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

231–240 of 495 posts

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

#231

Post by stale2002 »

LadyCailin wrote: post #153
lozenge wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's what the lawsuit is about. "Epic’s complaint alleges that Google’s payment restrictions on the Play Store constitute a monopoly, and thus a violation of both the Sherman Act and California’s Cartwright Act."

Maybe google should move to one year exclusivity on the apps in their App Store?

That would be a much better situation than the current status quo.

If Google moved to exclusive deals, then that would mean that they would be paying game developers, 10s of millions of dollars, instead of the other way around.

The current situation is the reverse. Game devs are paying google 10s of millions of dollars. If the opposite happened, then that would be much better.

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

#232

Post by [deleted] »

0x0nyandesu wrote: post #198
techrat wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I work in the entertainment industry. You're full of shit.

Lmk when you get invited to an after party with the talent in the Hollywood hills. And by talent mean 18-25 year old valley girls.

[deleted]

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

#233

Post by IncRnd »

0x0nyandesu wrote: post #179
roenxi wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

In the entertainment industry not having an iPhone literally hurts your career. If you can't use iMessage people look at you weird and you are literally excluded from social circles. I know someone that was in tech and went into music and even though she prefers Android she ended up caving and getting an iPhone.

You may not be aware, but you can send from imessage to an android. The other way works, too.

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

#234

Post by AlexCoventry »

mard wrote: post #18

In 2001, Microsoft "constituted unlawful monopolization" under Antitrust Act for bundling a web browser with their operating system. 20 years later, Apple and Google bundle not only their browsers, but whole irreplaceable app stores with no legal consequences. I don't know how the law sees it, but it's simply illogical from the common sense standpoint.

Maybe intent matters. Until now, maybe, there's been nothing demonstrating intent like the "cut off Netscape's air supply" quote the DOJ used in the Microsoft antitrust case.

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

#235

Post by AlexCoventry »

fzzzy wrote: post #218
fingerlocks wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much does this really matter to the typical user? I’m not using Firefox because it’s JS and rendering engine are significantly better than webkit. Can’t really tell the difference honestly. I’m still getting all the other features of Firefox that actually distinguish it from it’s competitors. The so-called skin is more like the guts from a user value perspective.

The user doesn't notice, but it stifles innovation at that level of the stack.

I would notice the lack of ad blocker/no-script.

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

#236

Post by beambot »

beckman466 wrote: post #3

> Larry Page told Steve Jobs in 2010 that "There will always be places we compete, and places where we cooperate." > 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." > That is a damning little piece of evidence. Looks like it’s exactly the meritocracies Google and Apple claim to be, nothing monopoly-like to be…

They also cooperated on illegal recruiting practices to stifle tech wages:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust...

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

#237

Post by Ericson2314 »

the-dude wrote: post #128
ant6n wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's competition in the railroad market in the EU,because they want there to be a market. In particular they mandate separation of infrastructure and operation, and force rail infrastructure owners to give open access to all (for a toll, which has to be the same for all operators). Once you can't use infrastructure as a moat, competition is much more possible. The US which only regulates rail safety but not the ma…

Are there any indications that a market for rail is actually more efficient?

It's not! One of the end results is taking trains across national borders is way more annoying than it should be. That in turn I believe has lead to warped statistics on the viability of rail for long distances!

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

#238

Post by howaboutnope »

smabie wrote: post #193
arkitaip wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As always when mega corps are involved we have to at least entertain the idea that their employees and agents come out in full force to defend the actions of the corp. Anything else would be dangerously naive.

Alternatively, maybe some people just disagree?

Downvoting isn't for disagreement, replies are.

At any rate, the idea that companies with people who would collude in such a major way don't have any employees willing to manipulating discourse on a site like HN... that doesn't even pass the smell test, there is no way that this is the case.

This site should have all votes and flags by all accounts made public. No more guessing, no more squirming.

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

#239

Post by arcturus17 »

dalbasal wrote: post #173
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…

>>business' has naturally high margins $8bn in revenue might not mean profitable. Google certainly spend a lot more than this on search and advertising, and well... software scales. In any case, whether they make $1bn in profit, losses or something in between... This is profits . Apple is making $8bn-$12bn, all profit, just on defaults.

GP is saying naturally high margins because it is a pure software play with close-to-zero marginal distribution cost and massive scale.

We don’t know if Bing’s profitable but GP is merely saying that with the circumstances above it is an interesting market for Microsoft to pursue.

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

#240

Post by arcturus17 »

Sargos wrote: post #92
ThePhysicist wrote: post #27

I've grown pretty pessimistic about the prospects of the Internet as a motor for entrepreneurship. Today it is theoretically still "free" but wherever you go you'll find gatekeepers like Google, Apple, Facebook, Twitter and Microsoft that keep a tight grip on who is visible on the net and who can offer a service or software product on a given platform. In my view, the market dominance of the big players has led to a…

Thankfully I think Web3 (dapps made from composable protocols collaboratively developed by everyone) will form strong competition and maybe even replace Google in the next 5-10 years. Services like social media, finance, gaming, productivity, etc will all be interoperable by default providing a seamless user experience and be built by millions of developers around the world. Each company coding only what they special…

Why would my mother or yours, as internet users, care about anything that you just said, in a way that justifies a prediction that Google, Facebook or others will lose their monopolies in 5-10 years?
Post reply on HN