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

Google must open Android for third-party stores, rules Epic judge

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 607 posts

Re: Google must open Android for third-party stores, rules Epic judge

#211

Post by o11c »

carlosjobim wrote: post #160
ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If apple literally hadn't won their own case 2 years ago you'd be right. If the company that literally doesn't allow users to install ANY application, yet alone a whole store, is in the clear, it's mind boggling that Google's situation is the one they took issue with. Apple literally has a higher market share in the US.

No matter how much hackers and activists try to redefine the word "monopoly" to mean what it isn't, the word still will have the same meaning. And being a market leader doesn't mean you are a monopoly. Toyota does not have a monopoly on motorized transportation. Having two competing companies being tried for the same monopoly is tragicomic, and only to show how rotten the courts have become.

The word "monopoly" is irrelevant for many of the laws involved.

Re: Google must open Android for third-party stores, rules Epic judge

#212

Post by lolinder »

ethbr1 wrote: post #31
mike_d wrote: post #22

Epic's "First Run" program does all the things they got mad at Apple and Google about. You don't have to pay any license fees for Unreal Engine if you use Epic exclusively for payments. They give you 100% revshare for 6 months if you agree to not ship your game on any other app store. Let's not kid ourselves, Epic never cared about consumer choice or a fair playing field, they only want the ability to profit without…

All I care about is having some healthy competition in the marketplace again. If that takes tying Google's hands behind its back for a few years, fine. Taking a 30% cut should have been, prima facie, evidence of monopoly abuse.

Tying Google's hands while giving Apple a clean bill of health isn't going to increase competition, it's going to solidify Apple's lead in the US.

The competition that actually matters is between whole platforms, it's only Epic's lawyers who want everyone to get fixated on the idea that the app store markets are the whole story (or even really a significant portion of the story). I could totally get behind efforts to prevent Google and Apple from together duopolizing the entire mobile phone space, but this is not that.

Re: Google must open Android for third-party stores, rules Epic judge

#213

Post by saghm »

ethbr1 wrote: post #25
xnx wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is ridiculous. From Google's reply ( https://blog.google/outreach-initiatives/public-policy/epic-... ): "These Epic-requested changes stem from a decision that is completely contrary to another court’s rejection of similar claims Epic made against Apple — even though, unlike iOS, Android is an open platform that has always allowed for choice and flexibility like multiple app stores and sideloading."

It's probably not a great idea to point at a monopoly, as a defense of one's own monopoly, and claim "Yeah, but he did it worse." Both Google and Apple's platforms need to be cracked open to competition.

The issue is that the precedent they point to was categorically ruled _not_ an illegal monopoly in a similar court case. I don't disagree that there should be more competition in for platforms, but I also can recognize that the legally binding opinion on that disagrees with mine.

Re: Google must open Android for third-party stores, rules Epic judge

#214

Post by ethbr1 »

lolinder wrote: post #212
ethbr1 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All I care about is having some healthy competition in the marketplace again. If that takes tying Google's hands behind its back for a few years, fine. Taking a 30% cut should have been, prima facie, evidence of monopoly abuse.

Tying Google's hands while giving Apple a clean bill of health isn't going to increase competition, it's going to solidify Apple's lead in the US. The competition that actually matters is between whole platforms, it's only Epic's lawyers who want everyone to get fixated on the idea that the app store markets are the whole story (or even really a significant portion of the story). I could totally get behind efforts to…

The important competition isn't Google v Apple.

It's everyone else v Google and/or Apple.

Ironically, forcing this onto Google might be the best thing for Android, as it's the openness the platform really needed to compete against Apple, but costs Google too much revenue to ever do it if left to their own decision.

Re: Google must open Android for third-party stores, rules Epic judge

#215

Post by o11c »

crazygringo wrote: post #181
akira2501 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. Then consumers can decide which one is best for them. Then they can compete. Then the best features with the best pricing, no only for customers, but the cut for developers, can be discovered. You pay such a high price for living in the walled garden. I honestly can't imagine why you would _want_ it.

How can I decide which store is best for me when the only store I can get Spotify from is the Spotify store? And the only store with Instagram is the Meta store? If every store had to make every app available, then sure I'd have choice and maybe that could be super cool. But nobody's talking about that. We're talking about a world where major corporations will make their apps available only through their own stores a…

The reason that isn't too much of a problem is that if an app is only available on one store, a significant fraction of people will simply not install it. Businesses don't want to lose customers like that, but the mere fact that they could will force Monopoly App Store to act more reasonably.

We'll probably see 3-4 major stores that manage to get enough mindshare for people to actually install them, and a lot of apps available on a 2-ish-store subset of them.

Re: Google must open Android for third-party stores, rules Epic judge

#216

Post by ethbr1 »

rahkiin wrote: post #162
callc wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are a myriad of points which make this metaphor a insufficient argument at best (at worst intentionally obfuscating the nature of digital publishing and digital marketplaces as having similar physical analogues) in favor of the current app store landscape: 1. AFAIK anyone can manufacture and distribute CDs 2. The argument that anything below the cost to manu CDs is acceptable only holds water if you have an ine…

It was 30% vs whatever parties like Symbian asked at the time. Or other existing platforms like consoles where developers were left with less than 70%. Safely distributing software was a pain in 2007 and did involve a lot of expensive publishing

The problem is that cut hasn't come down in the last 20 years, because there's no competitive pressure within ecosystems to force it to.

Re: Google must open Android for third-party stores, rules Epic judge

#217

Post by ethbr1 »

wolpoli wrote: post #191
ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If apple literally hadn't won their own case 2 years ago you'd be right. If the company that literally doesn't allow users to install ANY application, yet alone a whole store, is in the clear, it's mind boggling that Google's situation is the one they took issue with. Apple literally has a higher market share in the US.

Android has the appearance of an open platform that could accommodate alternate app stores, and so the court comes by with an order to allow alternate app stores. IOS never had the appearance of an open platform, so the court does not have the opportunity to do the same thing. What's the lesson for future leaders in tech companies?

Absent first mover advantage with the iPhone, it's extremely difficult to see Apple ending up where it is, with a closed ecosystem.

Re: Google must open Android for third-party stores, rules Epic judge

#218

Post by ethbr1 »

nerdix wrote: post #187
lancesells wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the difference is Google's platform is also on other manufacturers devices? If Android only existed on Pixel devices it could be different.

Why should that matter? If anything, shouldn't that mean that Google doesn't have a monopoly on Android apps in the way that Apple has on iOS apps because the device manufacturer can pre-install their own store on their devices? Like Galaxy Store on Samsung devices

It matters because Google got to the current state (Play Store installed on more devices than it would have been) through anti-competitive behavior.

Ergo, the redress isn't to say "Keep the ill gotten gains, but don't do it any more" -- it's to attempt to return things to the competitive playing field that might have existed if Google hadn't broken the law.

From that perspective, forcing them to use their market share to distribute alternatives makes sense.

Re: Google must open Android for third-party stores, rules Epic judge

#219

Post by zmmmmm »

tmtvl wrote: post #6

Wait, so the Google Play Store, which you can install alternatives to (F-Droid, Aurora, Amazon,...), and where you can easily install apps through other means (such as downloading an APK through your browser and running it from the file manager) is an illegal monopoly while the Apple App Store isn't? Well, I guess Google's market cap is only 2 trillion compared to Apple's 3 trillion, so I guess that's fair.

While I agree with you in principle, in practice Google makes side loading so convoluted and scary that I think they do need / deserve some censure here. The fact you have to go deep into settings, toggle weird settings that tell you how dangerous it is to side load and then it toggles the setting back after you put it on without asking you - this is not all that different to Apple letting you use an alternative payment provider but putting so many warnings in place that no user would ever do it.

I want Google to make ability to side load an actively supported first class feature of the platform. There can be a warnings and additional security measures (scanning, permissions boxing etc if necessary) but nothing that in practice has the effect of preventing a commercial entity from shipping a functional app outside of their store.

Re: Google must open Android for third-party stores, rules Epic judge

#220

Post by cmxch »

Phrodo_00 wrote: post #192
immibis wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple maintains a fully closed platform, while Google appears open yet is closed in practice. Like how Windows bundled IE, meaning that alternative browsers were never used in practice - the EU made them add a browser selection page.

> Google appears open yet is closed in practice How is Android closed in practice?

SafetyNet’s successor and effectively forced hardware attestation make devices designed for consumption, not development.
Post reply on HN