Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tim Sweeney on why Epic did better against Google than Apple in court

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 107 posts

Re: Tim Sweeney on why Epic did better against Google than Apple in court

#41

Post by smoldesu »

scarface_74 wrote: post #29
smoldesu wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing worse than the status-quo, presumably: https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/1/22361762/iphone-russia-sta... Given that US/FIVE-EYES surveillance is a prerequisite for all American smartphones, I'd at least appreciate them using their state power to benefit the customer for once. The US' negligence in prosecuting any of the transparently corrupt FAANG companies makes it obvious how they don't want to butcher any of…

So you really think the state controlling content is not going to be more restrictive than private corporations? And why are you quoting an article about Russia?

No, I think the state will do a better job at preserving individual freedom than the free market will. Normally I wouldn't take that stance, but the alternative is Apple's lock-in mentality and Google's neverending advertisement/data treadmill. Given that a secure smartphone is off the table anyways, I'd prefer the state as a custodian for digital rights. Plus, then nobody's confused about who holds all the power.

> And why are you quoting an article about Russia?

To emphasize the scope of influence on Apple software and the precedent for state control.

Re: Tim Sweeney on why Epic did better against Google than Apple in court

#42

Post by scarface_74 »

omeid2 wrote: post #38
scarface_74 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not true. There is no such thing as having to deal “fairly”. You are completely free to make different deals with different customers reason #1367 that HN commenters make horrible lawyers

No, you're not completely free to make different deals with different customers, the imperative word here being "completely". For example, RRPs are generally considered illegal, you can't force your customers to sale at specified minimum price, and more crucially, you can't do it selectively.

So define your legal definition of “treating customers fairly”

Re: Tim Sweeney on why Epic did better against Google than Apple in court

#43

Post by dataangel »

scarface_74 wrote: post #29
smoldesu wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing worse than the status-quo, presumably: https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/1/22361762/iphone-russia-sta... Given that US/FIVE-EYES surveillance is a prerequisite for all American smartphones, I'd at least appreciate them using their state power to benefit the customer for once. The US' negligence in prosecuting any of the transparently corrupt FAANG companies makes it obvious how they don't want to butcher any of…

So you really think the state controlling content is not going to be more restrictive than private corporations? And why are you quoting an article about Russia?

> So you really think the state controlling content is not going to be more restrictive than private corporations?

Yes, because then app restrictions that violate free speech/press will get slammed by the supreme court.

Re: Tim Sweeney on why Epic did better against Google than Apple in court

#44

Post by scarface_74 »

InTheArena wrote: post #15
fh9302 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google chose a jury trial.

I think it's a fair bet to say that either Apple's lawyers are better.. or Apple's employees are better (acting within the law) or both.

Or maybe Sweeney is an unreliable narrator?

Re: Tim Sweeney on why Epic did better against Google than Apple in court

#45

Post by smoldesu »

StressedDev wrote: post #35
smoldesu wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Nintendo Switch runs a locked-down version of Android that has sold over 100 million units of associated hardware.

I do not think the Switch runs Android. I think it runs BSD. Could you please provide a link showing the Switch runs Android?

It looks like I was wrong. Same family of hardware/drivers, different OS. Same principle and concept, though; I think BSD's success in the console industry proves that open OSes can find use (albeit as components of closed systems).

Re: Tim Sweeney on why Epic did better against Google than Apple in court

#46

Post by scarface_74 »

dataangel wrote: post #43
scarface_74 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you really think the state controlling content is not going to be more restrictive than private corporations? And why are you quoting an article about Russia?

> So you really think the state controlling content is not going to be more restrictive than private corporations? Yes, because then app restrictions that violate free speech/press will get slammed by the supreme court.

Let me introduce you to a little state you might have heard of called Florida where the governor is punishing a company for criticizing a law that was passed and trying to expel a student group that is not pro-Israel.

Or other states that make it a crime to boycott Israel.

You think the app review process is Byzantine. Wait until you try to get 8 justices to review your app and how long do you think that will take?

Re: Tim Sweeney on why Epic did better against Google than Apple in court

#47

Post by Pxtl »

COGlory wrote: post #37
smoldesu wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Nintendo Switch runs a locked-down version of Android that has sold over 100 million units of associated hardware.

Blackberry, Tizen, Windows Phone, FirefoxOS. Samsung, HTC, Huawei, Alcatel, Nokia, LG. How does Google, running closed and un-licensable Android with no phone to put it on, compete?

Name one of those OSes that had a quality phone on the market with a zero-dollar-license OS in 2009.

Android was first modern mobile OS to market that would run on 3rd party devices (unlike Apple and RIM).

Tizen was 2013. Win phone was 2011, and had license fees to use it.

Re: Tim Sweeney on why Epic did better against Google than Apple in court

#48

Post by Pxtl »

StressedDev wrote: post #30
Pxtl wrote: post #9

Lesson learned: just lock down your platform like Apple. Corrupted freedom is apparently worse than totalitarian control.

I think a better lesson would be to comply with the law, do not destroy evidence, and to do what you say you are doing. Google sold Android as being open. Once Android succeeded, Google started closing it and making anti-competitive deals. Many of these deals were illegal because Google had a monopoly and abused its monopoly. Please explain why Google's conduct should not be punished? Why should Google be allowed to…

I'm not saying they shouldn't be punished. I'm saying that what Apple does is worse and is punished less.

Re: Tim Sweeney on why Epic did better against Google than Apple in court

#49

Post by scarface_74 »

smoldesu wrote: post #41
scarface_74 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you really think the state controlling content is not going to be more restrictive than private corporations? And why are you quoting an article about Russia?

No, I think the state will do a better job at preserving individual freedom than the free market will. Normally I wouldn't take that stance, but the alternative is Apple's lock-in mentality and Google's neverending advertisement/data treadmill. Given that a secure smartphone is off the table anyways, I'd prefer the state as a custodian for digital rights. Plus, then nobody's confused about who holds all the power. >…

What country are you living in? You mean the one with the highest incarceration rate in the world?

Both sides are have been guilty of suppressing free speech that they don’t agree with.

Re: Tim Sweeney on why Epic did better against Google than Apple in court

#50

Post by lolinder »

StressedDev wrote: post #35
smoldesu wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Nintendo Switch runs a locked-down version of Android that has sold over 100 million units of associated hardware.

I do not think the Switch runs Android. I think it runs BSD. Could you please provide a link showing the Switch runs Android?

Wikipedia says you're both wrong—it uses some code from both FreeBSD and Android, but isn't actually based on either.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_Switch_system_softw...

Post reply on HN