6 ms·
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
by HiPhish 1y ago
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.
- tomall 1y agoI like the term "direct install" which someone suggested in one of the previous threads.
- bigwheels 1y agoOr 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 https://youtube.com/watch?v=ADgS_vMGgzY&t=3s
- numpad0 1y agoWould it be possible to exclude app store install from "Install", eg swapping positions with sideloading? The idea would be that "app store sideloads" are more like enabling features than installing something novel, and installs allow something unplanned to be enabled.
- kube-system 1y agoYou could certainly say that. But if you go up to a normal person on the street and say "Google has prevented you from installing apps on your phone", while they're still able to install from Google Play just fine, they're going to look at you like a crackhead. Language is for conveying information to other people. If your audience doesn't understand what you're saying, you're effectively screaming into the void.
- nagonago 1y ago"Google has prevented you from installing apps outside the Google Play store on your phone."
- wltr 1y agoAnd the average person would understand that as a non-issue. The issue is you need a developer account to distribute your app, and Google can censor you not explaining anything to you or others. The issue is Google being a gatekeeper. And the fact that there’s malware in Google play store, is a cherry on top.
- znort_ 1y agoindeed, 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" ...
- spankibalt 1y ago> "your point about the termn "sideloading" is spot on, though. perverting the language is the first step of manipulation [...]." Precisely.
- bigbadfeline 1y ago> linux phones can't come soon enough ... That would require a lot tighter and broader (but not corp-controlled) organization than what open source is accustomed to - making cheap and capable phones that aren't tied to a big corp is big challenge.
- HiPhish 1y ago> which is something you don't buy nor own, you buy a license to use it on the provider's terms The distinction between "own" and "license" is purely a legal one. If I buy a kitchen table I own it, I can chop it up and use the pieces to make my own furniture and sell it. When I buy a copy of a Super Mario game I cannot rip the sprites and make my own Super Mario game because I don't own the copyright nor trademark of Super Mario. But I do own the copy, and Nintendo does not get to march into my home and smash my games because they want me to buy the new one instead of playing my old ones. > linux phones can't come soon enough GNU/Linux. I used to think Stallman was being petty for insisting on the "GNU" part, but nowadays I understand why he insists on calling it GNU/Linux. There is nothing less "Linux" about Android than Debian, Arch or any other GNU/Linux distro, but GNU/Linux is fundamentally different in terms of user freedom from Android.
- itintheory 1y ago
- alejoar 1y agoI 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.
- viernullvier 1y agoThere is, actually, but in a different context. The `adb sideload` command allows you to boot a device from an image without flashing it.
- chasil 1y agoThis command is also used to install 3rd-party ROMs. There is an option in the TWRP recovery tool to sideload any capable .ZIP file.
- viktorcode 1y agoI call "running unsigned binaries"
- RedComet 1y agoThey are signed, though. Just not by Google.
- natch 1y ago“Running binaries signed either by yourself or by whoever wants to spy on you.” That last part there is the problem.
- grep_name 1y agoIt's an excuse. Give me the option to install the software I see fit. Period.
- generic92034 1y agoIs this not a meaningless differentiation if Google does no assume any responsibility for apps on the Play Store?
- RedComet 1y agoLet's ignore all of the preinstalled programs, which are signed by Google and do a great deal of spying. Do you think the 100 most popular F-Droid apps do more spying than the 100 most popular Play store apps?
- gruez 1y ago>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.
- unlikelytomato 1y agoI 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?"
- grepex 1y agoAgreed. "Sideloading" has been marketed as a boogeyman opening doors to malware, when in fact malware exists on the play store anyway.
- NoPicklez 1y agoIt hasn't been marketed that way, its a term which differentiates installing apps from the app store and installing them outside of it.
- grepex 1y agoI understand what sideloading means, as I'm sure the rest of HN knows. But to the layman non-techie, it has indeed been marketed as a boogeyman. Even in the Android developers blog post: > We’ve seen how malicious actors hide behind anonymity to harm users by impersonating developers and using their brand image to create convincing fake apps. The scale of this threat is significant: our recent analysis found over 50 times more malware from internet-sideloaded sources than on apps available through Google Play. The research paper that shows their methodology for discovering these results AHS not been published by Google, to my knowledge. Just a mere "trust me, bro". Edit to include link to source: https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/08/elevating-android-security.html https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/08/elevating-...
- ta1243 1y ago> 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 attrition. The vast majority of people on this site (especially those who entered the industry post dot-com crash) ridicule Stallman. "Dan would eventually find out about the free kernels, even entire free operating systems, that had existed around the turn of the century. But not only were they illegal, like debuggers—you could not install one if you had one, without knowing your computer's root password. And neither the FBI nor Microsoft Support would tell you that." https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.en.html
- gjsman-1000 1y agoIf 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 useful for building Cathedrals with, but the Bazaar was historically ephemeral. The very title of the essay predicts failure. The very metaphor for the philosophy was broken from the start. Or, in a twisted accidentally correct way, it was the perfect metaphor for how open-source ends up as Cathedral supplies.
- spookie 1y agoI fail to see the link, businesses come and go. Their software dies with them.
- gjsman-1000 1y agoBusinesses die. Cathedrals don't. IBM is 114 years old. Microsoft is 50. Google is 27. Disney is 101. Nintendo is 136 (they'll outlive Steam and the next nuclear war at this rate). The COBOL running banks is 65 years old. Windows NT architecture is 32. The platforms become infrastructure, too embedded to replace. How many bazaar projects from even 10 years ago are still maintained? Go through GitHub's trending repos from 2015. Most are abandoned. The successes transform - GitLab, Linux, Kubernetes, more Cathedral than Bazaar.
- chasil 1y agoIf Google provides a permanent mechanism to disable this in developer settings, then this devolves to an inconvenience. The setting to allow unsigned apps could be per appstore tracked by an on-device sqlite database, so a badly-behaving app will be known by its installer.
- sidewndr46 1y agoHave you read anything about this? What you are proposing is exactly what is being disabled.
- chasil 1y agoLet's say that Google implements this restriction, but allows F-Droid a permanent permission to disable it for apps installed through their store. Then there is both increased protection and accountability.
- sidewndr46 1y agoWhy would google implement a restriction then allow someone to disable it? That's literally how it works today. By default your Android phone with Googled-OS installs only from Play store, where all apps are verified. When you want to install non verified apps you need to explicitly allow it first.
- chasil 1y agoBecause F-Droid is going to regulators. "We urge regulators to safeguard the ability of alternative app stores and open-source projects to operate freely, and to protect developers who cannot or will not comply with exclusionary registration schemes and demands for personal information." https://f-droid.org/2025/09/29/google-developer-registration-decree.html https://f-droid.org/2025/09/29/google-developer-registration...
- observationist 1y agoTime to figure out how to live without a phone - gotta find some sort of ultramobile pocket pc with 5G and run your own FreePBX for text and calling, etc. I've been wanting to do this forever, anyway. Using Starlink 5G would make it palatable, or maybe even preferable, assuming the performance is solid.
- ptrl600 1y agoMandatory googleloading.
- api 1y agoI always found this term utterly bizarre. It first showed up in the early days of the mobile "revolution" and felt astroturfed, since no developer would think we need a fundamentally new term for downloading software. It felt like something some dark patterns team came up with to discourage free installation of software on your own device. Of course maybe I'm overthinking it. It's common for people deep in the bowels of an industry to invent pointless jargon, like "deplane" for getting off an airplane. Anyone know where the term "sideload" was coined or by whom?
- ncr100 1y agoNo I don't know. But: "side talking" Is a worthwhile distraction to Google and look at Nokia N-gage memes. I prefer the term "unlocked install". Consumers are already familiar with the terms: locked phones and unlocked phones.
- wkat4242 1y agoI like your point. Never thought of it that way. Totally agree
- ncr100 1y agoHow about "unlocked install"? Consumers are already familiar with what a "locked phone" is.
- laxd 1y agoUnfortunately not. They are calling it "phone" and ("rooted phone" or "unlocked phone").
- insane_dreamer 1y agoSounds too much like illegal jailbreaking. Direct install better IMO
- koolala 1y agoHow badly screwed are we that the term "installing" doesn't work because it doesn't exclude the now default assumption that someone else controls everything you are allowed to install.
- zmmmmm 1y agoif anything, installing the app spoon fed to you by your phone OS provider should get the pejorative. Let's calling, "Lameloading" or something to really nail it home.