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

261–270 of 607 posts

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

#261

Post by RevEng »

scarface_74 wrote: post #232
NotPractical wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

They actually did promise you could get the source code for Android. From a Twitter message by Rubin in 2010. https://techcrunch.com/2010/10/19/andy-rubin-twitter/ > the definition of open: "mkdir android ; cd android ; repo init -u git://android.git.kernel.org/platform/manifest.git ; repo sync ; make"

AOSP still exists, but it doesn't include most of the Google specific apps.

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

#262

Post by AceFromOttawa »

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…

If there 100's of alternate app stores, all with different revenue sharing agreements, payment processing systems, etc etc etc how are developers going to manage it all? Does a developer need to share their billing info with 100's of app stores? Seperatly agree to each stores terms of service? Seems like it will get awfully complicated awfully quick.

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

#263

Post by johnnyanmac »

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…

I fail the see the correlation. Epic is synergizing with its platform that is a tiny fraction of its market and its engine that is also not a monopoly (Unity still the most used engine). This context does indeed matter a lot. Hard to lock out competition when your competition is 8x the market share.

>Epic never cared about consumer choice or a fair playing field

of course not. But enemy of my enemy. As of now their arguments benefit the consumer. If they ever do form a monopoly and keep doing these tactics, we can talk lawsuits.

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

#264

Post by johnnyanmac »

elevatedastalt wrote: post #252
ethbr1 wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Then why is there one result for Google and the opposite one for Apple?

follow the money. Which judges handled which cases in which location?

but the non-partisan bailey answer is along the lines of "android promised freedom, IOS never did".

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

#265

Post by wokwokwok »

protimewaster wrote: post #198
isatty wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s because people don’t actually give a rats ass about competition directly. They care about _cost_ AND _convenience_. Steam is great on both fronts and you don’t have to create yet another account or have another buggy pos launcher on your computer.

I'm not sure why people would actively want their game to require either EGS or Steam, though, even if it's convenient. EGS has business practices that drive a lot of people crazy, and Steam has an awful security track record and was also convicted of anticompetitive pricing. (Though people seem to like Steam's business practices even with that conviction, which also always struck me as a little weird.) It seems like…

?

It’s like putting an android apk file on your website for an app.

If you’re giving it away for free to friends, sure.

If not, how do you sell it? How do you stop people stealing it? How do people find out about it?

Obviously, you the answer is usually “you write your own installer / updater” and do your own marketing.

Maybe that’s fun, and there’s something to be said for owning the entire stack… but it’s a loooot of work and probably not a reasonable financial decision to make.

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

#266

Post by rezonant »

kelnos wrote: post #105
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.

Sure, but I think it's fair to say "why are you regulating us significantly more than you are regulating our similar competitor?" Android is already more open than iOS; you can already install third-party app stores, where the only hoop you have to jump is agreeing to a warning about installing things from "unknown sources". But yeah, Google doesn't allow rival app stores to be distributed through the Play Store, nor…

It does make sense for Amazon's app store, as it's a general app store. Makes way less sense for Epic and other gaming/company focused storefronts.

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

#267

Post by davidczech »

akira2501 wrote: post #48
tencentshill wrote: post #21

Soon we'll have the Verizon Appstore and the Spotify Appstore and the Zoom Appstore, the exclusive home for each app and their partners, each with it's own overlapping user tracking libraries and insecure payment methods, and no one can even tell them to do otherwise. Coming soon to iOS, too!

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.

I wish that was true, but the exit and prompt return of seemingly every PC game developer back to Steam doesn't give much hope.

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

#268

Post by rezonant »

clhodapp wrote: post #71
jncfhnb wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple's claim is simple: The monopoly was from the very beginning, when the iPhone had 0.0% market share. If it was anti-competitive, the iPhone would have failed. If developers didn't like it, the iPhone would have failed. Has Apple unfairly done anything new now that they have a monopoly? No. Did Apple raise their 30% royalty to 70% when they had a monopoly? No. The problem is not a monopoly on hardware. The prob…

The logical consequence of this argument is that there is no such thing as a business practice which is illegal for a monopoly, but which is legal for a startup. As long as you start doing it when you're small, it must be OK. I don't think that holds water. The standards should definitely get higher as you gain more market share.

I assume you meant to respond to GP

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

#269

Post by orourke »

ethbr1 wrote: post #217
wolpoli wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I’ve been working with React Native and Flutter and every time I have to interact directly with iOS/Android, I find that Android is much easier to work with and feels much better designed from a software/api/config perspective. Where Apple wins, however, imho is in hardware. The iPhone is a masterpiece and users can tell, even ~16 years in. I feel that when Apple finally chokes on hardware, or some player in the Android spaces releases something incredible, the game will change quickly.

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

#270

Post by rezonant »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #54
talldayo wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it started out this way, from the beginning, and developers accepted it. Developers did not accept it. Some did, but any amount does not constitute complete acceptance. From the very beginning, iOS had people developing alternatives to the App Store a-la Cydia. Apple's terms were always controversial. Apple's constituent of app developers does not even remotely reflect the attitude (or assent) of the development co…

The legal agreement, and the fact developers signed it, even if begrudgingly, back when iOS did not have a monopoly in any way, is the only assent the law needs to consider. Student loans certainly don't have much assent 5 years after graduation.

If any of this were remotely true, then I have a contract for you-- it involves a small loan for relocation, no big deal. You'll just have to work for me exclusively for the next 20 years, and if you can't pay it off, no problem, we'll assign the remainder to your kids.
Post reply on HN