, Oct 14, 2025, 3:01 PM UTC

Google has made a terrible decision and their justification for doing this is just laughable. Already right now, if a user wants to install an unverified app, they have to explicitly allow it through settings. They could have moved this option in to the developer settings feature to make it harder for normal people to sideload but still allow developers to sideload. Also Play Store itself is plagued with apps with severe vulnerabilities.

Google has lost its consumers for good. This is really sad. I have no reason to buy an android anymore when I upgrade my phone in the future. At least Apple does gaslight us

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

#515

Post by myko » Tue, Oct 14, 2025, 3:15 PM UTC

nubinetwork wrote: post #148

bitpush wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a weak argument. If things have slipped through the cracks with someone actively reviewing it, the alternative cant be 'lets not do any checking whatsoever'. There are better arguments against this that other commenters here have provided (including "my device, my rule") but this isnt a strong argument.

That's the thing, they don't review their apps, and they actively ignore people flagging apps that are scams or otherwise malicious. Much like their ad empire, its all bots and people making money for pretending to care.

Even worse, they DO review their apps. And they make huge hassles for anyone to submit apps, including forcing you to create a new account if your tiny side project with 0 permissions didn't fill out a form in time (grumble grumble).

Meanwhile they let shit like this go live

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

#516

Post by benjaminoakes » Tue, Oct 14, 2025, 3:19 PM UTC

ohman876 wrote: post #513

benjaminoakes wrote: post #505

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LineageOS? /e/OS? ArrowOS? Android has so much momentum that seems like it would be difficult to avoid a fork. I know Waydroid exists, but I'm not sure that's good enough. Ubuntu Touch sounds really cool too, but I've put effort into it with a used Google Pixel 3A and it's not an easy, cheap thing to try out right now. And it's still dependent on binary blobs for drivers, as far as I know. Not a great situation. Rega…

Thank you for taking your time to list all the options! I have no requirement to use apps other than calls, navigation, something to let me view pdf, take photos and maybe browse HN :) (already a big bunch)

No problem. Honestly, I have this on my mind a lot these days. It feels like I'm being forced out of an apartment and I'm wondering where I'm going to put all my stuff. First I left the iPhone for what I thought was greener pastures on Android and now I'm finding that there's not a lot of great options that don't give Google or Apple complete control. What little trust I still had in Google has basically disappeared. We need open phones and I'm more willing than ever to buy one. And if that doesn't work with how carriers operate, I guess a dumber phone or a cheap smartphone just to do phone calls and data is what I'll do.

Anyway, for navigation, try out Organic Maps. It's not as good as Google Maps in some ways, but in other ways it's better. I'm honestly very impressed with it as an open source project. I think you have to use a Google signed version of it to run it on Android Auto though, but honestly, maybe it's better just to have a phone holder instead of the finicky Android Auto experience that at least I go through.

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

#517

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 » Tue, Oct 14, 2025, 3:25 PM UTC

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #399

itg wrote: post #2

Installing any app I want outside the Play Store was the primary reason I decided to go with Android, despite most of the people I know using iPhones. If I can't do this anymore, I may as well switch and be able to use iMessage and FaceTime with them.

"If I can't do this anymore..." How will Google force Android users to "update" so sideloadinng can be prevented Non-updated versions of Android running non-updated versions of sideloaded apps will not have the restriction Another example of how not every "update" is for "security" and "updates" should be optional The computer owner chooses one version of an operating system, e.g., "I chose Android because I can side…

What happens if the computer owner disables Google Play Services along with the Play Store and keeps the phone offline

(Own experients conducted over the years make this a "rhetorical question" meaning I already know the answer)

Not every app requires Play Services and internet access

(Online commentators sometimes try to argue that all apps, even offlines ones, "require" Play Services otherwise they cannot be updated automatically, highlighting the significance of "automatic updates" in steering debates about Android. Own experiments show that many if not most apps work fine without Play Services and can be updated manually if desired)

Not every phone is used for banking or other "government services"

(For example, some owners have mulltiple phones. Some owners may have phones with older versions of mobile OS that may be used for experiments)

Not every computer owner is the same

(For example, most phone owners do not install any apps at all. Of those that do, most use "app stores", not so-called "sideloading")

HN replies are likely to invoke "security" as a retort to any suggestion of decision-making and control being placed with the computer owner

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

#518

Post by RealStickman_ » Tue, Oct 14, 2025, 3:54 PM UTC

IshKebab wrote: post #286

xandrius wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Check UbuntuTouch, it's really a nice third option. The OS is refreshing and the dev community active. We do not have to choose the lesser of two evils this time.

Yeah... Does it support WhatsApp? If not that's a deal-breaker in most of the world.

Moving to an open operating system and improving existing Android emulation is the first step. Once we have enough people on our alternative system, native apps can follow.

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

#519

Post by PaulDavisThe1st » Tue, Oct 14, 2025, 4:01 PM UTC

ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #434

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Windows NT is younger than Unix. I'd say the smart money is on the Unix-derived line of operating systems outliving Windows NT by a considerable amount. However ... the domain of operating systems is subject to weird constraints, and so it's not really appropriate to make some of the observations one might make in other domains. Nevertheless, I thought the point was that we want things to improve via replacement (a "…

> " I'd say the smart money is on the Unix-derived line of operating systems outliving Windows NT by a considerable amount. " Are you referring to the *BSDs? Linux isn't Unix derived. It's a re-implementation with no code traceable back to the original Unix or any of its descendants. Aside from that, Windows has a revenue stream behind it that looks to continue indefinitely paying for its development and Linux has...…

There are descendants of the Unix source code, and there are descendants of the Unix design. Linux is in the latter group.

Linux is the root OS of Android, which has a lot more revenue behind it than Red Hat or Canonical.

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

#520

Post by seanw444 » Tue, Oct 14, 2025, 4:11 PM UTC

wltr wrote: post #500

seanw444 wrote: post #305

If nothing prevents this from happening, then when it does happen, I will make it a point to carry nothing but a laptop and a dumb phone, maybe a hotspot. If I need something from the internet, I will get it before the trip. If I can't get it on the trip, and forgot to beforehand, I will either find another way, or not do whatever it is. I don't know why I don't do that now, honestly. Sounds pretty interesting.

You don’t because it’s not reasonable. It’s fun to play with (speaking from experience), but it’s not reasonable in day-to-day life. That’s why smartphones are so successful. That’s why we need to actually open platform.

Open platform would be better, I agree. In the meantime until said open platform actually catches up to the current garbage duopoly, I may have no other choice but to be inconvenienced.

Principle > convenience. I am okay with that. Right now, GrapheneOS works properly and doesn't compromise my principles in exchange for the convenience.