From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

PSA:
Normal loading (aka sideloading) of older apps on Android 14+ using adb

This information below from Siard is useful enough to have its own thread.
From: Siard <saylor259@mailbox.org>
Newsgroups: comp.mobile.android
Subject: Re: Contacts
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2026 15:12:42 +0200
Message-ID: <nh27ddFsujU1@mid.individual.net>

AJL wrote:

Most of my Android tablet toys going back to 12 already refuse to
sideload my old apks (like my old Groundhog newsreader).

You could install them as described here:
<https://liliputing.com/how-to-install-old-apps-on-android-14/>
This way, I managed to install several old apps in Android 14
that would not install the normal way any more (including Groundhog!),
and I never encountered any problems.

I'm still on Android 13 until I get a new phone (as my USB port can no
longer handle data) so I can't test it, but here's more information on
<https://liliputing.com/how-to-install-old-apps-on-android-14/>

The article suggests the use of a switch to bypass Android 14 restrictions.
adb install --bypass-low-target-sdk-block base.apk

Often, you don't want to worry about version number mismatches,
and you don't want to worry about losing your data, so this becomes
a "more universal" command for future single-apk installs now:
adb install-multiple -r -d -i com.android.vending --bypass-low-target-sdk-block base.apk

While almost every APK obtained outside of the Google Play Store repository
is a single APK, unfortunately almost every APK inside the Google Play
Store is a split APKs, so for those split apks, the universal command is
adb install-multiple -r -d -i com.android.vending --bypass-low-target-sdk-block base.apk split_config.en.apk split_config.xhdpi.apk

Where
-r allows re-installs w/o losing the application data
-d allows version downgrades (so we don't have to worry about versions)
-i changes the installer string (for programs that check who installed it)
<https://i.postimg.cc/T2gLdvrM/actual-installer.jpg>
install-multiple handles the split apks that are common nowadays
--bypass-low-target-sdk-block overrides the new Android 14 security policy

In summary, Google is making it more and more difficult to do normal
loading (which some people debase by calling it sideloading), but Siard has been very helpful in giving us yet another option, for certain situations.
--
Knowledge is best shared, like Italian pizza & German beer, among friends.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

Maria Sophia wrote:

AJL wrote:

Most of my Android tablet toys going back to 12 already refuse to
sideload my old apks (like my old Groundhog newsreader).

You could install them as described here:
<https://liliputing.com/how-to-install-old-apps-on-android-14/>
This way, I managed to install several old apps in Android 14
that would not install the normal way any more (including Groundhog!),
and I never encountered any problems.

Thanks.

In summary, Google is making it more and more difficult to do normal
loading (which some people debase by calling it sideloading)...

You may have missed it but in an earlier post I used the word "side loaded"
(two words). It wasn't on purpose. This Amazon tablet's dictionary
automatically changed it from one word and I didn't notice before sending.
And there's a currently a red line under your "sideloading" word above.
Oops now there's another red line under the s....ing word in my last
sentence. So you see Amazon seems to agree with you about there being no
such word...

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

AJL wrote:

Maria Sophia wrote:

AJL wrote:

Most of my Android tablet toys going back to 12 already refuse to
sideload my old apks (like my old Groundhog newsreader).

You could install them as described here:
<https://liliputing.com/how-to-install-old-apps-on-android-14/>
This way, I managed to install several old apps in Android 14
that would not install the normal way any more (including Groundhog!),
and I never encountered any problems.

Thanks.

In summary, Google is making it more and more difficult to do normal >>loading (which some people debase by calling it sideloading)...

You may have missed it but in an earlier post I used the word "side loaded"
(two words). It wasn't on purpose. This Amazon tablet's dictionary
automatically changed it from one word and I didn't notice before sending.
And there's a currently a red line under your "sideloading" word above.
Oops now there's another red line under the s....ing word in my last
sentence. So you see Amazon seems to agree with you about there being no
such word...

Hi AJL,

As usual, I appreciate that you're balanced, where I'll openly and readily
and publicly admit that "side loading" (or sideloading) is accepted by most people, but my point is that it's a deprecatory word for normal loading.

Since Webster added 1400 words to the dictionary just recently, let's look.
<https://dailyvoice.com/article/merriam-webster-adds-1400-new-words-see-what-made-the-dictionary/>

Nope. It's not in Webster yet, if this is the correct way to find it:
<https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sideload>
<https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/side%20load>
<https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sideloading>
<https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/side%20loading>
"The word you've entered isn't in the dictionary. Click on a
spelling suggestion below or try again using the search bar above."

However, it is in the Cambridge dictionary, so they think it's a word.
<https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/sideload>
"to put software on a computer or mobile phone without using
the official way of buying the software"

Notice something odd though, that they specifically focus on "buying".
That's weird. It's wrong, right? They simply don't know what it means.

Any other dictionary citations we should add to this thread for reference?
--
Intelligence, when bestowed upon a person, affords them wondrous insight.

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

Maria Sophia wrote:

AJL wrote:

Maria Sophia wrote:

Google is making it more and more difficult to do normal loading
(which some people debase by calling it sideloading)...

You may have missed it but in an earlier post I used the word
"side loaded" (two words). It wasn't on purpose. This Amazon
tablet's dictionary automatically changed it from one word and I
didn't notice before sending. And there's a currently a red line
under your "sideloading" word above. Oops now there's another red
line under the s....ing word in my last sentence. So you see
Amazon seems to agree with you about there being no such word...

Two wins for Maria: I'm now posting with my Windows Thunderbird app.
Guess what. All the 'sideloading' words above and in this sentence are underlined in red. Another newsreader app's dictionary agrees with you.

I'll openly and readily and publicly admit that "side loading" (or sideloading) is accepted by most people, but my point is that it's a deprecatory word for normal loading.

Damn. Quit using big words. Deprecatory?? I had to look that up:
Expressing disapproval; disapproving, apologetic or appeasing:
"a deprecatory smile". Kinda like my smile right now. Anyway I don't see 'sideloading' as having any emotion at all.

Since Webster added 1400 words to the dictionary just recently,
let's look. <https://dailyvoice.com/article/merriam-webster-adds-1400-new-words-see-what-made-the-dictionary/>

Nope. It's not in Webster yet, if this is the correct way to find it:
<https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sideload> <https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/side%20load> <https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sideloading> <https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/side%20loading> "The
word you've entered isn't in the dictionary. Click on a spelling
suggestion below or try again using the search bar above."

However, it is in the Cambridge dictionary, so they think it's a
word. <https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/sideload>

"to put software on a computer or mobile phone without using the
official way of buying the software"

That's close. I doubt that Amazon intended for me to put the Google Play
Store and other outside APKs on its Fire OS tablet but still allowed my
outside apps to be unofficially sideloaded and used.

Notice something odd though, that they specifically focus on
"buying". That's weird. It's wrong, right? They simply don't know
what it means.

Or maybe the word is used in different ways. This seems to suggest
cheating by loading an app from the side to avoid payment?

Any other dictionary citations we should add to this thread for
reference?

Nah. It's worn out. And anyway I've solved the problem with this
Thunderbird newsreader. I just right click a red underlined word and
in the popup tick "Add to Dictionary". Now, no more 'sideload' red
underlines. Problem solved... ;)


--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

AJL wrote:

I'm now posting with my Windows Thunderbird app.
Guess what. All the 'sideloading' words above and in this sentence are underlined in red. Another newsreader app's dictionary agrees with you.

Hi AJL,

I hope by now you, and most people here, realize I don't just parrot
propaganda like many clueless people do, as I think about the meaning.

Even the Cambridge dictionary uses sideloading the way we use the word
thief. The word is *designed* to conjure up images akin to the dark web.

Since every platform not iOS has the capability of "normal loading", even
as Google is deprecating it daily, as we speak, that's what it really is.

To me.

And, rest assured, I do a *lot* of "normal loading", since all my Google
Play Store apps are scraped off the Google Play repository by Aurora.

I'll openly and readily and publicly admit that "side loading" (or
sideloading) is accepted by most people, but my point is that it's a
deprecatory word for normal loading.

Damn. Quit using big words. Deprecatory?? I had to look that up:
Expressing disapproval; disapproving, apologetic or appeasing:
"a deprecatory smile". Kinda like my smile right now. Anyway I don't see 'sideloading' as having any emotion at all.

I'd like to meet you when I visit friends in Phoenix as you have a sense of humor. The way Google uses 'sideloading' is the way a pastor uses 'hooker'.

Out here, we just call them 'sex workers', which is a more-normalized word.

However, it is in the Cambridge dictionary, so they think it's a
word. <https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/sideload>
"to put software on a computer or mobile phone without using the
official way of buying the software"

That's close. I doubt that Amazon intended for me to put the Google Play Store and other outside APKs on its Fire OS tablet but still allowed my outside apps to be unofficially sideloaded and used.

Well, as I understand the word, sideloading in tech speak, AFAIK, is for putting an app on the device without using the official OEM methods.

It's kind of like putting an app on an iPhone without using the app store. Perhaps, more to the point, it's like normal Windows without the MS Store.

Notice something odd though, that they specifically focus on
"buying". That's weird. It's wrong, right? They simply don't know
what it means.

Or maybe the word is used in different ways. This seems to suggest
cheating by loading an app from the side to avoid payment?

Right. The Cambridge dictionary is so wrong that I seriously wonder how it
made it into their books, given they could have asked someone who knew.

It's probably hard to run a for-pay app anyway, without paying for it.

There are some apps that are available both ways, but otherwise, I have no
idea how anyone could run a for-pay app without actually paying for it.

Do you?
Does anyone?

If not, then it's likely the Cambridge dictionary is wrong on a lot.

Any other dictionary citations we should add to this thread for
reference?

Nah. It's worn out. And anyway I've solved the problem with this
Thunderbird newsreader. I just right click a red underlined word and
in the popup tick "Add to Dictionary". Now, no more 'sideload' red underlines. Problem solved... ;)

Yes, but how are we going to get Apple to stop using the derogatory term?
--
On Usenet, we teach what we know & others teach us what we didn't know.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

Maria Sophia wrote:

AJL wrote:

Most of my Android tablet toys going back to 12 already refuse to
sideload my old apks (like my old Groundhog newsreader).

I just found out about InstallerX-Revived for installing almost anything, apparently including apps which refuse to load due to SDK restrictions.

<https://github.com/wxxsfxyzm/InstallerX-Revived>

Apparently, it handles split APKs (like .apks, .xapk, .apkm) formats and
can bypass low-target SDK restrictions like those AJL recently ran into.
--
On Usenet, we pool our knowledge so everyone's a little smarter.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

Maria Sophia wrote:

AJL wrote:

I'm now posting with my Windows Thunderbird app. Guess what. The
'sideloading' word in this sentence is underlined in red. My
newsreader app's dictionary agrees with you.

Even the Cambridge dictionary uses sideloading the way we use the
word thief. The word is *designed* to conjure up images akin to the
dark web.

Bottom line for me: Whether one writes 'sideloading' or 'side loading'
it makes little difference as long as I know what they mean, and I do. I suspect most others do too.

And, rest assured, I do a *lot* of "normal loading", since all my
Google Play Store apps are scraped off the Google Play repository by
Aurora.

I also do 'normal' sideloading. Mostly to my Android tablets. But this
old Thunderbird app I'm using was sideloaded/loaded (darn, now I can't
make up my mind! All your fault.) onto my latest Windows LT toy.

I'd like to meet you when I visit friends in Phoenix as you have a
sense of humor.

Actually I'm in India. Phoenix is just a cover cause they have lots of
Indians. (And of course no one knows that most of them actually came
from Indiana...)

The way Google uses 'sideloading' is the way a pastor uses 'hooker'.

Hooker? Well I haven't been screwed by Google yet (I think). Actually I
didn't know they had a hooker service. But Amazon does have delivery.
Maybe?? Checking...

Out here, we just call them 'sex workers', which is a more-normalized
word.

We used to use the word 'Whores' but that's a whore-able word so maybe
'comfort folks'?

I doubt that Amazon intended for me to put the Google Play Store
and other outside APKs on its Fire OS tablet but still allowed my
outside apps to be unofficially sideloaded and used.

When my sideloaded Google took over my Amazon tablet it started security checking all my apps including the Amazon Appstore loaded apps. Thanks Google...

I have no idea how anyone could run a for-pay app without actually
paying for it.

The legal way is to suffer through the ads. But I generally pay for the
"pro" version cause it's usually very cheap. My PhoNews Pro was $2US for
7 years service (so far) for example...


--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2