"Sideloading" isn't a thing. That's a term to shame and discredit people and apps installed outside of the official stores. Just like people got shamed by "jaywalking" for merely crossing the street. Both of those things were, are, and always should be the norm.
Because it isn't real. You aren't "sideloading". You're simply installing apps. You're not doing anything different, other than using a source that the big company does not like.
helenslunch@feddit.nl
on 02 Oct 14:56
nextcollapse
That didn’t answer my question.
Sideloading just means you’re installing apps from outside the first party app store. Im not sure where youre getting the shame and discrediting from.
It did, you just did not accept the answer. Installing apps is just installing apps, regardless of its source. That's it. Sideloading, just like jaywalking, makes it sound like you are doing something dangerous, something forbidden, something you should not do. The whole locking down of operating systems is to take control away from the user.
helenslunch@feddit.nl
on 02 Oct 16:45
nextcollapse
It did, you just did not accept the answer.
No. It didn’t. You just repeated the same statement with no explanation or justification.
Installing apps is just installing apps, regardless of its source.
You’re mad that a term exists that specifies their source?
Sideloading, just like jaywalking, makes it sound like you are doing something dangerous, something forbidden, something you should not do.
…how? Honestly this sounds like something you made up in your head. I don’t understand why you refuse to answer the question.
The whole locking down of operating systems is to take control away from the user.
I don’t understand what that has to do with this conversation.
Maybe look for someone else, because I really don't have the time nor motivation for delusional internet arguments with willfully obtuse people.
Edit: Downvoters might want to check their profile, because they're doing the same shit to other people. Very clearly a troll.
TheOneAndOnly@lemmy.world
on 02 Oct 17:07
nextcollapse
Bruh… Then what are you doing commenting on Lemmy? Lol!
I guess even in my nihilistic mind is still too optimistic when it comes to people. I should just stop giving them the benefit of the doubt and just accept that almost everyone will argue in bad faith.
Sideloading is a term that’s been around for decades, it’s not some made up word by tech giants to make people scared of installing apps.
The term originates from a designation for transferring data between physical devices and was slowly adopted (because language is fluid) to its current definition (by people on forums like xda).
This isn’t some conspiracy and Google and apple don’t need to use coded language to prevent you from side loading, apple for example just outwardly and bluntly forbids it.
Takumidesh@lemmy.world
on 02 Oct 15:48
nextcollapse
It needs a definition because it is a thing that happens though.
You need to differentiate between installing from the app store and installing from other sources, you might not like the choice of word, but we need a word to define it.
Go ask your mom who had to deal with your limewire phase in high-school if you can “sideload” apps on her phone.
You want sources or something, what are you expecting dude?
Takumidesh@lemmy.world
on 02 Oct 20:03
nextcollapse
I think any unknown phrase and method to install an app will be scary to a person who is that unknowledgeable about it. At that point there isn’t any phrase that you could use that wouldn’t sound sketchy to them, it isn’t the phrase that is the problem, it’s the fact that it’s unknown and the process is scary.
The people you are describing would still be skeptical even if you explained it to them (and they should be, since they likely don’t have the knowledge or resources to properly vet an application from an unknown source)
You guys are kind of missing my point and hyper focusing on the word here.
There is nothing inherently dangerous about the word sidealley but if you’re at night with someone that is already fearful of the city and you tell them you are taking a sidealley, they might not be so willing.
Someone that doesn’t know how to drive well will probably avoid the bumpy and confusing sideroads.
The word has negative connotation and it’s use is benefiting Google. That’s my main point, maybe I should of used less safe instead of dangerous.
I think we more just disagree with your points rather than miss them. We have never seen this term be scary for the non technically involved people in our lives, nor has the examples you provided to prove your point been considered scary to people we know.
Many times, people in this chain have effectively asked for proof of what you claim, but you just keep reiterating your feeling/opinion.
Now, it’s possible that everyone here just associates with people who aren’t afraid of technology enough to run across it, but that’s all we have to work with until provided evidence.
Hammerheart@programming.dev
on 03 Oct 20:34
collapse
Because it’s not downloading, which is the thing every one thinks is normal. It’s different, and potentially dangerous, which your phone will remind you any time you try to do it.
Because it’s not downloading, which is the thing every one thinks is normal.
Not sure I get what you mean by this
OmegaLemmy@discuss.online
on 05 Oct 05:30
collapse
Before I knew what sideloading was I just assumed it was a different way of getting apps
DarkThoughts@fedia.io
on 02 Oct 16:34
nextcollapse
It has a definition already, which is the same it always has been. And no, you don't need to differentiate this. We've always installed applications from outside sources. Hell, until recently there weren't even official app stores and shit. Locked down operating systems where you only get what the tech giant wants you to get is a very recent development in order to take control away from the user.
The reality is that there is a difference now, and it needs to be clarified. How would you, talking to another regular human being communicate to install an app that isn’t in the official app store succinctly? If you just tell someone to ‘install the app’ then you are doing a bad job communicating. Economy of language means that new words are going to form to distill common concepts.
Package managers have existed for a long time, so the concept of app stores isn’t new and is actually generally the accepted solution by the open source community. It’s typically regarded as the safest way to install software as it comes with auditing and active management.
Side loading does a great job at communicating what is being done, and it helps consolidate the various ways you actually install applications into a nice generic term.
A store being locked down doesn’t really have much to do with the concept of side loading anyway, since a locked down device doesn’t support it in the first place.
I was extremely surprised that Apple let Christian publish this originally, they have blocked alternative YouTube clients for years. At the time I thought that Apple is doing this to spite Google who didn’t release native app for VisionOS. Christian had a good relationship with Apple and could deliver something high quality so there’s that too. Curious that they changed their mind but it’s safe to assume Apple and Google had to work it out.
Sent from Apollo Voyager
cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 02 Oct 11:25
nextcollapse
this sort of thing is exactly why mozilla, firefox, and - more specifically - a non-profit internet is essential to it’s survival. two for profit ad-driven companies being the gatekeepers of the internet is horrible.
TheRealKuni@lemmy.world
on 02 Oct 12:49
nextcollapse
I had forgotten the name of his Vision Pro app, so I was very confused. Is it 1998 and they’re banning my dial-up internet/email service?
Juno: Because email was meant to be free!
bluemellophone@lemmy.world
on 02 Oct 19:29
collapse
Dang, I used to have so many Juno disks. What a flashback.
I am typing this on Voyager, but would love to have a Lemmy client developed by Christian.
helenslunch@feddit.nl
on 02 Oct 14:48
nextcollapse
YT shooting themselves in the foot here. Someone makes a third party client that keeps ads and doesnt allow for downloading, and generally (probably) makes the YT experience not absolute shit and they have to get rid of it, ensuring people just keep using the ones that don’t.
LunchMoneyThief@links.hackliberty.org
on 02 Oct 16:10
nextcollapse
Direct consequence of sourcing all your software from a centralized, huge corporation controlled “app store”. That is hilarious.
Will mobile users ever tire of getting b1tchslapped by their masters?
We should be fighting the laws that enable them to do this shit instead of whining about how Apple is adhering to them being allowed to protect their IP from people circumventing their bullshit forced ads.
Apple, for all their faults elsewhere, is only complying to what YouTube has a legal right to do. Don’t like it? Go after the law. Not those that have to abide it.
The problem isn’t Apple. It’s the laws that allow YouTube to do the heinous bullshit they do.
Man. Lemmy really needs a stickied post in every community that defines nuance and how to properly use it in everyday situations.
threaded - newest
The best way is to migrate away to other platforms wherever possible, but in the interim, fuck you, Google.
the app in question was
so your alternatives might not be the best fit here.
Haha, ooooooooops.
(But hey, I guess Android users can get some mileage out of it.)
Poor Christian. First Reddit now YouTube
He’s a great developer but he needs to find a way not to be so reliant on giant tech companies to make his apps viable.
All technology development stands on the shoulders of giants. It’s unethical for modern giants to refuse to continue the tradition.
I hope this frees up time to invest more time in a passion project for himself. I want nothing but contentment for that guy.
Read this as contemptment 3 or 4 times and was very confused.
This is why side loading is important. Fuck apple and google
"Sideloading" isn't a thing. That's a term to shame and discredit people and apps installed outside of the official stores. Just like people got shamed by "jaywalking" for merely crossing the street. Both of those things were, are, and always should be the norm.
…where ever did you get that idea from?
Because it isn't real. You aren't "sideloading". You're simply installing apps. You're not doing anything different, other than using a source that the big company does not like.
That didn’t answer my question.
Sideloading just means you’re installing apps from outside the first party app store. Im not sure where youre getting the shame and discrediting from.
It did, you just did not accept the answer. Installing apps is just installing apps, regardless of its source. That's it. Sideloading, just like jaywalking, makes it sound like you are doing something dangerous, something forbidden, something you should not do. The whole locking down of operating systems is to take control away from the user.
No. It didn’t. You just repeated the same statement with no explanation or justification.
You’re mad that a term exists that specifies their source?
…how? Honestly this sounds like something you made up in your head. I don’t understand why you refuse to answer the question.
I don’t understand what that has to do with this conversation.
Maybe look for someone else, because I really don't have the time nor motivation for delusional internet arguments with willfully obtuse people.
Edit: Downvoters might want to check their profile, because they're doing the same shit to other people. Very clearly a troll.
Bruh… Then what are you doing commenting on Lemmy? Lol!
I guess even in my nihilistic mind is still too optimistic when it comes to people. I should just stop giving them the benefit of the doubt and just accept that almost everyone will argue in bad faith.
🙈we lost one
Right, you repeatedly refuse to answer simple questions and I’m the “wilfully obtuse” one. Okay.
Sideloading is a term that’s been around for decades, it’s not some made up word by tech giants to make people scared of installing apps.
The term originates from a designation for transferring data between physical devices and was slowly adopted (because language is fluid) to its current definition (by people on forums like xda).
This isn’t some conspiracy and Google and apple don’t need to use coded language to prevent you from side loading, apple for example just outwardly and bluntly forbids it.
It needs a definition because it is a thing that happens though.
You need to differentiate between installing from the app store and installing from other sources, you might not like the choice of word, but we need a word to define it.
Yes but sideloading makes it sound like something dangerous to people that don’t know any better. This is by design.
…according to whom? Who came up with this? If they called it “dangerloading” I’d be all on your side.
For tech illiterate people, it sounds bad.
Again I ask, how? There’s absolutely nothing in the name to suggest it is “dangerous” or “bad”.
Tech illiterate people will not understand it at all.
Go ask your mom who had to deal with your limewire phase in high-school if you can “sideload” apps on her phone.
You want sources or something, what are you expecting dude?
I think any unknown phrase and method to install an app will be scary to a person who is that unknowledgeable about it. At that point there isn’t any phrase that you could use that wouldn’t sound sketchy to them, it isn’t the phrase that is the problem, it’s the fact that it’s unknown and the process is scary.
The people you are describing would still be skeptical even if you explained it to them (and they should be, since they likely don’t have the knowledge or resources to properly vet an application from an unknown source)
My Mom is far too old to know anything about Limewire.
Literally any sort of explanation why you think “sideload” = “dangerous”? Other than just repeating that it is over and over.
Side loading makes it seems like it’s not going through the proper channels. You are loading it from the side while the play store is the right way.
It implies the play store is the center.
Sideload Sideroad Sidekick Sidecar
Using side infront of something means it’s lesser for the most part.
Okay so you’re just sticking with repeating the same non-sense over and over.
Between hero and Sidekick, which do you think is better. Stop nitpicking and find someone else to fight with, you lout.
Since when are any of those examples considered dangerous lmao
Sideloading is exactly the same as a side road. It’s a less polished and a less intended road for people to take.
You guys are kind of missing my point and hyper focusing on the word here.
There is nothing inherently dangerous about the word sidealley but if you’re at night with someone that is already fearful of the city and you tell them you are taking a sidealley, they might not be so willing.
Someone that doesn’t know how to drive well will probably avoid the bumpy and confusing sideroads.
The word has negative connotation and it’s use is benefiting Google. That’s my main point, maybe I should of used less safe instead of dangerous.
I think we more just disagree with your points rather than miss them. We have never seen this term be scary for the non technically involved people in our lives, nor has the examples you provided to prove your point been considered scary to people we know.
Many times, people in this chain have effectively asked for proof of what you claim, but you just keep reiterating your feeling/opinion.
Now, it’s possible that everyone here just associates with people who aren’t afraid of technology enough to run across it, but that’s all we have to work with until provided evidence.
Because it’s not downloading, which is the thing every one thinks is normal. It’s different, and potentially dangerous, which your phone will remind you any time you try to do it.
Not sure I get what you mean by this
Before I knew what sideloading was I just assumed it was a different way of getting apps
It has a definition already, which is the same it always has been. And no, you don't need to differentiate this. We've always installed applications from outside sources. Hell, until recently there weren't even official app stores and shit. Locked down operating systems where you only get what the tech giant wants you to get is a very recent development in order to take control away from the user.
The reality is that there is a difference now, and it needs to be clarified. How would you, talking to another regular human being communicate to install an app that isn’t in the official app store succinctly? If you just tell someone to ‘install the app’ then you are doing a bad job communicating. Economy of language means that new words are going to form to distill common concepts.
Package managers have existed for a long time, so the concept of app stores isn’t new and is actually generally the accepted solution by the open source community. It’s typically regarded as the safest way to install software as it comes with auditing and active management.
Side loading does a great job at communicating what is being done, and it helps consolidate the various ways you actually install applications into a nice generic term.
A store being locked down doesn’t really have much to do with the concept of side loading anyway, since a locked down device doesn’t support it in the first place.
I guess we were all sideloading apps on Win 7 and other prev gens
Now that there’s a Microsoft/Windows app store, any app not sourced there is sideloaded.
When Microsoft bans installation of legacy Win32 apps, it will be the death on Windows.
For Apple it is side loading though, they actively prevent non app store installation
I was extremely surprised that Apple let Christian publish this originally, they have blocked alternative YouTube clients for years. At the time I thought that Apple is doing this to spite Google who didn’t release native app for VisionOS. Christian had a good relationship with Apple and could deliver something high quality so there’s that too. Curious that they changed their mind but it’s safe to assume Apple and Google had to work it out.
Sent from
ApolloVoyagerthis sort of thing is exactly why mozilla, firefox, and - more specifically - a non-profit internet is essential to it’s survival. two for profit ad-driven companies being the gatekeepers of the internet is horrible.
I had forgotten the name of his Vision Pro app, so I was very confused. Is it 1998 and they’re banning my dial-up internet/email service?
Juno: Because email was meant to be free!
Dang, I used to have so many Juno disks. What a flashback.
I am typing this on Voyager, but would love to have a Lemmy client developed by Christian.
YT shooting themselves in the foot here. Someone makes a third party client that keeps ads and doesnt allow for downloading, and generally (probably) makes the YT experience not absolute shit and they have to get rid of it, ensuring people just keep using the ones that don’t.
Direct consequence of sourcing all your software from a centralized, huge corporation controlled “app store”. That is hilarious.
Will mobile users ever tire of getting b1tchslapped by their masters?
We should be fighting the laws that enable them to do this shit instead of whining about how Apple is adhering to them being allowed to protect their IP from people circumventing their bullshit forced ads.
Apple, for all their faults elsewhere, is only complying to what YouTube has a legal right to do. Don’t like it? Go after the law. Not those that have to abide it.
The problem isn’t Apple. It’s the laws that allow YouTube to do the heinous bullshit they do.
Man. Lemmy really needs a stickied post in every community that defines nuance and how to properly use it in everyday situations.