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

241–250 of 607 posts

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

#241

Post by tick_tock_tick »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #229
lolinder wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 antic…

I think the problem everyone is having is the government is seeing something that isn't there. We don't have a "lack of understanding" but are rather just so much more informed and educated then the legal system on this matter that we came to the correct conclusion while they failed to reach a basic understanding.

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

#242

Post by miki123211 »

GeekyBear wrote: post #151
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.

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…

it's not about whether your platform is open or not, but about who's making the devices and what you're forcing them to do.

XBox is only made by Microsoft, there are no XBox OEMs, and Microsoft can do whatever they like to their devices. They're not forcing any manufacturer to do anything, because they are the manufacturer. Same with iPhones, Play Station consoles and so on.

Windows computers and Android phones are manufactured by many companies, and Microsoft and Google were engaging in anticompetitive behavior by forcing everybody who wanted their OSes to do certain things, and that's the problem here.

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

#243

Post by lolinder »

makeitdouble wrote: post #237
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…

From the TFA > Stop requiring Google Play Billing for apps distributed on the Google Play Store (the jury found that Google had illegally tied its payment system to its app store) > Let Android developers tell users about other ways to pay from within the Play Store > Let Android developers link to ways to download their apps outside of the Play Store > Let Android developers set their own prices for apps irrespectiv…

Yes. I install everything I can through F-Droid or sideloading and only fall back on the Play Store for a few things like banking apps which couldn't care less about Google's monetization rules.

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

#244

Post by NotPractical »

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…

It's not quite as convoluted as you describe, and I don't think Android ever changes that setting on your behalf. The fact of the matter is that it is dangerous. IMO it's a good thing that they provide you with appropriate warnings.

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

#245

Post by rezonant »

nijave wrote: post #227
carlosjobim wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

This. I'm so tired of people (and Google/Apple themselves) trying to change the narrative and say that this is about Android and iOS competing. It's not. Both companies are effectively saying you have no right to change the upholstery in your car unless you buy the package from them.

This is about the economic freedoms of end users and app developers within a platform, not whether lock in is a feature for consumer comparison when buying a phone.

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

#246

Post by makeitdouble »

hooli42 wrote: post #61
whimsicalism wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, just like how they've done on desktop environments

This is exactly the situation for desktop games right now, something Epic is profiting immensely from. It's an extremely annoying situation for users, having a dozen launcher/store apps around contributing to bloat.

> It's an extremely annoying situation for users

This is where I see how long that battle will be.

The future where this "extremely annoying" situation is fully solved is Xbox XXX being un removable and the only Game Store allowed on any PC sold, with legal threats to anyone jailbreaking.

As long as user have a choice and control on their device, and competition is alive, we'll hopefuly have different stores with different rules and you'll be extremely annoyed I think.

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

#247

Post by rpdillon »

NotPractical wrote: post #244
zmmmmm wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

It's not quite as convoluted as you describe, and I don't think Android ever changes that setting on your behalf. The fact of the matter is that it is dangerous. IMO it's a good thing that they provide you with appropriate warnings.

It's only dangerous if Google has better judgment than the end user. This may be the case for the majority of users, but there's a significant subset for whom it's not the case. It'd be nice if there were a way for the end user to nudge Google to step aside.

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

#248

Post by AStonesThrow »

NotPractical wrote: post #199
scarface_74 wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes because Google said there platform was “open” and then changed the rules. Apple buyers knew what they were getting beforehand. There is Supreme Court precedent for this

This comes up a lot but when did Google say their platform was "open"? Maybe a few times in the early days when Google was still considered "cool" in hacker circles, but probably not in consumer-facing advertising? Moreover, "open" can mean a lot of things. I don't think I ever signed an agreement with Google that promised me source code for Android or the ability to sideload on my Android phone?

For starters, it's the "O" in "AOSP":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_(operating_system)#Ope...

So, 2007-present, that's when.

Android is acknowledged as a Linux distribution. Linux, also known as GNU/Linux, incorporates significant GPL-licensed code. By contrast, Apple has used BSD derivatives for a codebase, and BSD licenses, while F/OSS, are not "viral" in the way the GPL is, so Apple is not required to redistribute source code, or submit their patches upstream, and they can make proprietary additions anywhere they like.

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

#249

Post by rezonant »

ssl-3 wrote: post #98
ethbr1 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It's not a court of public opinion. This isn't a popularity contest; they're not running for public office or something here. In real court (with real lawyers and real judges), precedent often matters (often, it matters quite a lot). Informing the court of [what may be] meaningful precedent is important; without this deliberate informative step, the court might not know about it at all. The court cannot take anything…

I'm not worried that Google forgot to tell the judge about the other ruling. Pretty sure they are competent enough to try.

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

#250

Post by Izkata »

xethos wrote: post #204
Phrodo_00 wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

For years, OEMs were made to install a number of Google apps onto the homescreen at predefined places. One of which is the Play Store. Amazon (for example) absolutely did not have this advantage, despite this kind of thing happening on non-Google hardware. Or we can look at why Google's Play Store is allowed to auto-update apps without user interaction, and... that's it. That's the only store that's allowed to do tha…

Speaking of OEMs (and non-Google Android in general), Google has moved some functionality from base Android into Google Play Services so some apps won't work unless you get that installed.
Post reply on HN