When I install software from the Arch User Repository I still just call it installing, even though it isn’t through the standard path. Everywhere else, you don’t make the distinction. For some reason on phones we’ve come to call it sideloading, even though the software is just software —it doesn’t care where it came from.
even within android, if you attempt to install an apk directly, it doesn’t say “would you like to sideload this application?”, but instead says, “Do you want to install this app?”.
Even Google’s own OS doesn’t use made up language.
Again, when I install something from the AUR (which is not where most software comes from —99+% are from official repositories) it isn’t given a special term. It’s the exact same situation as “sideloading” but we just call it installing. Can you explain what the difference is between them?
Wow, you’re frustrating. If using an unofficial source for applications is called sideloading, why isn’t that term used for desktop computing? The term only exists for phones. The AUR is an unofficial user-run source and is equivalent to a source other than the play/apple store. If that term was actually useful or needed we call installing applications from the AUR sideloading, but we don’t. Clearly the term has no real utility besides making it sound like something you shouldn’t do.
Yes they are! That’s what I’m saying. 99% of apps aren’t coming from the AUR. Why don’t we call it sideloading, if it were actually a term that were needed?
When I install software from the Arch User Repository I still just call it installing, even though it isn’t through the standard path. Everywhere else, you don’t make the distinction. For some reason on phones we’ve come to call it sideloading, even though the software is just software —it doesn’t care where it came from.
Because 99% of people are getting it from the same place…
even within android, if you attempt to install an apk directly, it doesn’t say “would you like to sideload this application?”, but instead says, “Do you want to install this app?”.
Even Google’s own OS doesn’t use made up language.
I don’t know what that’s supposed to prove. Use of the word is not mandatory.
Again, when I install something from the AUR (which is not where most software comes from —99+% are from official repositories) it isn’t given a special term. It’s the exact same situation as “sideloading” but we just call it installing. Can you explain what the difference is between them?
LOL you just lumped every other repository into one and then excepted the AUR for…reasons?
Because the AUR is by users. The others aren’t.
I know you just can’t explain the difference though so wrote this instead.
I don’t understand what that has to do with this conversation?
Wow, you’re frustrating. If using an unofficial source for applications is called sideloading, why isn’t that term used for desktop computing? The term only exists for phones. The AUR is an unofficial user-run source and is equivalent to a source other than the play/apple store. If that term was actually useful or needed we call installing applications from the AUR sideloading, but we don’t. Clearly the term has no real utility besides making it sound like something you shouldn’t do.
You are also frustrating, asking me questions that I’ve already answered: Because 99% of people aren’t using the default app store on desktops.
Yes they are! That’s what I’m saying. 99% of apps aren’t coming from the AUR. Why don’t we call it sideloading, if it were actually a term that were needed?