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

Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

581–590 of 1001 posts

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#581

Post by S201 »

scarface_74 wrote: post #431
S201 wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And malware has never existed in the Google Play store, right? The point is that if you are the owner of the device you get to choose what to do with it, not Google. If the trade off for that freedom is an increased risk of malware then so be it. The people that want to only use the Google Play store as their source of software are free to do so, that's the beauty of your device being /your/ device.

And this is why people on HN make horrible product designers

I assume by being on HN you work in the tech industry. Assuming so, you owe your career and livelihood to the openness of the systems that came before you and the people that built them. Locking everything down in the name of safety and convenience is also a great way to prevent innovation and competition.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#582

Post by kazinator »

How does Google compete fiercely with Apple's app store?

I have an Android device. If I can't find something in the Google store, can I go to the Apple store?

We can stretch the argument to say that a power company in Los Angeles competes fiercely with one in Miami, because if people don't like it in Los Angeles, they might go to Miami (and take some of their appliances with them to a power company there).

Thus power companies are not monopolies: people can move. Q.E.D.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#583

Post by summerlight »

MBCook wrote: post #376
summerlight wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whenever DMA kicks in, I'm reasonably sure that there will be a number of state legislatures to follow this case, which will practically enforce Apple to open up the App store in the US.

Why do you say that?

CCPA came after GDPR. What makes you think this is an exception?

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#584

Post by kelnos »

shagie wrote: post #530
deepsun wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ... anticompetitive behavior on android by paying off companies to not produce third party app stores What if they didn't just pay off, but forcefully forbid it, wouldn't it be anticompetitive? Basically, as Apple does on iOS.

Read the complaint against Microsoft from back in the day - https://www.justice.gov/atr/complaint-us-v-microsoft-corp Consider how many of those items apply to Google's behavior and how many apply to Apple's. That Apple is the only way to get the hardware or software for their products (compare to getting Google software licensed on Samsung) is a very important distinction.

I don't see why the Microsoft case is all that relevant; it's not like Microsoft is the archetypal definition of monopoly behavior in hardware/software, and only companies that do things the Microsoft way should be punished.

I personally don't think the distinction you point out should actually be important at all. The end result is an anti-competitive platform, and that's all that should matter.

If we go by the oft-used test of consumer harm, consumers get harmed in exactly the same way on both platforms, with higher prices (due to percentage fees that you can't opt out of) than if the market were more open.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#585

Post by meepmorp »

brandensilva wrote: post #485
fnordpiglet wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Monopolies are not illegal. It’s leveraging the monopoly to exert force on adjacent markets that is. In the case here googles foul play is making side deals for preferential treatment against other app stores given their control over the handset operating system. Apple doesn’t offer an App Store market and never has nor ever represented otherwise, the app store is and always has been part of the operating system. Thi…

Just a slight clarification. The first Apple iPhone did not have an app store.

I think what they meant could be rephrased as, "for as long as there's been an App Store, it's been part of the OS. "

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#586

Post by busymom0 »

bee_rider wrote: post #466
paulddraper wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More of HN uses iOS than Android.

Oh, does the site report this kind of info? That’s interesting, where? It would also be neat to know mobile vs desktop, and how’s the Linux population doing here.

Anecdotal and also not sure how reliable this info can be but I am the developer of HACK which is available on both iOS and Android and I have a significantly larger user base on iOS than android.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#587

Post by kelnos »

bee_rider wrote: post #477
deepsun wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ... anticompetitive behavior on android by paying off companies to not produce third party app stores What if they didn't just pay off, but forcefully forbid it, wouldn't it be anticompetitive? Basically, as Apple does on iOS.

User safety seems like a much more compelling justification for anti-competitive behavior than money.

The non-US world overwhelmingly uses Android more than iOS, and yet everyone's personal security has not crumbled into dust. I will absolutely agree that Android's security posture (both in the OS itself and its app ecosystem) is worse than Apple's, but that doesn't seem to make all that much of a practical difference, does it?

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#588

Post by wvenable »

jader201 wrote: post #416
Wowfunhappy wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple doesn't need to strike secret deals to keep out alternative app stores because they've made alternate app stores completely impossible. If the result of this case is "you can have a monopoly as long as your device and ecosystem are 100% locked down", that's terrible!

What’s to stop Google from locking theirs down, too, at this point? Or would that be illegal since it was originally open?

It's not that Android is open or locked down. Google can do whatever they want with own handsets, like Apple does, but Google is using their influence to affect the software market on other handsets.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#589

Post by zmmmmm »

imchillyb wrote: post #513
poulpy123 wrote: post #397

Tell me if I'm mistaken but Epic lost against Apple that has a completely closed iPhone ecosystem but won against Google that has a relatively open ecosystem ?

That's kind of a childlike interpretation, and mostly fits an anti-apple agenda. The two cases are only similar on the very surface, and nothing alike within the cases themselves. Epic accused apple of being a monopoly, and using its monopoly power to price gouge. The judge in that case ruled that Apple's online store is akin to a physical store and physical stores have _for centuries_ charged monies to shelf product…

> If Apple is not allowed to continue to charge for shelf space, then neither can walmart, Publix, or any other physical venue

When Walmart charges for shelf space the supplier isn't completely out of business if they don't take the deal. They can go to a different store, settle for non-prime shelf space or sell direct to the public. Those options are just not available to app developers - for many categories of app, Apple is the only way to make a profit at all.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#590

Post by kelnos »

ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #469
LordKeren wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 t…

The mental gymnastics outplay here are wild. Google is anticompetitive because they allowed users to install third party apps, but paid big players not to develop app stores. But if they had just done what Apple does, and just ban third party installs all together, that'd be what? Hyper competitive and fair? It absolutely pains me to see Google essentially punished for having the only phone platform that allows users…

Couldn't agree more. It's bizarre to think that one company should be punished because they theoretically had a competitive platform, but did some shady business deals to keep it noncompetitive; but another company is completely in the clear making a platform that is noncompetitive by design, with technical measures in place to ensure it can't be.

I kinda get how it plays out that way in a legal sense, but it still baffles me that so many people can simultaneously support this ruling against Google and continue to praise Apple's practices. Cognitive dissonance (and the Jobsian RDF) is a thing.

Post reply on HN