8 comments

  • theandrewbailey 8 hours ago
    It's sad that Tuta has fallen for Big Tech newspeak. Once upon a time, we installed stuff on our devices. Calling it side-something makes it seem frowned upon, which plays right into Google's hand.
    • unrented7977 7 hours ago
      It's not newspeak, we've been calling it sideloading since the 90s
      • Grimblewald 3 hours ago
        right but sideloading means installing outside the official channel. last i checked playstore was an option, not android official.
      • roosterIllusi0n 4 hours ago
        That is untrue. It's called "installing" or just "running". Sideloading makes no sense if you describe normal installing that way. The side load is the app store.
    • tweetle_beetle 7 hours ago
      Sideloading is a type of installing defined by the source of the file(s) being installed. Google will still allow installing from the Play store. The distinction is valid.
      • x______________ 6 hours ago
        > Sideloading is a type of installing defined by the source of the file(s) being installed

        Installing is the action of the owner of the device, to add functionality to that device by adding compiled executable code, regardless of the source.

        • gruez 2 hours ago
          You can acknowledge that different concepts exist and would be better served by having different words, rather than trying to force others (via downvoting) into not using a given word. Whether you support google's restrictions or not, they only apply to a subset of apps, so having a word to refer to the specific subset of apps is helpful.
  • garbawarb 7 hours ago
    Why is it called side-loading here? Isn't that just downloading?
    • paxys 5 hours ago
      Downloading and installing an app from a source other than the official store included with the OS.

      Because that is a mouthful people named it "sideloading".

      • NewJazz 21 minutes ago
        "Direct app installation"
      • roosterIllusi0n 4 hours ago
        There is no such thing as an official store for anything. You can use any app store you want. But normal installing without an app store is called normal. The app store is the side show. If an OS locks you to their brand's app store and blocks normal installation, that is not legal since its a monopoly action.
        • Dylan16807 3 hours ago
          > There is no such thing as an official store for anything.

          This goes beyond advocacy into straight up... well I won't yet call it lying but it's intentionally using words in a way that will mislead people using words the normal way.

          That we should just call things installing, yeah I see where you're coming from. But in your other comment where you go so far as to conclude that "The side load is the app store"? That's just wrong.

    • orphea 5 hours ago
      It's installing, not just downloading.
  • throwa356262 4 hours ago
    I am not a fan of Apple or Google, but there is no other option that works with my everyday essential apps (e.g banking)?
    • mysterydip 4 hours ago
      (warning dumb question incoming): since android apps are java, is it possible for a third contender to create a jvm for their platform and some hooks for android api’s and run anything that was made for them?
      • tadfisher 29 minutes ago
        Yes. The main issue is hardware attestation, e.g. the bank's backend refusing to allow you to log in unless you can prove cryptographically that you are running a Google-certified device and operating system.
      • nosioptar 4 hours ago
        Anbox let's you run android apps on Linux. I'd assume it could also work on Mobian or something similar.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anbox

        • NewJazz 20 minutes ago
          Is Anbox still maintained? I remember using Anbox a long time ago, then I tried waydroid.

          https://waydro.id/

    • iAMkenough 4 hours ago
      I miss when websites made it possible to do essential things in my daily life without requiring I install something on my device.
      • amlib 3 hours ago
        Except there were websites requiring you to install ActiveX and proprietary plugins to do anything meaningful as soon as 1995? Also banks requiring proprietary security modules to access your account, they were pretty ubiquitous in the early 2000s where I lived.

        The difference now is that accessing services through the internet is a necessity rather than a luxury. I guess passing laws could fix this, but it's exceptionally hard to get anything done through the barrage of big tech lobbying.

        • iAMkenough 3 hours ago
          Oh god I just had Microsoft Silverlight flashbacks
    • black6 2 hours ago
      I almost never use dedicated apps. I am able to access all my bank and other financial accounts through their websites on mobile, no problem. (Vanadium browser on GrapheneOS)
  • OroPla 7 hours ago
    Guess it's a good thing that Android can't install updates via Ethernet, but I only connect my phone via Ethernet. My next phone is going to be a Linux phone, though, I guess.
  • zerozerotwo 5 hours ago
    Best part is the justification that eu regulations require this
    • throw_m239339 2 hours ago
      EU regulations do not require that, that's bullshit. Otherwise Microsoft and Apple would do the same and completely restrict what one can install on their laptop (Microsoft tried to force people to go through their store on Windows Family versions though, I'm glad they failed).
  • MadrasThorn 7 hours ago
    Walled garden models I guess
  • throw_m239339 3 hours ago
    The only reason I chose Android was being able to install my own "native" apps without Google having a say. If that function is gone, I simply have no reason to use Android, I actually like IOS better in terms of UI, so I'll just move to Apple's ecosystem...

    While using alternative OS on older Android devices.

  • ChrisArchitect 7 hours ago
    • megagpt1 7 hours ago
      Petitions never do anything. Reverse engineering does.