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

351–360 of 607 posts

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

#351

Post by idle_zealot »

diebeforei485 wrote: post #142
kelnos wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we just have different priors. My belief is that, fundamentally, everything should be open. Users should have full control over their devices, and manufacturers should have no place in dictating anything about how they are used, what software can and can't run on them, etc. (Note that I'm not being anti-proprietary-software here; I don't think companies should be required to give away their source code if the…

The problem is that we will have proprietary software (distributed for free) doing bad things, and people blame their phone being slow. I don't like that app stores engage in rent seeking behavior when it comes to payments, but that is a separate issue.

> The problem is that we will have proprietary software (distributed for free) doing bad things, and people blame their phone being slow.

The solution to this remains the same as ever: curation of software packages. You can install any app you want, but you're probably going to use some front-end to manage that (Play Store, App Store). It's up to those platforms to curate what apps they host, and up to the user to delegate safety c he checks to platforms they trust.

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

#352

Post by clhodapp »

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!

Who is going to force Verizon to allow other app stores on their contract phones?

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

#353

Post by sadeshmukh »

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…

No clue what you're talking about. What device do you use? On a Pixel (Google's phone) you download it, then you open it (it warns you that it could have anything) and then it is installed.

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

#354

Post by mvdtnz »

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

Is it? I regularly use Steam, Epic and XBox and occasionally Ubi, Larian and whatever the GoG one is called... and it's fine. It's just another program.

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

#355

Post by riversflow »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #327
_imnothere wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently you don't know enough about Android, a perfect example of this is eSIM, you simply couldn't use eSIM without Google Play Services.

That functionality was never available in phones with Google builds without Google Play Services, so it doesn't fit GGP's claim. The reason it's not in base AOSP out of the box is that it requires a server, and any carrier can build an implementation for downloading carrier profiles without Google Play Services and any OEM can build an LPA using https://source.android.com/docs/core/connect/esim-overview .

You don’t have GPS satellite data, “location services” without Google Play services. That means a gps lock takes minutes. This data could be stored on the phone, but it’s better for google if you fetch it from them when you need it.

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

#356

Post by wraptile »

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…

Nobody cares "who's right" here; consumers just want competition because when businesses compete the consumers win.

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

#357

Post by bad_user »

immibis wrote: post #183
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.

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.

I'm reading all the arguments below for why Google just appears open, while they aren't, and they are bullshit.

Go here, download and install the APK: https://f-droid.org/en/

You now have a third party app repository on your phone. And actually every Samsung device comes with their own app store installed in addition to Google Play. It's not perfect, Play having the privilege to automatically install updates, but good enough.

Also, AOSP is completely usable even without Google's apps or Play Services, and one proof of that is that Amazon forked it for their Kindle Fire.

The arguments from Apple fans are truly bizarre.

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

#359

Post by cma »

Ferret7446 wrote: post #314
cma wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and where you can easily install apps through other means When the lawsuit started, apps installed like this couldn't be automatically updated without going through the scare screens again manually.

I don't remember how far back, but I remember third party apps working just fine at least, say, 5-6 years ago. The case was brought 2020, so I doubt this is true.

Android 12 was what fixed what I meant to refer to: unattended updates with third party sideloaded stores. It's from 2021 and probably didn't get 50% marketshare until ~2023 or so. Developers for those app stores had to deal with their users being out of date all the time to a much bigger extent than Play store and officially partnered stores.

And Android WearOS is still hard for side-loaded stores to work with at all without developer debugging mode I think and is tightly integrated with the phone stuff.

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

#360

Post by FridgeSeal »

itake wrote: post #299
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.

If every company self regulates their own App Store, then who is going to go to ensure apps are trustworthy and reliable? Imagine if Spotify had a Spotify store that required device id tracking for their ad network.

> Imagine if Spotify had a Spotify store that required device id tracking for their ad network.

I’m pretty sure the likes of Adobe and Meta would be literally foaming at the mouth in excitement over the potential for this.

Post reply on HN