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

Google’s ‘Project Hug’ paid out huge sums to keep game devs in the Play Store

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 495 posts

Re: Google’s ‘Project Hug’ paid out huge sums to keep game devs in the Play Store

#221

Post by simfree »

hliyan wrote: post #102
jasode wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>In 2001, Microsoft "constituted unlawful monopolization" under Antitrust Act for bundling a web browser with their operating system. That reductive summary is repeated but isn't accurate. Microsoft didn't get in trouble for adding its own IE web browser to Windows. (Software companies always add new features and enhancements.) The key nuance that triggered the government lawsuit was anti-competitive actions such as…

On a perhaps related note, I have noticed that a Google Meet that consumes just over 1Mbps on Google Chrome consistently consumes close to 4Mbps on Firefox. Same settings, same window size, same participants. I cannot help but wonder whether Chrome has implemented some standard browser feature more efficiently, or whether it has special native features just for Meets.

Change your useragent to Chrome. Google often gates performance improvements to be Chrome only.

Re: Google’s ‘Project Hug’ paid out huge sums to keep game devs in the Play Store

#222

Post by phendrenad2 »

How is this different from giving developers a larger cut of profits? It's a pretty common sales trick to do "cash back" instead of reducing price. If this is what Epic is going with, they're grasping at straws more than I had imagined.

Re: Google’s ‘Project Hug’ paid out huge sums to keep game devs in the Play Store

#223

Post by solarkraft »

bushbaba wrote: post #184
edouard-harris wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Google also pays Apple 7 billion annually^ to be its default SE. It's actually between $8-12 billion now. [1] > Yahoo & MSFT's experience as 2nd place in that market was working very hard and earning $0 profits. This is an exaggeration though. MSFT made nearly $8 billion in revenue last year from search (mostly Bing), and the business has naturally high margins so it would be extremely surprising if it was unprofit…

It’s likely the payoff is also to prevent apple from building its own search engine to compete. As googles payoff is so lucrative

There have been reports and speculation that they’re doing just that. Of course it’s worth it for the negotiation threat alone, but Apple also really doesn’t seem to like depending on Google.

I personally can’t see them switching any time soon, as DuckDuckGo’s search results are something between worse to terrible and I’m not sure they can do much better without collecting more data.

Re: Google’s ‘Project Hug’ paid out huge sums to keep game devs in the Play Store

#224

Post by easrng »

dalbasal wrote: post #133
jakecopp wrote: post #9

> After another meeting between Apple and Google senior executives, notes showed that the execs agreed: "Our vision is that we work as if we are one company." ... > This unredacted graf shows that telcos get up to 25% of Google's app sales to keep them from developing rival app stores on the smartphones they sell and service. Insane reading.

>> 25% of Google's app sales to keep them from developing rival app stores Google also pays Apple 7 billion annually^ to be its default SE. Despite Adwords' incredible profitability, Yahoo & MSFT's experience as 2nd place in that market was working very hard and earning $0 profits... Their Revenues @ were far lower than proportional to their market share, and costs are the opposite. Better to just take your share of…

My phone has a hidden app store made by the manufacturer that automatically shows and whitelabels itself when it connects to a Brazilian cell network. The app is really just http://help.motorola.com/hc/apps/brapps/redirect.php (Redirects to https://moto.offerwall.com.br/appbox_moto) in a WebView with a carrier-specific header at the top and some way to install APKs which seems to be defunct as the page only links to the Play Store now.

Re: Google’s ‘Project Hug’ paid out huge sums to keep game devs in the Play Store

#225

Post by heavyset_go »

jakecopp wrote: post #9

> After another meeting between Apple and Google senior executives, notes showed that the execs agreed: "Our vision is that we work as if we are one company." ... > This unredacted graf shows that telcos get up to 25% of Google's app sales to keep them from developing rival app stores on the smartphones they sell and service. Insane reading.

>> After another meeting between Apple and Google senior executives, notes showed that the execs agreed: "Our vision is that we work as if we are one company."

They're literally a cartel.

Re: Google’s ‘Project Hug’ paid out huge sums to keep game devs in the Play Store

#227

Post by stale2002 »

roenxi wrote: post #78
H8crilA wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean Apple's monopoly position is even stronger because they can put roadblocks at the hardware level? :)

The problem with that line of accusation is that Apple having a monopoly on the production and maintenance of Apple products isn't a very compelling threat. In a more reasonable market, like smartphones or phones in total, Apple just does not have a monopoly. There are alternatives.

> like smartphones or phones in total, Apple just does not have a monopoly.

A monopoly is not needed for anti-competitive behavior to be illegal. All that is needed is significant market power.

Apple has 50% of the smartphone market. Which is around where courts have stated that anti-trust laws start to apply.

50% of a highly concentrated market is not a slam dunk anti-trust case, by any means, but it is within the realm where courts might rule against it, depending on numerous factors.

Re: Google’s ‘Project Hug’ paid out huge sums to keep game devs in the Play Store

#228

Post by IncRnd »

jimbob45 wrote: post #156
jakecopp wrote: post #9

> After another meeting between Apple and Google senior executives, notes showed that the execs agreed: "Our vision is that we work as if we are one company." ... > This unredacted graf shows that telcos get up to 25% of Google's app sales to keep them from developing rival app stores on the smartphones they sell and service. Insane reading.

That’s it, right? That’s the game? There’s no way the DoJ doesn’t have a slam-dunk case with that one quote.

Possibly, but when Janet Reno "had the goods" on Microsoft, she suddenly settled. Mind you, that was a lengthy case with the explicit purpose of splitting up Microsoft. Then, when it was all but cinched, she suddenly reversed and settled for just about ... no concessions. All Microsoft had to do was share APIs.

Even the judge in the case said that Microsoft executives had "proved, time and time again, to be inaccurate, misleading, evasive, and transparently false. ... Microsoft is a company with an institutional disdain for both the truth and for rules of law that lesser entities must respect. It is also a company whose senior management is not averse to offering specious testimony to support spurious defenses to claims of its wrongdoing." [1]

This new situation may be a slam-dunk, but no dunking may actually happen.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor...

Re: Google’s ‘Project Hug’ paid out huge sums to keep game devs in the Play Store

#229

Post by stale2002 »

spicybright wrote: post #6

tbh, isn't it completely in google's right to do this? It's not a regulated market, it's google's store.

Thats for the courts to decide.

And apparently there are a whole bunch of lawsuits against google, in multiple countries.

My money is on them losing at least one of them, in some way.

All that needs to happen is for them to lose a single lawsuit, somewhere, for the statement of "its in their right to do that" to be wrong.

Re: Google’s ‘Project Hug’ paid out huge sums to keep game devs in the Play Store

#230

Post by IncRnd »

Forge36 wrote: post #67
NorwegianDude wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His point still stands, especially on iOS where other browsers isn't even allowed and every browser has to be basically a reskin of safari. That way others can't add features or stability, forcing developers to use the app store and give Apple a large cut. This is much more serious that the Microsoft case.

Based on this previous case Apple isn't violating the law because they also sold the hardware.

Are you saying that Safari requires hardware-level apis?
Post reply on HN