The Sideloading Trap: Why Corporate Lockdowns Matter (Even If You Don't Pirate)

A recent article on The Streaming Advisor by Ryan Downey presents a surprising recommendation: do not replace your Amazon Fire TV with a Walmart onn device. At first glance, this seems counterintuitive. The onn box is widely considered a faster, cleaner, and more affordable alternative to the increasingly cluttered Fire TV interface. However, a deeper look at Downey's argument reveals a specific warning targeted not at the general consumer, but at the sideloading community.

The central issue is the tightening of corporate control. Amazon is aggressively moving to shut down the ability to sideload third-party applications. According to Downey, those migrating to the onn device as a "safe haven" are likely walking into another dead end.

The onn box is a solid piece of streaming hardware. It has the full Google Play Store built for TV, so it will be able to provide all of the normal paid and free apps one would expect, with a nice, sleek interface. But that is not why people want it. The crew moving on from Fire Sticks are looking for something that can run side-loaded apps. And right now the onn box will do that for you. But it will not do it forever.

Let's just say I know because I know. This crackdown on sideloading has been a long time coming. Amazon is getting tough now after years of officially pretending it wasn't going on. It started with companies selling boxes that were preloaded with apps used for piracy. That is still going on. Servers get shut down all the time, and the people who run them get arrested. Amazon was part of the group that was pursuing these purveyors, and it became pretty ridiculous to be suing people for using a product that Amazon made for piracy. Frankly, I have no idea why it didn't happen a long time ago. But if Amazon decided to shut it down, you can be pretty sure Google will too. And soon.

Downey's insight likely stems from a proximity to industry shifts and beta testing environments that are not yet public knowledge. As someone who follows these trends closely, I find his reasoning difficult to doubt. For those whose streaming habits rely on "playing the game" with grey-market apps, the onn box is likely a temporary reprieve, not a permanent solution.

Technical Curiosity vs. Piracy Enablement

This discussion highlights a critical distinction between technical experimentation and piracy. In 2022, I embarked on a project to build a Raspberry Pi streamer running an older version of Android. It was a classic "can I do it" endeavor, born out of technical curiosity to see if hobbyist hardware could successfully replicate a consumer media experience.

The project was a success from a technical standpoint, but it was never a viable long-term streaming device. Due to hardware limitations and a lack of official DRM certifications, it couldn't reliably support high-definition playback for legitimate, paid services. While a pirate might have found the unlicensed environment ideal for illicit apps, that was never the intent. I do not support piracy; my focus remains on integrity, clarity, and the efficient use of legitimate home networks.

The Verdict for the Legitimate Streamer

For the average user, the onn box remains an excellent choice. If you are using it to access official services like Paramount Plus Essentials or Hulu+Live TV, Downey's warning largely does not apply. In fact, for those of us who prioritize a stable, officially supported ecosystem, the fact that the onn box is a licensed Google product is its greatest strength. It ensures security and high-definition performance that unlicensed "grey market" boxes simply cannot match.

Ryan Downey is right: for the sideloading community, the onn box is a mistake. But for everyone else, it remains a superior way to watch TV without the interference of a locked-down, ad-heavy operating system.