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

281–290 of 607 posts

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

#281

Post by johnnyanmac »

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!

okay. Then I just use APK pure and find the APKs there. See what freedom does?

Realistically, this never happens. making a platform isn't some cheap endeavor like a landing page for a website. Most people will stay on the play store and use play services. Those with more skin will consider alternative stores, and then lastly some will make their own platforms.

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

#282

Post by johnnyanmac »

throw16180339 wrote: post #139
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.

> You pay such a high price for living in the walled garden. I honestly can't imagine why you would _want_ it. I got an iPhone so that I wouldn't have to deal with the Android ecosystem. I go to the app store, install an app, and get on with my life.

okay, so I assume those who jailbreak don't live rent free in your head? That's all that's happening on a technical level. Making it easier to have other Cydia stores.

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

#283

Post by colonelpopcorn »

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.

But it is. For the savvy user you can run whatever you want on an android device.

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

#284

Post by NotPractical »

ToucanLoucan wrote: post #27
whimsicalism wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

they still have to go through Apple review & still have to pay Apple a revenue cut, so it's basically been defanged

I mean, the review part I support. The revenue part is fucking horseshit.

The review part is much more concerning IMO and completely exiles FOSS from the platform (free as in the GNU definition -- you should be able to make arbitrary changes to your copy of the app without some asshole from Apple telling you that they believe your changes constitute a joke or prank [1]). The review part also re-enforces the revenue part because it costs $100/year to submit apps for EU notarization.

[1] Section 1.1.6: https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/

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

#286

Post by lolinder »

naravara wrote: post #272
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…

If you chose Android because it’s open, then the judge has just forced Google to make it more open for you. If someone chose iOS because it’s closed then the judge has decided it can stay mostly closed. Also Google is where it is because they pitched a platform that was friendlier for carriers to load up with crapware than Apple was. It wasn’t really openness for openness’ sake. If Google hadn’t done that we might ha…

I'm not really concerned about what will happen to Android—worst case scenario at this point, the community forks it and I use the fork.

I'm concerned about the precedent this sets. As long as this is the state of US law, we won't see another open platform developed in the US because these rulings together say that the only way to be sure you're not punished for anti-competitive behavior is to ensure that no one can ever define a "market" around your platform. Only a fully walled garden is safe.

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

#287

Post by johnnyanmac »

davidczech wrote: post #267
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.

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.

can't stop business. I just want Steam to not get in my way outside of giving their share and giving clear feedback on their reviews and what is wrong with my releases. Open Source isn't mainstream, but I don't care about that.

Given current lawsuits, Valve does neither.

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

#288

Post by lern_too_spel »

Izkata wrote: post #250
xethos wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

This is easily seen to be false, but I see it repeated often. The functionality in Google Play Services requires a server. If you don't use Google services, you don't need Play Services. https://developers.google.com/android/reference/packages

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

#289

Post by signal11 »

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.

The Epic v Google and Epic v Apple cases are a great showcase about how the law actually works in practice.

Epic v Google was a jury trial, and also there was plenty of evidence in discovery to Epic’s favour[1], and also there was evidence that “Google destroyed evidence and repeatedly gave false info to court”[2].

There was a fair amount of coverage and analysis among legal commentators about why Google lost. It’s worth reading for people interested in trial law.

(Especially read [2] about how Google sought to hide conversations from discovery. It’s cringeworthy.)

[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2023/12/12/tim-sweeney-why-epic-did-bet...

[2] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/03/judge-finds-goog...

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

#290

Post by johnnyanmac »

jpc0 wrote: post #68
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.

Amazon Prime Video... Netflix... Disney Plus... The choices are great... Yo ho ho and a bottle of rum...

yeah. If I want to watch a show, I pay the $10-12, immediately not renew, and watch the show and maybe a few other things. And repeat if anything interesting comes on.

I don't need everything all in one place. Piracy was always the cheapest option if you wanted to spend time fiddling, but the current official means is much more convenient than the cable contract lock-in days.

Post reply on HN