I suggest that this actually makes Sweeney _more_ historically influential than Carmack. They both have remarkably similar origins https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Sweeney_(game_developer)
[deleted]
Epic vs. Google: Google Loses
121–130 of 1001 posts
Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses
#122Absolutely fantastic news. Now extend it to Apple.
[deleted]
Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be fair, that's literally called a video game console.
What is?
> Lock down your platform tight as a drum and you may employ all manners of anticompetitive practices because you legally forbid the existence of competitors and you're "curating your experience"
That's what a video game console is, technically speaking. It's a completely locked down environment which is curated tightly.
> but open yourself up to any competition and your behavior becomes anticompetitive.
That's called the antitrust investigation into Microsoft Windows; or the complaints about Apple's "sherlocking."
Edit: I'm actually OK with this, even legally, because I view devices as being means to an end for an experience, which is also how I think most consumers view devices. When viewed that way, we really have three major "buckets" of devices if you will: "Computers", "Gaming", "Phones".
The "Computers" market is a race in most minds between Windows and Mac (and thus Windows gets hit with antitrust investigations). The "Phones" market is once again a 2-cart race between Android and iPhone (and this time, Android gets the antitrust investigations). The "Games" market is a 4-cart race between 3 console manufacturers and the PC, with 2 additional smaller carts called Cloud Gaming and the Smartphone (which, themselves have 3 and 2 carts respectively) - thus, no interest in investigating anyone there. However, if gaming didn't exist on the PC and was strictly Sony v. Nintendo, it would totally be investigated.
Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses
#124It will be extremely interesting to see how this shapes android going forward. Google didn’t just lose some point— they lost every point > The jury unanimously answered yes to every question put before them — that Google has monopoly power in the Android app distribution markets and in-app billing services markets, that Google did anticompetitive things in those markets, and that Epic was injured by that behavior. Th…
[flagged]
Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses
#125Assuming this ruling stands, and the pattern is extended to Apple as well, what does a multi-app-store world look like? How does one "install" a new app store, what sort of permissions does it get? Who can start a new app store? What risks does a user accept when they do business with a 3rd party store? I for one would welcome a mobile store from Valve, Epic etc, especially if I could have my purchases work on multip…
The case is about the fees in an anti-competitive situation, not about whether or not consumers should be allowed to install their own software on these devices.
The stores can be the exact same with the fees removed and device prices hiked, afaict
Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the article: > But Epic v. Google turned out to be a very different case. It hinged on secret revenue sharing deals between Google, smartphone makers, and big game developers, ones that Google execs internally believed were designed to keep rival app stores down. It showed that Google was running scared of Epic specifically. And it was all decided by a jury, unlike the Apple ruling.
We learned in the Epic v. Apple trial that Apple cut sweetheart deals with Netflix and other companies as well. Am I missing how this is different?
You mean like Epic cut with console makers for co-marketing dollars or like every company does with large customers?
I’ve got news for you - AWS also cut special deals with AWS, Spotify with GCP and OpenAI with Azure.
Do you really think large comoanirs get the same deals as the creator of random Indy app maker?
Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses
#127I'm not sure how I feel about this, on the one hand monopolies are obviously very anti consumer, but I do see Google's point of securing the already questionable appStore. But surely there's a happy medium in there to simply allow 3rd party payment processing?
Why is there this assumption that third party apps are going to be so unsafe? We already run untrusted executable code in the form of JavaScript. Why does the android system need to be different? Why can’t we say the OS needs sandboxing, api permissions, etc. I really don’t want the only thing protecting my phone being the fact that a human sometimes reviews an app.
because this is what computing used to be. you would download some random executable off some random website and hope you didn’t get infected with malware
except the stakes are much higher on your phone than your 1998 computer because your phone is more powerful: your phone has more personal data, financial info, and can consume costly telecom resources
Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Would they also make Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft open up their platforms? God I hope so.
It would be terrible for consoles. They would not be able to recover their costs early enough in the lifecycle. Which means that the time between console releases would be much longer than it already is. It also would put Nintendo in an untenable situation since they rely on low price hardware as their differentiation.
The would be the end of consoles.
At this point consoles have very few advantages to PC. If they got "opened up" it would be zero.
Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses
#129Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don't get it, so no company can provide a walled garden You can provide a walled garden. But that's not Apple does. Instead, Apple is a mafia that shakes down all the vendors for the right to sell in their semi-open market square. If Apple iOS were a walled garden, it would have contained only Apple applications.
The mafia shakes down people who don't interact with them, apple does not.
How do I develop a mobile app which a majority of people in the US will be able to use without interacting with Apple?