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

221–230 of 607 posts

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

#221

Post by jojobas »

zmmmmm wrote: post #219
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 paym…

I'll take convoluted over outright impossible any day. I'll also take convolutedly unlockable bootloader over the vendor having access to my device even when I don't.

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

#222

Post by jaimex2 »

Google will do an uno reverse on the EU

If Apple's store isn't illegal then they will switch to their model. Android will lock out alternative stores completely in response.

They'll probably rename Android to something else and say its a new, more secure OS.

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

#223

Post by ocdtrekkie »

lolinder wrote: post #208
GeekyBear wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you claim the platform you create is open, but use anticompetitive actions to retain control of it, you end up in a worse legal position than you would have by being clear that the platform is closed. Look at Microsoft. They have been found guilty of anticompetitive conduct related to their open Windows platform in multiple jurisdictions, but not so with XBox. Either never claim your platform is open, or refrain f…

This is a terrible incentive structure to set up for platforms. I get the reasoning, but I chose Android because it's open and I've never run into any of the anticompetitive problems people claim are so damaging. If Google had known that this was the deal at the beginning, I doubt they'd have created Android the way that they did and I wouldn't have an open platform to use—we'd just have two walled gardens. How is th…

"I chose Android because it's open"

But it never was. You were defrauded and everyone who made that choice for those reasons were illicit market gains because of the secret agreements Google exerted over the entire ecosystem around you.

It was never really open but you also never really knew about that because all of the real options were taken out back and killed before you saw them.

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

#224

Post by ocdtrekkie »

kelnos wrote: post #122
akira2501 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> is an illegal monopoly while the Apple App Store isn't? This lawsuit is focused on Google. It's existence or the facts conveyed within do not provide any cover to Apple. They don't prevent Apple from facing the same lawsuit or from being covered by the same judgement. Do you feel this way when we put a murderer away? I mean, "his murder was illegal, but yet, some people still get away with it?! What is this injusti…

> They don't prevent Apple from facing the same lawsuit or from being covered by the same judgement. I thought Apple did face the same lawsuit, against the same plaintiff, and Apple won.

The core difference is Apple had a bench trial and Google let actual people decide in a jury trial, which is a lot harder to swindle with legal technicalities, and also much harder to overturn on appeal.

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

#225

Post by lolinder »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #223
lolinder wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a terrible incentive structure to set up for platforms. I get the reasoning, but I chose Android because it's open and I've never run into any of the anticompetitive problems people claim are so damaging. If Google had known that this was the deal at the beginning, I doubt they'd have created Android the way that they did and I wouldn't have an open platform to use—we'd just have two walled gardens. How is th…

"I chose Android because it's open" But it never was. You were defrauded and everyone who made that choice for those reasons were illicit market gains because of the secret agreements Google exerted over the entire ecosystem around you. It was never really open but you also never really knew about that because all of the real options were taken out back and killed before you saw them.

> You were defrauded

No. I knew exactly what I was getting and I've been enjoying it for years.

Is it perfect? No. But I know better than to demand perfection when something entirely suitable to my needs is already available.

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

#226

Post by dmvdoug »

gerash wrote: post #201
dmvdoug wrote: post #163

For all the people commenting on the discrepancy between this ruling and the one in Apple’s case: now perhaps you see the value of good lawyers. Apple was able to convince the judge in their case to fairly narrowly define the market segment at issue. Google failed to do that here. And no, it’s not as simple as saying they’re the same so this will get overturned on appeal to stay consistent with the Apple ruling. The…

Good lawyers or BS legal system?

Yes.

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

#227

Post by nijave »

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.

That's not quite a fair comparison. The issue isn't Google v Apple--it's Google/Apple creating vertically integrated software platforms where they have a monopoly on App Stores.

Imo this is more similar to John Deere creating tractor DRM to lock out other entities from repairs. If Toyota came up with a proprietary motor design such that no other repair shop or parts manufacturer could make repairs, it'd be a similar situation. As it stands, there's 3rd party companies making replacement parts and a secondary market with used parts in addition to varying degrees of interoperability with other parts.

There is no secondary market for apps since they're all sold as licenses and never own anything. They also intentionally put restrictions in place to prevent 3rd parties from creating "replacement" apps

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

#228

Post by notatoad »

flutas wrote: post #145
wccrawford wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That isn't "all apps on Google Play". It's "all apps developed by Google that integrate with the Google Play system."

Nah, it's absolutely all apps on google play. > For a period of three years, Google will permit third-party Android app stores to access the Google Play Store's catalog of apps so that they may offer the Play Store apps to users. For apps available only in the Google Play Store (i.e., that are not independently available through the third-party Android app store), Google will permit users to complete the download of…

thanks for posting the actual wording here, that makes things a lot more clear and a lot less ominous than my first interpretation.

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

#229

Post by ocdtrekkie »

lolinder wrote: post #225
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I chose Android because it's open" But it never was. You were defrauded and everyone who made that choice for those reasons were illicit market gains because of the secret agreements Google exerted over the entire ecosystem around you. It was never really open but you also never really knew about that because all of the real options were taken out back and killed before you saw them.

> You were defrauded No. I knew exactly what I was getting and I've been enjoying it for years. Is it perfect? No. But I know better than to demand perfection when something entirely suitable to my needs is already available.

Your lack of understanding of how you were defrauded does not change that you were. This is exactly why the government sometimes steps in to fix things even when a company is considered popular by consumers.

Everything you have bought on Android was illegally taxed, and numerous things you bought outside of Android you also overpaid for as companies tried to absorb the abusive fees as well.

You didn't "see" the anticompetitive concerns but you also never benefit from any of the options you would have if Google had operated a legal business model.

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

#230

Post by miki123211 »

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.

This isn't just about which store is a monopoly, but about what companies choose to do with that fact.

Google is (was) free to only ship Google Play on Pixel phones, just as Apple only ships the App Store on their iPhones. What Google wasn't allowed to do was to "bribe" and force carriers and OEMs to favor Google Play over other stores. This is what they did, and now they have to face consequences.

The business models are very different here. Apple makes their own phones with their own OS, and can do with them as they please. In Android land, however, it's other companies making the phones, using a custom fork of the open source Android operating system, and Google is engaging in anticompetitive behavior by pushing these companies into Google Play if they want to get any of the other Google services on that OS.

Post reply on HN