16 ms·

Author here. I admit I am rather startled by the tone of many comments here and the accusations of disingenuity. Splitting hairs about the origin of the term "s

by marcprux 11mo ago

Author here. I admit I am rather startled by the tone of many comments here and the accusations of disingenuity. Splitting hairs about the origin of the term "sideload" does not change the fact that those who promote the term tend to do so in order to make it feel deviant and hacker-ish. You don't "sideload" software on your Linux, Windows, or macOS computer: you install it. You have the right to install whatever you want on your computer, regardless of whether that computer is on your desk or in your pocket. That's a hill I'll die on. I'm dismayed to see that this sentiment is not more widespread in this of all communities.

citizenpaul 11mo ago
[flagged]
- tomhow 11mo ago
  > In general HN skews towards an incredibly privileged and spoiled crowd > This poem sums up most of HN's politics on control structures. Please let's not have these sweeping generalisations about the HN community or this grandiose "first they came" rhetoric. The HN community is a bell curve like any other large group of people. All the evidence I see from looking at the discussions for hours each day is that it skews left-libertarian - i.e., supports individual freedoms and opposes government and corporate authoritarianism. This is what you would expect from a cohort of people dominated by technology employees and freelancers, of whom most are deeply supportive of the principles of open-source software and the freedom to do what you please with your devices. It also includes huge numbers of people from different places around the world who are not at all "privileged" and "spoiled". Of course there will always be exceptions in a large group of people – or really, the other end of the bell curve. But this broad-strokes characterisation of the HN community as a whole makes no sense at all. The guidelines ask us to do better than this, in all these different ways: Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes. Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community. Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents. Omit internet tropes. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Ajedi32 11mo ago
I agree it's a pointless distraction, but it's a distraction you instigated by trying to language police your own supporters. I and most others who use the term sideloading don't use it because we want to make sideloading "feel deviant and hacker-ish", we use it because it's the commonly accepted term for installing apps outside the app store. I'm open to alternative phrasing, but "direct install" doesn't work because installing apps from F-Droid isn't a "direct install" and "installing" doesn't work because that doesn't distinguish from installing from the Play Store. "Sideloading" is simply the correct word, and I've yet to see a better alternative. There's no reason to be ashamed of it, or accuse people of being part of some conspiracy for calling it that. If anything, the fact that Google feels the need to disingenuously argue "sideloading isn't going away" suggests to me that the term sideloading has a good reputation in the public consciousness, not a negative one. Let's just focus on the fact that Google is trying to take away Android users' ability to install software that Google doesn't approve of, and not stress so much about what words people use to describe that.
- dotancohen 11mo ago
  > and "installing" doesn't work because that doesn't distinguish from installing from the Play Store I'm not choosing sides, but why do you need a term to distinguish from installing from the Play Store? On my Debian machine I install git from apt (officially supported) but also install Anki from a tarball I downloaded from a website. Same term `install`.
  - kragen 11mo ago
    Because Google isn't trying to prevent installing, just "sideloading".
    - realusername 11mo ago
      If anything, it's the playstore which is a side channel and the website of the software producer the main one.
      - 11mo ago
Imustaskforhelp 11mo ago
Hey, I hope you have a nice day. F-droid is one of the communities which was really a key role in, what open source project should I recommend if given the power to, for people to gain maximum impact on, and f-droid was one of the tops in that charts, so much so that I really tinkered with android apps creation with rust/tauri just to create an android app for f-droid (building android apps is hard I must admit, which makes my appreciation for apps on f-droid even more lovely) > You have the right to install whatever you want on your computer, regardless of whether that computer is on your desk or in your pocket. That's a hill I'll die on I feel like there are some phones, I will say my honest experience, I had a xiaomi phone which required me to unlock the bootloader for me to root it/ remove the spyware that I feel it has, I never felt safe really (maybe paranoia?) but I wanted an open source operating system on it and that required me to unlock my bootloader Which required me to create an MI Unlock / MI account which then later required me to open up a windows computer and try to do things with the windows computer I didn't have a windows computer, I am a linux guy and I didn't want to touch windows and I tried any option available on linux (there was a java thing and some other exploit too but both failed) Later, I tried to actually install win-boat and tried to install the mi tool in it after so many nights of work and I tried and it actually opened but it asked me for the otp to sign up but I don't know if I overwhelmed their system or not but their OTP just straight up didn't show on the phone's sim I had registered on. That OTP not coming after 5-6 tries, I am not sure if they had detected it was win-boat or what, but idk, that effectively locks me out of ways to unlock the device and remove some spyware functionality I think it has. I feel like this case made me feel as if although I had a device, it feels like a license when you think about it. This is true for many other consumer devices as well and thus, people accepting the fact that their devices have become similar to licenses, not hardware which they own, but rather software which they rent > I'm dismayed to see that this sentiment is not more widespread in this of all communities. I feel like your message is in the right heart, and its honestly okay, sad even, that some part of the community didn't respond to your message in agreement. But Honestly, please don't lose hope because of this, You and people/foundations like f-droid,linux etc. inspire a sense of confidence for a good future while actively working on it. I was thinking of trying to host some f-droid mirror but I didn't personally because I was a little skeptical of getting any notices or anything after the f-droid team had created a blog post about something similar. Also one thing, I would try to tell you is that you are trying your best. And that's all that matters. What doesn't matter is the past or the future or how the community responds but rather doing what you think is right with correct intentions which I think you do a perfect job in. Doing the right thing can be difficult but maybe in a world where doing the right thing isn't rewarded as much in even mere appreciation or sharing the sentiment whereas doing the wrong thing is financially rewarded. its a complicated world we live in, but hopefully, we all can try to make it a little more beautiful for us and our future generations by trying to do things the right way no matter how hard they are, just because its the right thing. I may speak these things but I myself regularly contradict these. So I don't feel the best guy speaking this stuff but I just want to say that f-droid really means a lot to me, a recent example is how I ditched that xiaomi phone, used my mum's old moto phone, tried to install termux from playstore but it couldn't download for some reason from play store because it was android 8 yet theoretically it should work, but I then opened up f-droid and installed it from there and I am running a termux/gitea server on it now :) Please, have a nice day, F-droid/you deserve it, I just hope that you recognize that there are people's lives that you have touched (like my termux thing and there are countless other stories as well) and how impactful the project is. Lets use this comment as a way to show our appreciation to f-droid in whatever ways it has touched our lives and how effectively google's recent moves are really gonna impact f-droid/ hurt us as well. How I wouldn't have been able to run git server on my phone if it wasn't for f-droid and so much more.
dataflow 11mo ago
Hey, question. While I'm also miffed about Google's decision and see your point about the term sideloading, there is another elephant in the room you seem to not be addressing here. You write: > “Sideloading is Not Going Away” is clear, concise, and false_ But isn't Google saying that you will still be able to sideload via ADB? Which would mean their statement is true, and that your claim that Google's statement is files is itself false? I'm so confused why you never even mention ADB or its relevance to sideloading, which they refer to rather explicitly in their blog post. At the very least, if you think ADB doesn't change anything, you could mention it and say so. Could you explain this seemingly critical omission?
- fyrn_ 11mo ago
  Forcing ADB may as well be a ban, if you don't see that, you're pretty out of touch with consumers. Sideloading is already hard enough for many, forcing the use of an extra computer, a dev tool in the CLI, and dev mode is way way outside what people will do
  - kgwxd 11mo ago
    The number of people that don't even own a general purpose computer is huge. And for those that do, ADB is a ridiculous thing to get setup for a particular device. I get paid to work on android software, and I don't even want to put up with the hassle.
    - dvngnt_ 11mo ago
      you don't need a computer to run adb. there's install with options
      - ashirviskas 11mo ago
        For now
    - xp84 11mo ago
      Yes. And a bigger question is, why should I have to? This is a perfectly functional computer, it is more than capable of downloading a file and running it. It's really sad that Apple and Google (and to some extent MS though they're just behind in this race to the anti-consumer bottom) happened upon this "solution to malware" (note: not a real solution) of "OS vendor vets and controls all software." It's a lazy way, it's an ineffective way, and it has made computers - incredibly flexible, programmable devices - more like cable boxes or telephones from past decades, that you had to rent from a monopolist and had no control over.
doix 11mo ago
I agree with your point about "install" vs "sideload". > Google’s message that “Sideloading is Not Going Away” is clear, concise, and false Given your(and my) definition, this statement is false. Google isn't taking away sideloading, you can still use adb. I'd say using adb to load an apk from another device is the proper use of "sideloading". What Google is doing is much worse, they are taking away your ability to _install_ software. And yes, HN loves splitting hairs. But if it wasn't for the hairsplitting, there probably would be be much discussion. Just most people agreeing with you and a few folks who would prefer to give up freedom for security.
glenstein 11mo ago
Regardless of its origin, its usage in context clearly implies it's supposed to be understood as a non-standard, non-default process. Making preferred software design choices feel like defaults, or making preferred app or distribution ecosystems feel like default is the product of extraordinary and intentional effort to set expectations, and so I don't see it as an accident that the nomenclature would be used for the purposes you describe. I did make a comment in this thread about the historical usage of the term sideload, although for my purposes, I was noting a historical quirk frim a unique time in the history of the internet rather than disputing any premise in your post. It was the first and only comment at the time I posted it and I was not anticipating such an unfortunate backlash that seized on terminology for the purpose of disputing your point, or for otherwise missing your point. But it is indeed missing the point. Requiring developer registration to install is exercising a degree of control over the software ecosystem that's fundamentally out of step with something I regard as a pretty important and fundamental ideal in how software is able to be accessed and used.
akerl_ 11mo ago
Is there no line, in your opinion? At this point, there are computers (many of which run variants of Linux in many cases) in my: 1. Laptop 2. Phone 3. Car 4. Washing machine 5. Handheld GPS 6. E-reader 7. TV Is there some intrinsic different between a device where the manufacturer has programmed it using an ARM/x86-based chip vs a microcontroller vs some other method that means in the 1st case I have the right to install whatever I want? Because that feels like what's happened with cell phones: manufacturers started building them with more capable and powerful components to drive the features they wanted to include, and because those components overlapped what we'd seen in desktop computers, we've decided that we have an intrinsic right to treat them like we historically treated those computers.
- koolala 11mo ago
  Video game consoles?
  - akerl_ 11mo ago
    Good catch. They are similarly noteworthy to phones: there are all kinds of projects and tools built around making custom and modded games for the Gameboy, or hacking the NES, but there wasn't a movement saying Nintendo was violating our fundamental rights by not allowing users to overwrite or modify the code inside the actual console. Then consoles started shipping with recognizable internals, and we had waves of people very frustrated at things like Sony's removal of OtherOS, or Nintendo's attempts to squash the exploits that enabled Wii Homebrew.
- aussieguy1234 11mo ago
  I'd like to be able to install my own software on all of these
  - akerl_ 11mo ago
    I'm not asking what you'd like to do. I'd like to be able to customize all of those things too. I'm asking why taking a device that uses a microcontroller and making a new model with an ARM chipset and a Linux-based OS seems to suddenly make people treat the ability to install custom software on it as a fundamental right.
1vuio0pswjnm7 11mo ago
Could you make the claim that F-Droid is actually safer than "Google Play Store" The plea Google makes against so-called "sideloading" always refers to "malware" But how much malware has been distributed via F-Droid versus "Google Play Store" It could be that smaller, independent "app store" might be better managed than Google's
- GreenVulpine 11mo ago
  Yes, software on F-droid is free and reviewed for anti-features before publishing. Google Play has the worst, ad ridden, dark pattern filled, data guzzling, subscription packed, commercial slop with no real oversight on what gets published. Malware frequently gets on the Play Store, never heard of it being a problem on F-Droid.
  - throwaway48476 11mo ago
    Google is a malware services company. They profit when malware OBS is the first search result when you search for OBS.
- dlcarrier 11mo ago
  Google themselves have mentioned that about half of all malware is installed through their Play Store.
- greatgib 11mo ago
  To me, the question is not even relevant. Whatever the quality of f-droid,each use should be free to decide if they want to use it or not without Google having a life or death choice on the app that you want to use.
- marcprux 11mo ago
  > Could you make the claim that F-Droid is actually safer that "Google Play Store" That is essentially the assertion that we made in the prequel to this post (at https://f-droid.org/en/2025/09/29/google-developer-registration-decree.html https://f-droid.org/en/2025/09/29/google-developer-registrat...). > But how much malware has been distributed via F-Droid versus "Google Play Store" There's been only a single case of malware that we know of that has slipped into distribution on F-Droid (through a supply-chain attack on a transitive dependency), and it was caught within a day. So if we were feeling glib, we might have made the claim that "there is over 224 times as much malware on the Play Store than on F-Droid".
wizardforhire 11mo ago
It’s a hill you don’t have to die alone on! I too am flabbergasted at the utter lack of integrity some show and vocally proclaim in this of all places… corporate shills every last of them.
- yupyupyups 11mo ago
  There is a lot of money to be made in locking down Android and iOS. We should be surprised if companies like Google and Apple are not spreading lies and trying to decieve the public. No morals can be expected from publically traded companies. Finding a "PR firm" willing to do the lowly dirty job of going on HackerNews, MacRumors or wherever people are and blatantly lie and make stuff up shouldn't be too hard either, I can imagine.
CommenterPerson 11mo ago
Sorry about this. This hairsplitting is common on HN comment threads. We lose track of the main theme and nitpick at great length on some word. .. A grateful F-Droid supporter and user.
- beart 11mo ago
  Have to constantly remind others (and myself!) at work that "we aren't focusing on that right now, that's not what this conversation is about". Technical minded people seem to have a real problem of missing the forest for the trees.
asveikau 11mo ago
This community has pockets of people who like authoritarian control, and genuinely believe in Apple or Google Play as some kind of superego that they need to defend, that they believe is protecting us. This surfaces in many types of discussions, including discussions where they may be prompted to defend the locked down nature of mobile devices. I say it's just pockets. A vocal pocket. It's not everyone here. But it elicits comments justifying that stuff, which can feel surprising for those who don't share those views.
- giovannibonetti 11mo ago
  > This community has pockets of people who like authoritarian control, and genuinely believe in Apple or Google Play as some kind of superego that they need to defend, that they believe is protecting us. Perhaps you meant Leviathan instead of superego?
- com2kid 11mo ago
  > This community has pockets of people who like authoritarian control, Alternatively, we've spent our lives helping our parents out. Last year my mom just got completely owned, total taken over of all her financial accounts. The most likely vector was that her phone was out of date and not receiving security patches anymore. Luckily her bank's anti fraud systems kicked in before too much damage was done. Prior to smart phones, many of us remember making monthly, or even weekly, trips to family members houses to remove malware and viruses from personal computers. Things were bad.
  - godelski 11mo ago
    > The most likely vector was that her phone was out of date No one is talking about stopping security patches. Your computer works fine, gets security patches, and you aren't restricted from installing any software on it. Perhaps, as a fellow developer and a HACKER News user, you can understand that the underlying problem is the device security. Amplifying the problem is the surveillance capitalism ecosystem. Your data is valuable, to the trillion dollar companies and to hackers. Which means they need to collect that data and try to drive a fine line of giving them access but no one else. I thought we were all aware that trying to make backdoors is a foolish endeavor. > Prior to smart phones ... to remove malware and viruses from personal computers. Your desktop computer is still a desktop computer. The smart phone didn't change anything there. If you're getting fewer viruses it is because either 1) the user is becoming more proficient, 2) the hackers are becoming less proficient, or 3) (the actual answer) security is getting stronger. Critical to #3 is noting that this has happened without the requirement of app stores. I also want to stress, the enforcement of app stores is the death of phones and general purpose computers. What makes computers (phones included) so great is that they are an ecosystem. You can't make a product for everyone, but you can make an ecosystem that can be adapted to anyone. Without programs these things aren't very useful. We're back in the old days like with the IBMs. Just remember, it took Google and Apple years before they put a flashlight app on their phones, but it only took weeks for developers. If we wait for them to build everything we're going to wait forever and won't get half the stuff we need. >>> You have the right to install whatever you want on your computer, regardless of whether that computer is on your desk or in your pocket. That's a hill I'll die on It is a hill I'll die on too
znort_ 11mo ago
>You have the right to install whatever you want on your computer, regardless of whether that computer is on your desk or in your pocket. That's a hill I'll die on. I'm dismayed to see that this sentiment is not more widespread in this of all communities. agreed, but i'm not going to die on any hill. i don't see much point in this discussion, these corps will do whatever they like. for me it is simple: iphone never was an option precisely because of this reason, and i've been quite content with android, but i don't think my current smartphone will run android for much longer, and the next one will definitely not.
- bfdm 11mo ago
  Very curious what you expect to move to. The market outside those options is extremely limited.
  - znort_ 11mo ago
    it is, but i'm willing to compromise. grapheneos can be an option for a while, ultimately a linux phone. worst case i can settle with 2 phones for a while, one cheap/old stock android exclusively for the bank and such, another one for everything else. it's also a long run, the way things are shaping up i don't expect alternatives to become mainstream but nevertheless getting improved support over time. if we indeed end up in a situation where there is no viable alternative then screw that, i might as well go completely off grid.
eipi10_hn 11mo ago
I think it's better to shut down the project. I used to contribute to privacy projects, but then after being slandered for damaging youtube's "creators" by blocking the trackers, I realize that people enjoy getting f*cked by google and enjoy shilling google collecting personal data. So I stopped, it's better for my mental health and I have more free time for myself.
- lern_too_spel 11mo ago
  That's just the price of developing open source software. People will complain. Don't worry about the people who don't want to use your software. They can make their own. You should only consider stopping your own project when there is a better alternative.
degamad 11mo ago
Another supporter here, chiming in to let you know you're not alone on this hill.
evanmoran 11mo ago
The correct term was always “download”. We should be allowed to download and run anything we want on our own phones.
- deleted 11mo ago
  [deleted]
- echelon 11mo ago
  The fact that Apple and Google have taken away digital freedom on the most important device of our time is shameful and gross. That they've convinced everyone that this is okay, and that they've maintained regulatory capture to keep doing it, is absurd. We need web downloads and installs on Apple and Android immediately. With no "scare walls" or deeply nested and hidden menu settings to enable it. We need the ability to run any kind of tech, including JIT runtimes. Apple and Google shouldn't be able to tell consumers or the industry what type of computing is permissible. Smartphones are the most important device category in the world. They're how people bank, work, navigate, shop, order, communicate, date, order food at restaurants, take photos, -- life without them is impossible. It would be nice to see as much competition as we do with the automotive industry, but the next best thing would be to rid Apple and Google of their draconian overlording of the platforms. Consumers do not have the expertise to articulate this or really understand what is happening to them. This requires regulators and industry professionals to push forward.
o1o1o1 11mo ago
This is mostly a framing war. Calling it "sideloading" makes it sound risky or unusual, but if we called it "installing software on your own device", Apple's and Google's restrictions would seem absurd - like telling homeowners what kind of light bulbs they're allowed to use.
- echelon 11mo ago
  Or what kind of store you can drive to. Imagine if your car was locked to certain manufacturer-permitted destinations. That's what our smartphones have done.
  - 0xedd 11mo ago
    [dead]
  - spogbiper 11mo ago
    > Imagine if your car was locked to certain manufacturer-permitted destinations. not to mention paying your car manufacture a 30% cut on anything you purchase
twothreeone 11mo ago
FWIW, thank you and the team for all the hard work. Me and my family use it to install, discover, and try out many of the genuinely useful and really cool, high-quality Apps on our de-Googled devices and truly appreciate it. I could never imagine using that ad-ridden, user-tracking, scam-infested, filth-flinging abomination they call Play "Store". The only thing that's worse is GCM - you don't even see it's there as a regular user.
palata 11mo ago
> You have the right to install whatever you want on your computer, regardless of whether that computer is on your desk or in your pocket. That's a hill I'll die on. I totally agree with that. BUT: > Splitting hairs about the origin of the term "sideload" does not change You can't start your article by splitting hairs about the meaning of the term, and then complain that people follow down that discussion :-).
- bux93 11mo ago
  Since you're someone who welcomes splitting hairs: "meaning" and "origin" are different things.
  - palata 11mo ago
    Agreed. But splitting hairs is splitting hairs.
jacquesm 11mo ago
You're spot on. Do keep in mind that a lot of people on HN make their money from the empires that the likes of you (and me) despise.
bigstrat2003 11mo ago
> Splitting hairs about the origin of the term "sideload" does not change the fact that those who promote the term tend to do so in order to make it feel deviant and hacker-ish. That is not a fact, that is your opinion. Lots of people say "sideload" without trying to convey such negative meanings. For better or for worse, the term has entered the common lexicon and I very rarely see it used with negative connotations attached to it.
- phendrenad2 11mo ago
  > those who PROMOTE the term > Lots of people SAY "sideload" It's almost like you didn't read the post
- Craighead 11mo ago
  [dead]
- alanbernstein 11mo ago
  I think the verb "promote" was chosen over "say" here very deliberately
- huflungdung 11mo ago
  [dead]
- hypeatei 11mo ago
  > Lots of people say "sideload" without trying to convey such negative meanings Sure, but they effectively do even if they're not trying to. It comes off like you're up to no good or doing something dangerous. Like GP said: deviant.
  - gruez 11mo ago
    >Sure, but they effectively do even if they're not trying to. What specific acts are referring to? Is it just their recent plans to restrict sideloading? This feels circular. "Google is evil because they're trying to restrict sideloading. They're also extra evil because trying to demonize sideloading. How? By restricting sideloading!" >It comes off like you're up to no good or doing something dangerous. Like GP said: deviant. Yes, but only insofar as if you're not taking the primary route, you're taking the "side" route. Or you're "deviating" from the intended route. None of that actually implies you're a "deviant" for doing so, any more than a driver taking side streets to shave 30s is a "deviant".
gruez 11mo ago
>Splitting hairs about the origin of the term "sideload" does not change the fact that those who promote the term tend to do so in order to make it feel deviant and hacker-ish. Can you corroborate this? At least for me, the whole idea that "sideloading" has negative connotations only came up as a result of this debacle, and the only evidence I've seen are some very careful readings of blog posts from Google. The word itself hardly has any negative connotations aside from something like "not primary", which might be argued as negative, but is nonetheless correct. >You don't "sideload" software on your Linux, Windows, or macOS computer: you install it. Right, because those devices don't have first party stores. Windows and Mac technically do, as does some Linux distros, but they're sufficiently unpopular that people don't think of them as the primary source to get apps. Contrast this to a typical Android or iOS phone.
- kragen 11mo ago
  Debian has had a "first party store" since the early 90s, and the truth is the diametrical opposite of "they're sufficiently unpopular that people don't think of them as the primary source to get apps". It's been almost the only way I install software (that I didn't write) on my Debian and Ubuntu machines since I moved to Debian. This is true of most Debian and Ubuntu users.
  - gruez 11mo ago
    >Debian has had a "first party store" since the early 90s, and the truth is the diametrical opposite of "they're sufficiently unpopular that people don't think of them as the primary source to get apps". Aren't those all considered first party apps? Sure, debian aren't the authors of nginx or whatever, but they're the people building, packaging it, and adding patches for it. It's a stretch to compare them to the play store or app store.
    - shakna 11mo ago
      Apt has supported multiple sources since inception. Debian is not the only supplier.
cb321 11mo ago
I would say the situation is worse as this "subscription-esque" model is "spreading" to areas beyond software. Exercise equipment like ellipticals and bicycles - whose software is/could be borderline +/- resistance level trivial - has been moving to "only works with an online subscription" business models for a long time. I mean, I have had instances that controlled resistance with like a manual knob, but these new devices won't let you set levels without some $30+/month subscription. It's like the planned obsolescence of the light bulb cartels of the 1920s on steroids. Personally, I have a hard time believing markets support this kind of stuff past the first exposé. I guess when you don't have many choices or the choices that you do have all bandwagon onto oligopoly/cartel-like activity things, pretty depressing, but stable patterns can emerge. Heck, maybe someone who knows the history of retail could inform us that it came to software "from business segment XYZ". For example, in high finance for a long-time negotiated charging prices that are a fraction of assets under management is not uncommon. Essentially a "percent tax", or in other words the metaphorical "charging Bill Gates a million dollars for a cheeseburger". EDIT: @terminalshort elsethread is correct in his analysis that if you remove the ability to have a platform tax, the control issues will revert.
- rsch 11mo ago
  That planned obsolescence thing on light bulbs isn't the entire story. Light bulbs will last longer if driven less hard, due to the lower temperature. But that lower temperature also means much lower efficiency because the blackbody spectrum shifts even further into the infrared. So some compromise had to be picked between having a reasonable amount of light and a reasonable life span. But yeah agree, this subscription thing is spreading like a cancer.
  - kragen 11mo ago
    Yes, but the compromise didn't have to be an industrywide conspiracy with penalties for manufacturing light bulbs that were too long-lasting and inefficient. But it was. Consumers could have freely chosen short-lived high-efficiency bulbs or long-lived low-efficiency ones. In fact, they could have chosen the latter just by wiring two lightbulb sockets in series, or in later years putting one on a dimmer.
metalman 11mo ago
put a fork in it, it's done,almost! android that is. linux phones are comming up fast, and will be set up to run the droid apps we like. but big props to fdroid just used "etchdroid" to transfer a linux iso to a thumb drive and boot a new desk top, and if I get a few bucks ahead I will buy a dev board from these guys https://liberux.net/ https://liberux.net/ flinuxoid?, flinux?
- sigzero 11mo ago
  Linux phones are...what? Oh, just like Linux won the desktop. Never mind.
  - pksebben 11mo ago
    As far as I'm concerned, it did. Linux is far and away the best OS for my needs so I'll keep using it. Did it "win" more of some metric of perfusion / capital versus the other big two? Perhaps some, mostly not. Who cares. The market is dumb. What matters here is whether the capability exists at all. When it comes to phones, I'm still leery about linux. Support isn't quite wide enough and for a device that I need 110% reliability out of we ain't there yet. I do know one thing - the effects of closed ecosystems that caused 99.99999% of servers to use linux, will eventually come for interface hardware. Companies have periodic bouts of psychosis that make their walled gardens inherently unreliable. It's just a whole lot slower in a realm that doesn't iterate at web-speed. Will that mean everybody uses linux phones in the future? Of course not. But I do hope it will mean I get to put my own phone together with an OS I own, someday. That would be an unequivocal good.
- AppleAtCha 11mo ago
  Google really knew what they were doing by hiring Marc Levoy. The Google camera is the only thing keeping me from getting something other than a pixel phone.
  - deleted 11mo ago
    [deleted]
  - 11mo ago
Frenziefrenz 11mo ago
The way the term "sideloading" suddenly popped up for things like apps and ebooks to make it sound like a weird, special thing has always bothered me. It's just installing an app and putting a ebook on your reader. > You have the right to install whatever you want on your computer, regardless of whether that computer is on your desk or in your pocket. That's a hill I'll die on. Hear, hear!

citizenpaul 11mo ago

[flagged]

tomhow 11mo ago
> In general HN skews towards an incredibly privileged and spoiled crowd > This poem sums up most of HN's politics on control structures. Please let's not have these sweeping generalisations about the HN community or this grandiose "first they came" rhetoric. The HN community is a bell curve like any other large group of people. All the evidence I see from looking at the discussions for hours each day is that it skews left-libertarian - i.e., supports individual freedoms and opposes government and corporate authoritarianism. This is what you would expect from a cohort of people dominated by technology employees and freelancers, of whom most are deeply supportive of the principles of open-source software and the freedom to do what you please with your devices. It also includes huge numbers of people from different places around the world who are not at all "privileged" and "spoiled". Of course there will always be exceptions in a large group of people – or really, the other end of the bell curve. But this broad-strokes characterisation of the HN community as a whole makes no sense at all. The guidelines ask us to do better than this, in all these different ways: Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes. Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community. Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents. Omit internet tropes. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Ajedi32 11mo ago

I agree it's a pointless distraction, but it's a distraction you instigated by trying to language police your own supporters. I and most others who use the term sideloading don't use it because we want to make sideloading "feel deviant and hacker-ish", we use it because it's the commonly accepted term for installing apps outside the app store. I'm open to alternative phrasing, but "direct install" doesn't work because installing apps from F-Droid isn't a "direct install" and "installing" doesn't work because that doesn't distinguish from installing from the Play Store. "Sideloading" is simply the correct word, and I've yet to see a better alternative. There's no reason to be ashamed of it, or accuse people of being part of some conspiracy for calling it that. If anything, the fact that Google feels the need to disingenuously argue "sideloading isn't going away" suggests to me that the term sideloading has a good reputation in the public consciousness, not a negative one. Let's just focus on the fact that Google is trying to take away Android users' ability to install software that Google doesn't approve of, and not stress so much about what words people use to describe that.

dotancohen 11mo ago
> and "installing" doesn't work because that doesn't distinguish from installing from the Play Store I'm not choosing sides, but why do you need a term to distinguish from installing from the Play Store? On my Debian machine I install git from apt (officially supported) but also install Anki from a tarball I downloaded from a website. Same term `install`.
- kragen 11mo ago
  Because Google isn't trying to prevent installing, just "sideloading".
  - realusername 11mo ago
    If anything, it's the playstore which is a side channel and the website of the software producer the main one.
    - 11mo ago

Imustaskforhelp 11mo ago

Hey, I hope you have a nice day. F-droid is one of the communities which was really a key role in, what open source project should I recommend if given the power to, for people to gain maximum impact on, and f-droid was one of the tops in that charts, so much so that I really tinkered with android apps creation with rust/tauri just to create an android app for f-droid (building android apps is hard I must admit, which makes my appreciation for apps on f-droid even more lovely) > You have the right to install whatever you want on your computer, regardless of whether that computer is on your desk or in your pocket. That's a hill I'll die on I feel like there are some phones, I will say my honest experience, I had a xiaomi phone which required me to unlock the bootloader for me to root it/ remove the spyware that I feel it has, I never felt safe really (maybe paranoia?) but I wanted an open source operating system on it and that required me to unlock my bootloader Which required me to create an MI Unlock / MI account which then later required me to open up a windows computer and try to do things with the windows computer I didn't have a windows computer, I am a linux guy and I didn't want to touch windows and I tried any option available on linux (there was a java thing and some other exploit too but both failed) Later, I tried to actually install win-boat and tried to install the mi tool in it after so many nights of work and I tried and it actually opened but it asked me for the otp to sign up but I don't know if I overwhelmed their system or not but their OTP just straight up didn't show on the phone's sim I had registered on. That OTP not coming after 5-6 tries, I am not sure if they had detected it was win-boat or what, but idk, that effectively locks me out of ways to unlock the device and remove some spyware functionality I think it has. I feel like this case made me feel as if although I had a device, it feels like a license when you think about it. This is true for many other consumer devices as well and thus, people accepting the fact that their devices have become similar to licenses, not hardware which they own, but rather software which they rent > I'm dismayed to see that this sentiment is not more widespread in this of all communities. I feel like your message is in the right heart, and its honestly okay, sad even, that some part of the community didn't respond to your message in agreement. But Honestly, please don't lose hope because of this, You and people/foundations like f-droid,linux etc. inspire a sense of confidence for a good future while actively working on it. I was thinking of trying to host some f-droid mirror but I didn't personally because I was a little skeptical of getting any notices or anything after the f-droid team had created a blog post about something similar. Also one thing, I would try to tell you is that you are trying your best. And that's all that matters. What doesn't matter is the past or the future or how the community responds but rather doing what you think is right with correct intentions which I think you do a perfect job in. Doing the right thing can be difficult but maybe in a world where doing the right thing isn't rewarded as much in even mere appreciation or sharing the sentiment whereas doing the wrong thing is financially rewarded. its a complicated world we live in, but hopefully, we all can try to make it a little more beautiful for us and our future generations by trying to do things the right way no matter how hard they are, just because its the right thing. I may speak these things but I myself regularly contradict these. So I don't feel the best guy speaking this stuff but I just want to say that f-droid really means a lot to me, a recent example is how I ditched that xiaomi phone, used my mum's old moto phone, tried to install termux from playstore but it couldn't download for some reason from play store because it was android 8 yet theoretically it should work, but I then opened up f-droid and installed it from there and I am running a termux/gitea server on it now :) Please, have a nice day, F-droid/you deserve it, I just hope that you recognize that there are people's lives that you have touched (like my termux thing and there are countless other stories as well) and how impactful the project is. Lets use this comment as a way to show our appreciation to f-droid in whatever ways it has touched our lives and how effectively google's recent moves are really gonna impact f-droid/ hurt us as well. How I wouldn't have been able to run git server on my phone if it wasn't for f-droid and so much more.

dataflow 11mo ago

Hey, question. While I'm also miffed about Google's decision and see your point about the term sideloading, there is another elephant in the room you seem to not be addressing here. You write: > “Sideloading is Not Going Away” is clear, concise, and false_ But isn't Google saying that you will still be able to sideload via ADB? Which would mean their statement is true, and that your claim that Google's statement is files is itself false? I'm so confused why you never even mention ADB or its relevance to sideloading, which they refer to rather explicitly in their blog post. At the very least, if you think ADB doesn't change anything, you could mention it and say so. Could you explain this seemingly critical omission?

fyrn_ 11mo ago
Forcing ADB may as well be a ban, if you don't see that, you're pretty out of touch with consumers. Sideloading is already hard enough for many, forcing the use of an extra computer, a dev tool in the CLI, and dev mode is way way outside what people will do
- kgwxd 11mo ago
  The number of people that don't even own a general purpose computer is huge. And for those that do, ADB is a ridiculous thing to get setup for a particular device. I get paid to work on android software, and I don't even want to put up with the hassle.
  - dvngnt_ 11mo ago
    you don't need a computer to run adb. there's install with options
    - ashirviskas 11mo ago
      For now
  - xp84 11mo ago
    Yes. And a bigger question is, why should I have to? This is a perfectly functional computer, it is more than capable of downloading a file and running it. It's really sad that Apple and Google (and to some extent MS though they're just behind in this race to the anti-consumer bottom) happened upon this "solution to malware" (note: not a real solution) of "OS vendor vets and controls all software." It's a lazy way, it's an ineffective way, and it has made computers - incredibly flexible, programmable devices - more like cable boxes or telephones from past decades, that you had to rent from a monopolist and had no control over.

doix 11mo ago

I agree with your point about "install" vs "sideload". > Google’s message that “Sideloading is Not Going Away” is clear, concise, and false Given your(and my) definition, this statement is false. Google isn't taking away sideloading, you can still use adb. I'd say using adb to load an apk from another device is the proper use of "sideloading". What Google is doing is much worse, they are taking away your ability to _install_ software. And yes, HN loves splitting hairs. But if it wasn't for the hairsplitting, there probably would be be much discussion. Just most people agreeing with you and a few folks who would prefer to give up freedom for security.

glenstein 11mo ago

Regardless of its origin, its usage in context clearly implies it's supposed to be understood as a non-standard, non-default process. Making preferred software design choices feel like defaults, or making preferred app or distribution ecosystems feel like default is the product of extraordinary and intentional effort to set expectations, and so I don't see it as an accident that the nomenclature would be used for the purposes you describe. I did make a comment in this thread about the historical usage of the term sideload, although for my purposes, I was noting a historical quirk frim a unique time in the history of the internet rather than disputing any premise in your post. It was the first and only comment at the time I posted it and I was not anticipating such an unfortunate backlash that seized on terminology for the purpose of disputing your point, or for otherwise missing your point. But it is indeed missing the point. Requiring developer registration to install is exercising a degree of control over the software ecosystem that's fundamentally out of step with something I regard as a pretty important and fundamental ideal in how software is able to be accessed and used.

akerl_ 11mo ago

Is there no line, in your opinion? At this point, there are computers (many of which run variants of Linux in many cases) in my: 1. Laptop 2. Phone 3. Car 4. Washing machine 5. Handheld GPS 6. E-reader 7. TV Is there some intrinsic different between a device where the manufacturer has programmed it using an ARM/x86-based chip vs a microcontroller vs some other method that means in the 1st case I have the right to install whatever I want? Because that feels like what's happened with cell phones: manufacturers started building them with more capable and powerful components to drive the features they wanted to include, and because those components overlapped what we'd seen in desktop computers, we've decided that we have an intrinsic right to treat them like we historically treated those computers.

koolala 11mo ago
Video game consoles?
- akerl_ 11mo ago
  Good catch. They are similarly noteworthy to phones: there are all kinds of projects and tools built around making custom and modded games for the Gameboy, or hacking the NES, but there wasn't a movement saying Nintendo was violating our fundamental rights by not allowing users to overwrite or modify the code inside the actual console. Then consoles started shipping with recognizable internals, and we had waves of people very frustrated at things like Sony's removal of OtherOS, or Nintendo's attempts to squash the exploits that enabled Wii Homebrew.
aussieguy1234 11mo ago
I'd like to be able to install my own software on all of these
- akerl_ 11mo ago
  I'm not asking what you'd like to do. I'd like to be able to customize all of those things too. I'm asking why taking a device that uses a microcontroller and making a new model with an ARM chipset and a Linux-based OS seems to suddenly make people treat the ability to install custom software on it as a fundamental right.

1vuio0pswjnm7 11mo ago

Could you make the claim that F-Droid is actually safer than "Google Play Store" The plea Google makes against so-called "sideloading" always refers to "malware" But how much malware has been distributed via F-Droid versus "Google Play Store" It could be that smaller, independent "app store" might be better managed than Google's

GreenVulpine 11mo ago
Yes, software on F-droid is free and reviewed for anti-features before publishing. Google Play has the worst, ad ridden, dark pattern filled, data guzzling, subscription packed, commercial slop with no real oversight on what gets published. Malware frequently gets on the Play Store, never heard of it being a problem on F-Droid.
- throwaway48476 11mo ago
  Google is a malware services company. They profit when malware OBS is the first search result when you search for OBS.
dlcarrier 11mo ago
Google themselves have mentioned that about half of all malware is installed through their Play Store.
greatgib 11mo ago
To me, the question is not even relevant. Whatever the quality of f-droid,each use should be free to decide if they want to use it or not without Google having a life or death choice on the app that you want to use.
marcprux 11mo ago
> Could you make the claim that F-Droid is actually safer that "Google Play Store" That is essentially the assertion that we made in the prequel to this post (at https://f-droid.org/en/2025/09/29/google-developer-registration-decree.html https://f-droid.org/en/2025/09/29/google-developer-registrat...). > But how much malware has been distributed via F-Droid versus "Google Play Store" There's been only a single case of malware that we know of that has slipped into distribution on F-Droid (through a supply-chain attack on a transitive dependency), and it was caught within a day. So if we were feeling glib, we might have made the claim that "there is over 224 times as much malware on the Play Store than on F-Droid".

wizardforhire 11mo ago

It’s a hill you don’t have to die alone on! I too am flabbergasted at the utter lack of integrity some show and vocally proclaim in this of all places… corporate shills every last of them.

yupyupyups 11mo ago
There is a lot of money to be made in locking down Android and iOS. We should be surprised if companies like Google and Apple are not spreading lies and trying to decieve the public. No morals can be expected from publically traded companies. Finding a "PR firm" willing to do the lowly dirty job of going on HackerNews, MacRumors or wherever people are and blatantly lie and make stuff up shouldn't be too hard either, I can imagine.

CommenterPerson 11mo ago

Sorry about this. This hairsplitting is common on HN comment threads. We lose track of the main theme and nitpick at great length on some word. .. A grateful F-Droid supporter and user.

beart 11mo ago
Have to constantly remind others (and myself!) at work that "we aren't focusing on that right now, that's not what this conversation is about". Technical minded people seem to have a real problem of missing the forest for the trees.

asveikau 11mo ago

This community has pockets of people who like authoritarian control, and genuinely believe in Apple or Google Play as some kind of superego that they need to defend, that they believe is protecting us. This surfaces in many types of discussions, including discussions where they may be prompted to defend the locked down nature of mobile devices. I say it's just pockets. A vocal pocket. It's not everyone here. But it elicits comments justifying that stuff, which can feel surprising for those who don't share those views.

giovannibonetti 11mo ago
> This community has pockets of people who like authoritarian control, and genuinely believe in Apple or Google Play as some kind of superego that they need to defend, that they believe is protecting us. Perhaps you meant Leviathan instead of superego?
com2kid 11mo ago
> This community has pockets of people who like authoritarian control, Alternatively, we've spent our lives helping our parents out. Last year my mom just got completely owned, total taken over of all her financial accounts. The most likely vector was that her phone was out of date and not receiving security patches anymore. Luckily her bank's anti fraud systems kicked in before too much damage was done. Prior to smart phones, many of us remember making monthly, or even weekly, trips to family members houses to remove malware and viruses from personal computers. Things were bad.
- godelski 11mo ago
  > The most likely vector was that her phone was out of date No one is talking about stopping security patches. Your computer works fine, gets security patches, and you aren't restricted from installing any software on it. Perhaps, as a fellow developer and a HACKER News user, you can understand that the underlying problem is the device security. Amplifying the problem is the surveillance capitalism ecosystem. Your data is valuable, to the trillion dollar companies and to hackers. Which means they need to collect that data and try to drive a fine line of giving them access but no one else. I thought we were all aware that trying to make backdoors is a foolish endeavor. > Prior to smart phones ... to remove malware and viruses from personal computers. Your desktop computer is still a desktop computer. The smart phone didn't change anything there. If you're getting fewer viruses it is because either 1) the user is becoming more proficient, 2) the hackers are becoming less proficient, or 3) (the actual answer) security is getting stronger. Critical to #3 is noting that this has happened without the requirement of app stores. I also want to stress, the enforcement of app stores is the death of phones and general purpose computers. What makes computers (phones included) so great is that they are an ecosystem. You can't make a product for everyone, but you can make an ecosystem that can be adapted to anyone. Without programs these things aren't very useful. We're back in the old days like with the IBMs. Just remember, it took Google and Apple years before they put a flashlight app on their phones, but it only took weeks for developers. If we wait for them to build everything we're going to wait forever and won't get half the stuff we need. >>> You have the right to install whatever you want on your computer, regardless of whether that computer is on your desk or in your pocket. That's a hill I'll die on It is a hill I'll die on too

znort_ 11mo ago

>You have the right to install whatever you want on your computer, regardless of whether that computer is on your desk or in your pocket. That's a hill I'll die on. I'm dismayed to see that this sentiment is not more widespread in this of all communities. agreed, but i'm not going to die on any hill. i don't see much point in this discussion, these corps will do whatever they like. for me it is simple: iphone never was an option precisely because of this reason, and i've been quite content with android, but i don't think my current smartphone will run android for much longer, and the next one will definitely not.

bfdm 11mo ago
Very curious what you expect to move to. The market outside those options is extremely limited.
- znort_ 11mo ago
  it is, but i'm willing to compromise. grapheneos can be an option for a while, ultimately a linux phone. worst case i can settle with 2 phones for a while, one cheap/old stock android exclusively for the bank and such, another one for everything else. it's also a long run, the way things are shaping up i don't expect alternatives to become mainstream but nevertheless getting improved support over time. if we indeed end up in a situation where there is no viable alternative then screw that, i might as well go completely off grid.

eipi10_hn 11mo ago

I think it's better to shut down the project. I used to contribute to privacy projects, but then after being slandered for damaging youtube's "creators" by blocking the trackers, I realize that people enjoy getting f*cked by google and enjoy shilling google collecting personal data. So I stopped, it's better for my mental health and I have more free time for myself.

lern_too_spel 11mo ago
That's just the price of developing open source software. People will complain. Don't worry about the people who don't want to use your software. They can make their own. You should only consider stopping your own project when there is a better alternative.

degamad 11mo ago

Another supporter here, chiming in to let you know you're not alone on this hill.

evanmoran 11mo ago

The correct term was always “download”. We should be allowed to download and run anything we want on our own phones.

deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]
echelon 11mo ago
The fact that Apple and Google have taken away digital freedom on the most important device of our time is shameful and gross. That they've convinced everyone that this is okay, and that they've maintained regulatory capture to keep doing it, is absurd. We need web downloads and installs on Apple and Android immediately. With no "scare walls" or deeply nested and hidden menu settings to enable it. We need the ability to run any kind of tech, including JIT runtimes. Apple and Google shouldn't be able to tell consumers or the industry what type of computing is permissible. Smartphones are the most important device category in the world. They're how people bank, work, navigate, shop, order, communicate, date, order food at restaurants, take photos, -- life without them is impossible. It would be nice to see as much competition as we do with the automotive industry, but the next best thing would be to rid Apple and Google of their draconian overlording of the platforms. Consumers do not have the expertise to articulate this or really understand what is happening to them. This requires regulators and industry professionals to push forward.

o1o1o1 11mo ago

This is mostly a framing war. Calling it "sideloading" makes it sound risky or unusual, but if we called it "installing software on your own device", Apple's and Google's restrictions would seem absurd - like telling homeowners what kind of light bulbs they're allowed to use.

echelon 11mo ago
Or what kind of store you can drive to. Imagine if your car was locked to certain manufacturer-permitted destinations. That's what our smartphones have done.
- 0xedd 11mo ago
  [dead]
- spogbiper 11mo ago
  > Imagine if your car was locked to certain manufacturer-permitted destinations. not to mention paying your car manufacture a 30% cut on anything you purchase

twothreeone 11mo ago

FWIW, thank you and the team for all the hard work. Me and my family use it to install, discover, and try out many of the genuinely useful and really cool, high-quality Apps on our de-Googled devices and truly appreciate it. I could never imagine using that ad-ridden, user-tracking, scam-infested, filth-flinging abomination they call Play "Store". The only thing that's worse is GCM - you don't even see it's there as a regular user.

palata 11mo ago

> You have the right to install whatever you want on your computer, regardless of whether that computer is on your desk or in your pocket. That's a hill I'll die on. I totally agree with that. BUT: > Splitting hairs about the origin of the term "sideload" does not change You can't start your article by splitting hairs about the meaning of the term, and then complain that people follow down that discussion :-).

bux93 11mo ago
Since you're someone who welcomes splitting hairs: "meaning" and "origin" are different things.
- palata 11mo ago
  Agreed. But splitting hairs is splitting hairs.

jacquesm 11mo ago

You're spot on. Do keep in mind that a lot of people on HN make their money from the empires that the likes of you (and me) despise.

bigstrat2003 11mo ago

> Splitting hairs about the origin of the term "sideload" does not change the fact that those who promote the term tend to do so in order to make it feel deviant and hacker-ish. That is not a fact, that is your opinion. Lots of people say "sideload" without trying to convey such negative meanings. For better or for worse, the term has entered the common lexicon and I very rarely see it used with negative connotations attached to it.

phendrenad2 11mo ago
> those who PROMOTE the term > Lots of people SAY "sideload" It's almost like you didn't read the post
Craighead 11mo ago
[dead]
alanbernstein 11mo ago
I think the verb "promote" was chosen over "say" here very deliberately
huflungdung 11mo ago
[dead]
hypeatei 11mo ago
> Lots of people say "sideload" without trying to convey such negative meanings Sure, but they effectively do even if they're not trying to. It comes off like you're up to no good or doing something dangerous. Like GP said: deviant.
- gruez 11mo ago
  >Sure, but they effectively do even if they're not trying to. What specific acts are referring to? Is it just their recent plans to restrict sideloading? This feels circular. "Google is evil because they're trying to restrict sideloading. They're also extra evil because trying to demonize sideloading. How? By restricting sideloading!" >It comes off like you're up to no good or doing something dangerous. Like GP said: deviant. Yes, but only insofar as if you're not taking the primary route, you're taking the "side" route. Or you're "deviating" from the intended route. None of that actually implies you're a "deviant" for doing so, any more than a driver taking side streets to shave 30s is a "deviant".

gruez 11mo ago

>Splitting hairs about the origin of the term "sideload" does not change the fact that those who promote the term tend to do so in order to make it feel deviant and hacker-ish. Can you corroborate this? At least for me, the whole idea that "sideloading" has negative connotations only came up as a result of this debacle, and the only evidence I've seen are some very careful readings of blog posts from Google. The word itself hardly has any negative connotations aside from something like "not primary", which might be argued as negative, but is nonetheless correct. >You don't "sideload" software on your Linux, Windows, or macOS computer: you install it. Right, because those devices don't have first party stores. Windows and Mac technically do, as does some Linux distros, but they're sufficiently unpopular that people don't think of them as the primary source to get apps. Contrast this to a typical Android or iOS phone.

kragen 11mo ago
Debian has had a "first party store" since the early 90s, and the truth is the diametrical opposite of "they're sufficiently unpopular that people don't think of them as the primary source to get apps". It's been almost the only way I install software (that I didn't write) on my Debian and Ubuntu machines since I moved to Debian. This is true of most Debian and Ubuntu users.
- gruez 11mo ago
  >Debian has had a "first party store" since the early 90s, and the truth is the diametrical opposite of "they're sufficiently unpopular that people don't think of them as the primary source to get apps". Aren't those all considered first party apps? Sure, debian aren't the authors of nginx or whatever, but they're the people building, packaging it, and adding patches for it. It's a stretch to compare them to the play store or app store.
  - shakna 11mo ago
    Apt has supported multiple sources since inception. Debian is not the only supplier.

cb321 11mo ago

I would say the situation is worse as this "subscription-esque" model is "spreading" to areas beyond software. Exercise equipment like ellipticals and bicycles - whose software is/could be borderline +/- resistance level trivial - has been moving to "only works with an online subscription" business models for a long time. I mean, I have had instances that controlled resistance with like a manual knob, but these new devices won't let you set levels without some $30+/month subscription. It's like the planned obsolescence of the light bulb cartels of the 1920s on steroids. Personally, I have a hard time believing markets support this kind of stuff past the first exposé. I guess when you don't have many choices or the choices that you do have all bandwagon onto oligopoly/cartel-like activity things, pretty depressing, but stable patterns can emerge. Heck, maybe someone who knows the history of retail could inform us that it came to software "from business segment XYZ". For example, in high finance for a long-time negotiated charging prices that are a fraction of assets under management is not uncommon. Essentially a "percent tax", or in other words the metaphorical "charging Bill Gates a million dollars for a cheeseburger". EDIT: @terminalshort elsethread is correct in his analysis that if you remove the ability to have a platform tax, the control issues will revert.

rsch 11mo ago
That planned obsolescence thing on light bulbs isn't the entire story. Light bulbs will last longer if driven less hard, due to the lower temperature. But that lower temperature also means much lower efficiency because the blackbody spectrum shifts even further into the infrared. So some compromise had to be picked between having a reasonable amount of light and a reasonable life span. But yeah agree, this subscription thing is spreading like a cancer.
- kragen 11mo ago
  Yes, but the compromise didn't have to be an industrywide conspiracy with penalties for manufacturing light bulbs that were too long-lasting and inefficient. But it was. Consumers could have freely chosen short-lived high-efficiency bulbs or long-lived low-efficiency ones. In fact, they could have chosen the latter just by wiring two lightbulb sockets in series, or in later years putting one on a dimmer.

metalman 11mo ago

put a fork in it, it's done,almost! android that is. linux phones are comming up fast, and will be set up to run the droid apps we like. but big props to fdroid just used "etchdroid" to transfer a linux iso to a thumb drive and boot a new desk top, and if I get a few bucks ahead I will buy a dev board from these guys https://liberux.net/ https://liberux.net/ flinuxoid?, flinux?

sigzero 11mo ago
Linux phones are...what? Oh, just like Linux won the desktop. Never mind.
- pksebben 11mo ago
  As far as I'm concerned, it did. Linux is far and away the best OS for my needs so I'll keep using it. Did it "win" more of some metric of perfusion / capital versus the other big two? Perhaps some, mostly not. Who cares. The market is dumb. What matters here is whether the capability exists at all. When it comes to phones, I'm still leery about linux. Support isn't quite wide enough and for a device that I need 110% reliability out of we ain't there yet. I do know one thing - the effects of closed ecosystems that caused 99.99999% of servers to use linux, will eventually come for interface hardware. Companies have periodic bouts of psychosis that make their walled gardens inherently unreliable. It's just a whole lot slower in a realm that doesn't iterate at web-speed. Will that mean everybody uses linux phones in the future? Of course not. But I do hope it will mean I get to put my own phone together with an OS I own, someday. That would be an unequivocal good.
AppleAtCha 11mo ago
Google really knew what they were doing by hiring Marc Levoy. The Google camera is the only thing keeping me from getting something other than a pixel phone.
- deleted 11mo ago
  [deleted]
- 11mo ago

Frenziefrenz 11mo ago

The way the term "sideloading" suddenly popped up for things like apps and ebooks to make it sound like a weird, special thing has always bothered me. It's just installing an app and putting a ebook on your reader. > You have the right to install whatever you want on your computer, regardless of whether that computer is on your desk or in your pocket. That's a hill I'll die on. Hear, hear!