91–100 of 168 posts
why aren't they like, suing sony for not letting you sideload games on playstation or nintendo for not letting you sideload games on the switch
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1991-03-29-fi-1120-s...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The suit wasn't about their dominance in the PC operating systems market, it was about anticompetitive behavior to maintain that advantage against competitors, and anticompetitive behavior to gain advantages against competitors in other markets. Had the suit came earlier, we would not have been blessed with the decade of security vulnerabilities that plagued the desktop because Internet Explorer was tightly integrate…
In a world where OS/2 failed, Be wouldn’t have a chance. The biggest irony to Microsoft’s anti-competitive OEM practices is that they were unnecessary. The network effects of software compatibility proved sufficient to maintain their dominance. And their temporarily successful attempts to dominate the browser market failed to turn the open standards web platform into the Windows platform’s greatest competitor.
Before that point it was common for software to be ported to all the major platforms, so I don't think that caused their dominance, it just helped reinforce it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're not an Android user, you're an Android used.
It's kind of a shame the Ubuntu phone never really materialized. At one point a while back I put off a much needed upgrade from a nearly dead phone for about 6 months because their phone was supposed to be "any day now". I think the OS is still kicking around and technically not dead yet, but it's really hard to believe that it would be able to break into the OEM side of things at this point. If Microsoft couldn't bu…
Here it is running phosh: https://youtu.be/mjaJJ6o-mbM
It's pretty close to being a usable GNOME Linux phone
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is super worrying that in the 7 years nothing really changed for better in this regard, with Google only making things even less open and removing more user control.
And this was very much when Rubin was still at Google.
I think in the last thread a bunch of people were adamant Google wasn't a monopolist because plenty of phones shipped with app stores outside of Play. Seems like Google picks and chooses which of those are okay. It's time to stop lying: Google will absolutely abandon every single rule in the book to ensure they get 30% of Fortnite purchases. It's too lucrative, and Google is too greedy. This has nothing to do with sa…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why do I only have 2 choices? There’s an extremely high barrier to entry and people don’t have time to learn different operating systems.
The barrier to entry is not high. There used to be many more options for phone OS.
I don't think this is unique to mobile either - pretty much everyone uses Windows or Mac because those OS's support the software that they want to use (although with everything moving to the web this is going away to some degree). The main difference with mobile is that the expectation (or requirement, with Apple) is that you will install software through the app store rather than just downloading it from the internet like on desktop.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why do I only have 2 choices? There’s an extremely high barrier to entry and people don’t have time to learn different operating systems.
The barrier to entry is not high. There used to be many more options for phone OS.
I think in the last thread a bunch of people were adamant Google wasn't a monopolist because plenty of phones shipped with app stores outside of Play. Seems like Google picks and chooses which of those are okay. It's time to stop lying: Google will absolutely abandon every single rule in the book to ensure they get 30% of Fortnite purchases. It's too lucrative, and Google is too greedy. This has nothing to do with sa…
I might be wrong, but this is my take on this. Google has an agreement with OEM not to install any app store. What google objected was not default app of Fortnite. However, it was a Fornite's game store kind of.
Still Google does not object the user to install anything on their phone, though that is getting a bit difficult with Android 11.
TLDR; this article SEEMS to talk about Epic Games App Store, rather than Fortnite.
I think in the last thread a bunch of people were adamant Google wasn't a monopolist because plenty of phones shipped with app stores outside of Play. Seems like Google picks and chooses which of those are okay. It's time to stop lying: Google will absolutely abandon every single rule in the book to ensure they get 30% of Fortnite purchases. It's too lucrative, and Google is too greedy. This has nothing to do with sa…
Their customers are not your right For example,you are not forbidden from developing for some random Linux distro They did not build their trust and ecosystem for free,so you should'nt have access to them for free 30% is not unreasonable,costs can be managed,since you are selling a digital product
> For example,you are not forbidden from developing for some random Linux distro
> They did not build their trust and ecosystem for free,so you should'nt have access to them for free
> 30% is not unreasonable,costs can be managed,since you are selling a digital product
If only Microsoft had been smart enough to demand a 30% cut of Netscape sales instead of going through all that trouble to create IE.