I agree in spirit, but man... Its only 50% rentseeking... My elderly parents and computer illiterate siblings and coworkers would get in trouble fast if they weren't constrained by 3 software platforms: mint software manager, android play, and MS whatchamacallit. I have pounded it into their heads: never download software candy from strangers. (I live in an anti-apple pocket of the world)

But then, i guess all three of those do let you do your own thing to varying degrees.

Even the term "Side loading", makes it sound non-standard and risky. Which of course, it doesnt have to be.

#AOSP #OpenSource #GrapheneOS

Once you’ve bought the hardware, it’s yours, not a lease where the vendor still dictates your choices. Calling it sideloading makes it sound like something shady, when it’s just freedom to install what you want.

#freesoftware #digitalrights

Bold of you to assume that your phone is really "yours". I'm sure that by buying one Google owns your soul and that of your firstborn.

We need more competition in the Mobile OS market, and Google needs to be hit with a big enough antitrust suit to cripple them for a couple of decades.

Apple too. And MS...

I don't understand how companies managed to get people to accept this...

the whole case of why I've always had an Android phone: I'm a dev, if I want something I can write and install it.

I almost never do of course, but it's completely fucked up for Google to expect me to register an account with their service to receive their blessed key material in order to install my stupid side project on my own device

but Eugen, developers will continue to be free to distribute their apps off of Google Play and sideloading remains unaffected!

(as long as the apps are signed by Google shhhhhhhh don't tell the regulators, the whole walled garden thing has been going so well for Apple)

on one side, how different is what Google is proposing from what Mozilla has been doing with side-loaded extensions, which they have to certificate even if you host them yourself?

on the other side, why did I see no one complaining about the Mozilla stance on this?

I'd argue there's a critical reason besides rent-seeking: security.

It's a genuine conflict between user rights and the need to protect the average person. Phones hold our banking apps, 2FA tokens, mics, cameras, and countless secrets.

When a sideloaded app steals data, the user doesn't say, "My sideloaded app failed." They say, "My Android/iPhone got hacked." The OS developer takes the blame.

Android's approach—allowing it, but behind a clear security warning—seems like a decent compromise in this difficult balancing act.

Amen! And then there's my cars infotainment center that I can't even sideload!

Edit: I'm sure there are some absurdly smart people here who could tear apart the dash board and hard wire into the computers pinout to do it. But that's a little beyond my capabilities.

I agree: if someone buys a "computer" or a general purpose device, your point certainly holds.

But on the other side of a fine line I imagine (perhaps older) game consoles: when the original Nintendo came out, that company was not expected to help you run Atari software on their hardware.

They'd not prevent it - if you could figure out it, good on you. But Nintendo shouldn't be expected to make that work.

Not-supporting versus actively-preventing is the key difference for me.

I did not know of this word. It sounds a bit like the word ”jaywalking” which was invented by car companies to shame pedestrians into getting out of the way.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaywal…

term used to criminalize a pedestrian crossing the road outside of the authorized passage and time limit

^{Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)}

As someone who developed operating systems for 50 years I know that there are reasonable cases; but, as none are relevant to Google’s latest behavior, I will not elaborate.

Since a mobile device is mostly a general purpose system you should be able to run any software that doesn’t violate laws and it’s not the OS vendor’s responsibility to enforce laws except those regulating the radios in the device.

I like the term “rent seeker”.

Like Jaywalker is the rent seeker for car companies.

It is known that sideloading is a real risk for most of Android users*

*The bad guy comes to your home, enable ADB debug, you let him connect your phone, you give him your pin, you let him few moment to load a naughty apk (bring coffees) and VOILÀ ! 🔥

BTW I had today to clean a fully stock up to date Android (you even can install bank app on) because of a "legit" Play Store bloatware setup'd lots of other adware apks 👍

This list of replies is a hilarious string of people pretending that they’ve never looked at someone’s Windows machine *so completely fucked up with malware and viruses that the owner just blithely clicked on and installed* that the only solution was to nuke it from space and *buy a whole new computer*

For a good fifteen years the number one reason for tossing perfectly good hardware and buying a newer Win PC was virus/malware infestation. Might still be, I have no idea.

at this point I just want a fucking slab that lets me call from Linux.

I want postmarketOS on an AMD Ryzen with only 64bits (dump the 32, make a bloody atom ryzen you cowards), and a pure-64 Steam build. I want a slab that lets me play anime games if I bloody want to. And deploy a Linux fleet management solution. AND JUST LET ME DO MY THING.

yes, but...

Ma and Pa _need_ some form of sandbox. Sandboxing should be optional. But some form of sandboxing should exist when non-tech people will use computers.

It's a dangerous world.

Sideloading as a word was coined in 1990
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidelo…

Please stop spreading lies to make people angry

Especially as this newest move of Google is redundant: play protect is already built in all Google play services using phones.

It already flashed and remains suspicious Appa and known malware from all sources.

So how exactly is locking down the signing keys for apps that are allowed to run at all and connecting them with government ID for developers helping security?

This purely an anticompetitive measure.

counter-point: run your software outside this rentseekers sandbox then. it’s absolutely a bad look for them if something happens to you while in their ecosystem (randsomware, malware, identity theft, etc.)

just because you own the physical memory registers doesn’t mean you’re ever making use of them without this rentseekers work and IP.