Sideloading?

[Graham44]

Originally Posted by Quoth

Turf here also means "logs" of dried bog peat that is burnt in a stove or hearth.
I have a small bag of turf (the kind used for fires) about 20 years old for ornanmental purposes in an unused stove or hearth.

I did not know that dried peat logs were called Turfs! You learn something new everyday

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Know what doesn't matter in any of that??

Use of the term "sideload."

Have your open Android rant. I don't care. I only care that people are falsely claiming that use of the term "sideload" plays some part in closing down Android. If changing the sideload paradigm is paramount to saving Android, you've already lost.

You don't care about much, so why post on this thread?

I only care that people are falsely claiming that use of the term "sideload" plays some part in closing down Android.

That's not what is being claimed. But you don't care.

[theducks]

Side load is probably derived from the Trades and servants had to use the SIDE DOOR. The front was reserved for Quality

Amazon and Apple have (wishfully) promoted themselves

[kandwo]

Whether or not they've purposefully invented the term in order to manipulate or not, I don't like the sound of it.

I'd rather use "transfer" (direct transfer, USB transfer, etc) or "copy".

Sideloading for installing apps from outside of an app store sounds even weirder to me. Like somebody has loaded them on the system through some side door somehow. Nothing in the word suggests that the app has actually been installed either - just that it's been loaded onto the system through some non-direct channel.

[j.p.s]

The earliest reference that I can find on mobileread is from 2007
https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sh...light=sideload
where it is in a quote from a product announcement for a phone from Palm, Interestingly, the word sideload is in scare quotes.

[cfrizz]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Know what doesn't matter in any of that??

Use of the term "sideload."

Have your open Android rant. I don't care. I only care that people are falsely claiming that use of the term "sideload" plays some part in closing down Android. If changing the sideload paradigm is paramount to saving Android, you've already lost.

Ok, so let me see if I understand this whole issue.

What is being talked about is that Google will no longer allow software developers to upload their applications into Google unless they have been basically supervised and approved by Google? So, you can't go to the developer's website and get the app from them and download it onto your phone, tablet etc. Your device will no longer allow this to happen.

Is this correct?

But this has nothing to do with that if you are using an approved, legitimate reading app on your device, you should have no problem side loading/transferring ebook files that are on your pc over to your device.

Is this the correct interpretation Diap Dealer?

If it is, then it has no impact on me since I don't download any applications that don't come from Google Play onto my phone. Because I know that it's more than likely free of anything that can harm my phone!

I think that some of you forget that the majority of us have ZERO interest in fiddling with our devices, we have no interest in Jailbreaking a perfectly functioning device just so we can risk them by putting on untested software that is "spy" proof or whatever on them.

I have seen plenty of threads on here asking for help because someone decided to jailbreak their phone from the evil empire and now have a very expensive device that they can no longer use at all. Cry me a river, you took a big chance and lost, you have no one but yourself to blame!

Yes, I like to have choices and options, that is why I do my research beforehand before I purchase my devices and any software that I want to put on it. And I want to be sure that it is going to work with my untampered by me, device.

That is why I choose Samsung phones, that is why I never have and never will buy an Amazon device, or anymore of their ebooks. It is why I stick with Androids and epubs, because they allow me the widest selection of choice.

So long as none of this changes I'm happy!

[DiapDealer]

You are almost correct. As it currently stands, the proposed change wouldn't JUST prevent developers from uploading their apps to Google without prior vetting. It would prevent them from installing, testing, debugging their own apps on their OWN devices without being first vetted by Google. They couldn't develop their own app and use it on their own device (or give it to a friend) without spending money and being approved by Google. I don't want to downplay that. It IS quite the game-changer.

But you're correct that your usage should be unaffected. Unless your approved, legitimate reading apps choose to prevent you (or were forced to prevent you) from sideloading your own ebooks, nothing should change for you.

I just find all the retroactive blame being thrown at a silly term to be a bit... silly... is all.

[cfrizz]

Got it, thanks!!!!

[Quoth]

Comments
https://forums.theregister.com/forum...ent/#c_5171195

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by cfrizz

If it is, then it has no impact on me since I don't download any applications that don't come from Google Play onto my phone. Because I know that it's more than likely free of anything that can harm my phone!

It will have an impact on me because i do use applications from third party sites For example, Termux (a Linux Terminal) is very limited on the official PlayStore. (Google's limitations.) On F-Droid and the Aurora Store, their version of Termux allows me to do what I would do on a normal Linux machine, without rooting. This means I can run applications like Emacs and Jstar — so I can write on my Pixel with a BlueTooth keyboard. I also have Atril, so I can create PDFs and send them to myself or others via email. Hopefully this doesn't affect my older Pixel 3a "retroactively" but I don't know. I do know I won't be buying a new Android phone in the future.

[haertig]

We have so many stupid terms.

Why would you have to "jailbreak" your Kindle when you (or your Kindle) are not criminals trying to illegally free yourself from incarceration?

How about the newest cooking "hack"? Reheat your leftover pizza in the air fryer instead of the microwave. What exactly is it that you're "hacking" by hitting the Start button on a different device than before?

Then you have the really cool people who remark "I seen that happen while I was doing lunch with my bro." Dorks.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Quoth

That's not what is being claimed. But you don't care.

So why'd you title the thread "Sideloading" if it's not primarily about that term and its supposed advantageous effect for Google et al? Why not title it "Android is becoming Apple"? There's plenty of reasons to hate what Google is proposing without resorting to semantic silliness.

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

So why'd you title the thread "Sideloading" if it's not primarily about that term and its supposed advantageous effect for Google et al? Why not title it "Android is becoming Apple"? There's plenty of reasons to hate what Google is proposing without resorting to semantic silliness.

Did you actually read the first post and the content at the link?

It's your opinion that it's semantic silliness.


This quote is from the link:

"It bears reminding that 'sideload' is a made-up term. Putting software on your computer is simply called 'installing,' regardless of whether that computer is in your pocket or on your desk."

Both Google and Apple [PDF] use the term "sideloading" as a pejorative, possibly because they have a commercial interest in running app store toll booths.

Prud'hommeaux proposes the term "direct installing," in case you need to make a distinction between obtaining software the old-fashioned way versus going through a rent-seeking intermediary marketplace like the Google Play Store or the Apple App Store.

And they will come after content. Apple has for a long time. Amazon and Google are awkward.

Why are you so het up about people objecting to this totally artificial term?

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Quoth

Did you actually read the first post and the content at the link?

Of course I did. That's where I noted that folks were putting more emphasis on the term "sideload" than is clearly warranted.

Originally Posted by Quoth

It's your opinion that it's semantic silliness.

Yes. It is. Was that not clear?

Originally Posted by Quoth

Why are you so het up about people objecting to this totally artificial term?

Because there is no end to totally artificial terms. To object to them is pointless (in my opinion, lest there be no confusion). They're just silly words. Almost all of which could be considered totally artificial at some point in time. Fighting language (especially lingo) is dumb.

[Frenzie]

Originally Posted by Quoth

Don't be defeatist. Call it what it is: Copying, not sideloading.

I just call it putting documents on my reader. I may or may not do that by copying. (I suppose that technically it's all copying data around no matter how you transfer it.)

But yes, since the term "sideloading" started popping up it's always struck me as bizarre that something so normal is described like it's something weird.