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

921–930 of 1001 posts

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#921

Post by nodamage »

gardenhedge wrote: post #676
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…

"Knowingly agrees" - that phrase is doing a lot. The average consumer who buys an iPhone has no idea about Apple approved apps or app store restrictions. There also not told about it when purchasing the device or setting it up.

For the purposes of US antitrust law the onus is on Epic to prove that consumers did not know, and they did not provide any evidence either way.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#922

Post by noisem4ker »

xethos wrote: post #299
rpgwaiter wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AuroraStore is very close, using a ton of reverse engineered stuff from the play store It should all totally be open though

By that measure, F-Droid is very close in that both have the majority of apps some people use (Aurora for you, F-Droid for me). Neither can compete with the Play store though, as only Google's offering is allowed to update or install apps in the background without user interaction (without root). For that matter, only Google Play Protect (part of the Play Store IIRC) can un install apps from user's devices with no in…

> only Google's offering is allowed to update or install apps in the background

Not anymore, since Android 12 (2021).

https://www.xda-developers.com/android-12-alternative-app-st...

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#923

Post by gerash »

hackernewds wrote: post #267

I fail to understand how HN and the court system do not think the same against Apple

here's my conspiracy theory:

At some point in the last decade, large newspapers saw their local ad monopolies being disrupted by Google search ads so as the lost ad revenue they started running negative headlines on Google left and right for years. Apple also took advantage of this and portrayed themselves as the saviors of privacy. That created a negative perception of Google and a positive one for Apple affecting the society as a whole including HNers and these random sample (jury).

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#924

Post by throwaway18636 »

notnullorvoid wrote: post #827
throwaway18636 wrote: post #756

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a dev, I absolutely prefer Apple’s model of locked-down walled garden. HN has no idea about all the grandmas and people who are busy with their jobs and kids, aka majority of the population. I can’t imagine the magnitude of digital fraud and scams that would happen if Apple devices weren’t a walled garden. My only dissatisfaction is that I can’t develop for iOS without buying a Mac and a developer account, but I a…

How does allowing 3rd party app stores negatively affect the elderly? Just like Android the ability to install 3rd party apps and stores would likely be off by default and you'd need to enable it in the settings. And even after enabling it installing something gives you a pretty clear warning that what you're doing could be dangerous. If that's not enough warning for someone then they probably shouldn't have a smart…

Everything “off-by-default” is a “Ma’am, in order to refund the faulty transaction, I need you to open settings…” away.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#925

Post by Drew_ »

lijok wrote: post #814
Drew_ wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

However, Apple's deals were for the purpose of undermining competing payment systems.

They weren’t, because Apple does not allow competing payment systems.

They do just not directly in-app. Many apps only allow subscription via the web. Namely Netflix and Amazon.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#926

Post by secf4ult »

turtlebits wrote: post #863
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.

It's right and wrong at the same time, you can only say "most of the customers don't want a choice", so we just gonna ignore the minority and let big companies take all the cake?

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#927

Post by hipadev23 »

jzl wrote: post #872
hinkley wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple charges 30% on your second $million. For many of us, their fee is 15%. And for a lot of people it’s more like 25%.

> Apple charges 30% on your second $million Not exactly. That would be a purely progressive tax like US income taxes. With the Small Business Program, what you say is only true the first time you cross 1 mil. Assuming your revenue never goes down (you can appeal if it does), in all future years you pay the full price. So if your app makes a consistent $1.5 mil / year, you’re paying the full tax on all of that revenue…

Oh damn. That’s even worse, thank you for the clarification.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#928

Post by jncfhnb »

amadeuspagel wrote: post #868
jncfhnb wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

This isn’t what happens on PC And there’s no reason to think it will happen here.

You might have a few stores but they will largely compete with each other, reduce prices, and offer freebies.

Fuck the App Store. I want to use steam.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#930

Post by martin82 »

ryao wrote: post #882
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…

The average person needs safeguards to prevent them from being tricked into installing malware by seemingly trustworthy black hats. They should not be given devices that lack safeguards. That means having a gatekeeper that curates things. Be it Apple or Google, a gate keeper is a necessity for security. Even for non-average people, gatekeepers like Gentoo's or Debian's package maintainer(s) do a great deal of good.

The free market would have created many trustworthy gatekeepers itself.

And given how much scammy shit there is on the two major AppStores, I would say that it is clear as day and night that Apple and Google utterly suck as "gatekeepers".

Post reply on HN