←back to thread

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

(www.makeuseof.com)
424 points josephcsible | 1 comments | 13 Oct 25 15:24 UTC | HN request time: 0.308s | source
Show context
HiPhish ◴[13 Oct 25 16:27 UTC] No.45570232[source]▶
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.
replies(12): >>45570367 #>>45570379 #>>45570432 #>>45570481 #>>45570663 #>>45570698 #>>45570888 #>>45570921 #>>45571652 #>>45571793 #>>45571892 #>>45572581 #
gruez ◴[13 Oct 25 16:58 UTC] No.45570663[source]▶
>The term "sideloading" makes it sound shady and hacky

"side" refers to the fact that it's not going through the first party app store, and doesn't have any negative connotations beyond that. Maybe if it was called "backloading" you'd have a point, but this whole language thing feels like a kerfuffle over nothing.

replies(3): >>45571345 #>>45571454 #>>45571948 #
unlikelytomato ◴[13 Oct 25 17:55 UTC] No.45571345[source]▶
I get where you are coming from. However, language like this matters when it comes to legislation. People outside there space will be guided by the sideload language to think it's just "something extra on the side so why should I care?"
replies(1): >>45571400 #
1. grepex ◴[13 Oct 25 17:59 UTC] No.45571400[source]▶
Agreed. "Sideloading" has been marketed as a boogeyman opening doors to malware, when in fact malware exists on the play store anyway.