I fail to understand how HN and the court system do not think the same against Apple
Different people on HN, different judges, judge vs jury
Epic vs. Google: Google Loses
281–290 of 1001 posts
Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses
#282Earlier quoted context omitted.
But they are the ones that allowed those companies to compete in the first place. And I'm not saying that they should have won. Both Apple and Google losing would have been the best outcome. However, Google losing and Apple winning is the worst. Because its makes open platforms even less attractive to businesses.
Unfortunately, apple’s position as both phone manufacturer, iOS manufacturer, and App Store maintainer resulted in them being able to successfully argue that their control over the App Store was a feature that was expected by users and was needed to maintain a smooth and secure operating ecosystem Google, on the other hand, just got pilloried because they are not the phone manufacturer (for the most post), but instea…
if you zoom out you find that Google got published for allowing other manufacturers into their Android system while Apple benefited from keeping ios closed to themselves. how does this serve the consumers ultimately
Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses
#283Apple should be punished for this more than Google. Google doesn't ban competing browsers, Apple does.
The best answer would be to take a look at the ruling, it's pretty clear why it applies to Google.
On Apple, I think the EU will do a better job as for better or worse there will be no "let us bring money to the country" defense like the last time.
Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses
#284Now go after the rest of Google's effective monopoly on browsers and control over the Internet.
I wish the title said Epic Win.
Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses
#285This sounds good, but didn't Apple get off the hook?
Anyone can decipher what the difference are?
Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses
#286Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t think Nintendo has ever sold consoles at a per-unit loss. It would actually probably help them since it would raise the cost of Sony and Microsoft’s offerings even higher over theirs
No but they make a lot of money through licensing and Nintendo Store sales. That would all disappear if you could side-load any content.
Does "side-load any content" mean unlimited piracy? Otherwise I don't understand your argument at all. But adding side-loading does not enable unlimited piracy.
Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses
#287Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses
#288Earlier quoted context omitted.
Javascript was designed to be secure-by-default, and it takes a vast amount of effort to keep it that way Native apps were designed to be powerful-by-default, and the amount of effort to bolt security on after the fact is orders of magnitude more
Not for mobile. The default is to have everything sensitive locked down.
They are victim of Apple's security horror story. Apple advertises their mobile app sandbox system is poor, to protect their dominated store.
Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses
#289Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then Mom needs more training on how to differentiate between legitimate sites and non-legitimate ones. I've said it before, I'll say it again, as many times as people need to hear it: There is no such thing as, "I'm just not a computer person!" We're over and done with that era of human history. Just like we're over and done with, "I just can't read and write!" Too bad. You live in a world were reading and writing is…
And how has that worked for the last 40 years?
Well for the first couple of hundred thousand years of our existence as modern humans, we didn't teach everyone to read and write. It's been essentially the past 400 years, give or take some decades. And as it happens, it's turned out beautifully, in my estimation.
Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses
#290Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, this was not a court case about if Google has a phone OS monopoly. This was about if Google has a monopoly within the android ecosystem when it comes to app distribution. The jury ruled that they have a monopoly within android, and that they used this monopoly to stifle competition. They cited that Google used its influence as the makers of android to get phone manufacturers to not preinstall third party app stor…
um but does Apple not have a monopoly on the iOS distribution system? if anything, Android is open to competition against Google. I'm baffled
Google lost this lawsuit because they were engaging in anticompetitive behavior on android by paying off companies to not produce third party app stores (like Riot) and paying phone manufacturers to not ship third party stores
Google, as evidenced by their own internal docs and company deals, had no interest in having any real competition for the Google Play store.
It’s really hard to see these deals when Google is the arbiter of android and anything but extremely anti competitive