Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google will lose $50M or more in 2018 from Fortnite bypassing the Play Store

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 219 posts

Re: Google will lose $50M or more in 2018 from Fortnite bypassing the Play Store

#181

Post by chrisseaton »

potta_coffee wrote: post #146
chrisseaton wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google and Apple have created and invested in their platforms - it’s not insane for them to make profit from them.

They've created an artificial need for the platforms by closing their systems. Open systems don't require these kinds of platforms. I can install whatever I want on my PC and I like it that way.

> I can install whatever I want on my PC and I like it that way.

Good for you, but many other people appreciate the curated platforms that Google and Apple have built and like it that way instead. They're not 'insane' for liking it a different way to you - there's benefits of both approaches.

Re: Google will lose $50M or more in 2018 from Fortnite bypassing the Play Store

#182

Post by ocdtrekkie »

throw7 wrote: post #122
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they lose less than 30% of their installs, but are making 30% more on each IAP, they're rolling profit. Bear in mind, most users won't even buy stuff, so the question is... will they lose a lot of paying customers, and my guess for that is no. Also, Tim Sweeney is an outspoken critic of the app store model, so it's unsurprising to see Epic go this way where they can.

sounds like he's a hypocrite also, as his game is on IOS and even available there first.

He's the CEO of a major company, he presumably can't let his personal views lead him to not be part of iOS. But his board/investors can probably be reasonably sold on the idea of saving the 30% margin Google takes... and also aligns well with his ideals.

Re: Google will lose $50M or more in 2018 from Fortnite bypassing the Play Store

#183

Post by scarface74 »

kodablah wrote: post #174
scarface74 wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your claim was that you couldn’t have third party keyboards on iOS (untrue), you couldn’t have third party dialer (untrue), you couldn’t use third party development environments (untrue), you had to develop on the Mac (untrue). You couldn’t use a third party SMS client- Google Voice let’s you do that.

Unfortunately, whether we agree or not, automatic defaults, prominence of placement, ease of change, and several other factors all contribute to rulings of active competition prevention. That you can change (with or without caveats) is often not enough. None of it relates to the original false statement that Apple does nothing to prevent competition with their platform which it does for many values of platform. I was…

Now you're changing the argument...

What are the caveats with the dialer?

To ask someone to list some examples to make the general, obvious point is a bit derailing.

How is it "derailing" to ask you to give specifics and then systematically get them torn down?

Re: Google will lose $50M or more in 2018 from Fortnite bypassing the Play Store

#184

Post by MarkMc »

jpdus wrote: post #130

I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, I am still a big fan of Android´s openess (at least compared to the walled garden that is iOS) and I think it should the right of every company or developer to NOT use a closed platform to distribute its app. However on the other hand, this move by Epic sets a dangerous precedent: Factually, Google get´s economically punished for being more open than Apple. This does…

> the "right" move for Google would be to fork AOSP, make new Android versions as closed as iOS

I wonder whether Google's new operating system 'Fuschia' serves this purpose...

Re: Google will lose $50M or more in 2018 from Fortnite bypassing the Play Store

#185

Post by oliwarner »

jpdus wrote: post #130

I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, I am still a big fan of Android´s openess (at least compared to the walled garden that is iOS) and I think it should the right of every company or developer to NOT use a closed platform to distribute its app. However on the other hand, this move by Epic sets a dangerous precedent: Factually, Google get´s economically punished for being more open than Apple. This does…

A better direction might be making side-loading safer. Rather than forcing people to whitelist all APKs, adding signatures, doing organisational verification.

Stuff that Google Play does, just split out from the marketing and download service.

Re: Google will lose $50M or more in 2018 from Fortnite bypassing the Play Store

#186

Post by PunchTornado »

freedomben wrote: post #63
wvenable wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By default it is blocked although it's usually one of the first things I turn off. I always have at least one or two apps that aren't on the play store. I hope that Google doesn't block this feature and turn entirely into a walled garden.

As soon as they do, they die with users like me. I am pretty tolerant of the eco-system lock in because I can so easily opt-over the wall when I want to. If they change that, I'll go to the next platform that respects my ability to make choices for myself, even if they don't match what some people in power in California thinks I should choose.

I'm curious to what platform do you go if they do that

Re: Google will lose $50M or more in 2018 from Fortnite bypassing the Play Store

#187

Post by Eridrus »

Pissompons wrote: post #180
ksec wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about the 30% of store tax must cover the cost of developing, operating and supporting their Open Platforms Operating System? Along with payment processing, download bandwidth, and customer service? Google doesn't charge them a cent for using Android. As a matter of fact if you don't like the Google Store, Maps, and Search it has to offer for free, you could have forked the whole thing and tidy up all the loose e…

> How about the 30% of store tax must cover the cost of developing, operating and supporting their Open Platforms Operating System? > Google doesn't charge them a cent for using Android. Why should Epic care about Android's development costs? They don't pay Microsoft a cent for Windows, why should they pay Google for Android? Google chose this business model, software developers certainly have no obligation to suppor…

> Why should Epic care about Android's development costs?

He seems to care about console makers' costs and considers their 30% there reasonable, but he does not seem to consider them reasonable here.

> Why overpay for Google's?

I don't think he's under any obligation too, but it's interesting to see platforms like Steam gain traction despite not handling most of the investment in the platform, and that's on Windows where you can get an installer.

Re: Google will lose $50M or more in 2018 from Fortnite bypassing the Play Store

#188

Post by vetinari »

dbt00 wrote: post #165
SonnyWortzik wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

sure, as a private company I have a running budget based on the profits of my application. 30% of that revenue which I will never get will be going to another company which has a record of paying little to no taxes. Now, how do you think the government makes up the difference in the tax loop holes? By raising taxes on companies like mine and restricting/regulating on how I structure my profits/income so that it can s…

I think the comment was saying that it's way worse than income tax. I don't think you're disagreeing.

Exactly; it's at least one order of magnitude worse than the income tax.

Re: Google will lose $50M or more in 2018 from Fortnite bypassing the Play Store

#189

Post by adrianmalacoda »

dbt00 wrote: post #163
izacus wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a few years the media (which has always been very pro-Apple) has internalized the idea, that all your software MUST come from a single corporation controlled walled garden and pay tax to them. The whole concept of being able to install software from a source you choose is now so foreign that they'll speak against it when possible. And unfortunately, this seems to be the case with a lot of HN commenters as well.

I've been running open source, free, libre, etc software since the mid-90s. My firewall is openbsd. my laptop runs linux. I use emacs for most of my software editing. I want you to understand that I am a big open source weenie, and have been for decades. I think asking consumers to evaluate risk of installing third party apps and manage permissions is insane. My phone runs iOS. My family the same. The volume of malwa…

There's something to be said for having a known good source of software that you can trust. GNU/Linux of course follows the same model, where you're expected to get the majority of your software from the distro repository. So, I don't think this model is inherently antithetical to free software.

I'm a free software nerd and I run LineageOS-sans-Google on my mobile device. I get the vast majority of my software through F-Droid, which works like a GNU/Linux distribution - they build all packages from source and sign with their own key. Only time I would sideload a package is if it's not available in F-Droid (because it's proprietary - although I've since found out about Yalp and use that instead) or if I'm building it myself. It works well enough for me.

I think the objectionable part of a walled garden, at least to a free software nerd, is the walled part. I appreciate the option of being able to step outside if I feel I need to.

Re: Google will lose $50M or more in 2018 from Fortnite bypassing the Play Store

#190

Post by UncleMeat »

oliwarner wrote: post #185
jpdus wrote: post #130

I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, I am still a big fan of Android´s openess (at least compared to the walled garden that is iOS) and I think it should the right of every company or developer to NOT use a closed platform to distribute its app. However on the other hand, this move by Epic sets a dangerous precedent: Factually, Google get´s economically punished for being more open than Apple. This does…

A better direction might be making side-loading safer. Rather than forcing people to whitelist all APKs, adding signatures, doing organisational verification. Stuff that Google Play does, just split out from the marketing and download service.

The problem is that a tremendous amount of sideloading happens offline. This makes it very hard for anybody to make it safe.
Post reply on HN