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

861–870 of 1001 posts

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#861

Post by jojobas »

UtahDave wrote: post #857
jojobas wrote: post #842

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW you don't really need an app store, you could download APKs off vendors/publishers, verify signatures and mind updates (except Apple won't let you, but that's a different story). You want to use an app store, fine, use an app store and pay some commission on what you buy there, it's not a problem, reaching into any purchase done after the initial download is.

Many applications such as banking applications are only available in the official app store.

Google is not to blame for the fact that your bank won't trust you to verify an apk signature. There's no fundamental need for the OS vendor to oversee app distribution.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#862

Post by jzl »

jojobas wrote: post #842
guru4consulting wrote: post #837

I consider HN users to be smarter and rational than average internet crowd. Surprised to see folks here comparing the Google Apple store to other business models like Starbucks, Donut shops, Restaurants? does not make sense to me. Consumers have a choice to switch all other businesses but not the mobile app stores. I can live without Starbucks or Netflix if I want to, or switch to different providers if needed. But t…

FWIW you don't really need an app store, you could download APKs off vendors/publishers, verify signatures and mind updates (except Apple won't let you, but that's a different story). You want to use an app store, fine, use an app store and pay some commission on what you buy there, it's not a problem, reaching into any purchase done after the initial download is.

That would be impractical and nearly impossible to do. Name even one other computing platform that works this way.

Oh, wait a minute …

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#863

Post by turtlebits »

guru4consulting wrote: post #837

I consider HN users to be smarter and rational than average internet crowd. Surprised to see folks here comparing the Google Apple store to other business models like Starbucks, Donut shops, Restaurants? does not make sense to me. Consumers have a choice to switch all other businesses but not the mobile app stores. I can live without Starbucks or Netflix if I want to, or switch to different providers if needed. But t…

Customers don't necessarily want a choice.

Sometimes choice equates to complexity, if it doesn't work for you, don't use the product. Apple is very well known (and probably very successful) for limiting choice, in product lines and features.

IMO Android devices are already open enough - there are alternative app stores and you can sideload apps. Banks not distributing on these channels is not Google's responsibility.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#864

Post by ComputerGuru »

judge2020 wrote: post #468
Andrex wrote: post #403

Do I have this straight? Apple: no sideloading Google: yes sideloading Apple: no alternate app stores Google: OS-native APIs for facilitating third-party app stores Apple: no monopoly Google: yes monopoly Just wondering if I have this straight. Edit- > And it was all decided by a jury, unlike the Apple ruling. Oh, OK. Google will take this to SCOTUS, and their record there (The Author's Guild, Oracle) is pretty good.…

Epic agreed to no jury trial in the Apple case. They requested one for this Google case. I imagine they knew the battle against Apple was a much bigger hill given the lack of any evidence of direct harm to Epic, besides in the payment processors argument (which Epic won).

No, I think your reasons would be motivators for Epic to have insisted on a jury trial against Apple. I think the real reason is Epic’s lawyers thought the average American jury member would be more sympathetic to Apple than to Google.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#865

Post by turtlebits »

iforgotpassword wrote: post #858
jojobas wrote: post #842

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW you don't really need an app store, you could download APKs off vendors/publishers, verify signatures and mind updates (except Apple won't let you, but that's a different story). You want to use an app store, fine, use an app store and pay some commission on what you buy there, it's not a problem, reaching into any purchase done after the initial download is.

Where exactly can I download my bank's app as an APK? Except random shady websites...

How is this a Google problem? Ask your bank.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#866

Post by jzl »

dcow wrote: post #833
michaelt wrote: post #749

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on what type of subscription business it is. I've heard meal kit companies like Hello Fresh lose 90% of their customers in less than 12 months, as the generous new customer discount vouchers tail off. (Not that meal kit companies would be paying Apple 30%)

Meal kit companies don’t pay the 30% because the payment is for a service that is delivered outside the app. Uber doesn't pay it either. It’s a stupid loophole apple built in that all but proves the 30% cut is ridiculous and would never work in the real world.

Exactly. The whole argument about security and people needing a central payment system for things to be safe user friendly is patently ridiculous given that said approach is working just fine for all the “physical items” apps.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#868

Post by amadeuspagel »

jncfhnb wrote: post #377
TerrifiedMouse wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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! Monopolies aren’t illegal. Only the abuse of a monopoly position to advance your interest in other markets is illegal. E.g. It’s not illegal to be the only seller of gasoline in the country. It is illegal though to bundle laundry powder with gasoline sales to corner the laundry powder…

If we see fair competition reducing fees massively in android vs Apple, Apple’s abuse will be clear

What we will see is that you will need a different app store for every game on android, while on iOS you can get them all from the App Store.

The only thing that will be clear is that Apple got it right the first time by not allowing other app stores.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#869

Post by badwolf »

oarsinsync wrote: post #605
nostrebored wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because consumers value the Apple ecosystem and UX, both of which you can take advantage of as a developer. What is the problem?

The problem is that after a decade, my choices are to continue to spend money at Apple, or spend even more money and time to leave Apple, go somewhere else, and buy all the apps I already own, all over again. When I first started, I used to think of Apple as the best option available to me. Now I think about it as the least bad option. The cost of leaving involves so much time and money, that it’s not a realistic opt…

That's... life.

DVDs come out. Now I have to rebuy all my VHS movies on another platform...

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#870

Post by jzl »

nodamage wrote: post #674

There seems to be a lot of confusion in this thread regarding why Apple won their case against Epic while Google lost theirs. The key reason Apple won their case is the fact that consumers generally purchase iPhones knowing ahead of time that their app download options are restricted to the App Store. If they disagreed with that restriction then they could have made the choice to purchase another phone instead, but d…

It’s not like there was some centralized decision making here. It’s possible for the two cases to be contradictory, given jury vs bench, and a whole host of other reasons. I think it’s safe to say that there’s still a long road ahead for both cases, and it’s possible that one outcome will affect the other in the appeals process. Not to mention any legislation that might get passed as a result.
Post reply on HN