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

461–470 of 607 posts

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

#461

Post by wiseowise »

frizlab wrote: post #434
wiseowise wrote: post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When it occupies half the market and life is increasingly dependent on your phone it’s no longer “don’t like - don’t buy”. How about “don’t like the changes - stop using Apple”? Huh? What’s stopping you from finding another Apple if there are thousands of alternatives?

There are no closed-ecosystem alternatives!! However there are thousands of alternatives to Apple. It is don’t like don’t buy, as literally NO ONE NOR ANY SITUATION FORCES YOU TO BUY AN iPhone. You need a PHONE, not an iPhone. Also in what world does Apple have half the market?

> There are no closed-ecosystem alternatives!!

Any Android phone is closed-ecosystem if you don’t enable sideloading.

> However there are thousands of alternatives to Apple.

Nice! So you have plenty of choice if you don’t like where it goes with Apple.

> It is don’t like don’t buy, as literally NO ONE NOR ANY SITUATION FORCES YOU TO BUY AN iPhone. You need a PHONE, not an iPhone.

That’s correct, so there’s no issue with someone enforcing Apple to make changes, because you can always switch to something else?

> Also in what world does Apple have half the market?

In a world called US, Canada and good chunk of Europe.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/iphone-ma...

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

#462

Post by ericmay »

benoau wrote: post #409
a_wild_dandan wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could Apple have Google-like restrictions in the future? Or are we kinda fucked because Apple already "won"?

In the coming weeks or months the judge in the Epic case will decide if gacha games can link directly to their own payments without Apple, that threatens 70% of spending on the App Store in Apple's worst-case scenario (per the Epic case it was revealed 10% of users do 70% of spending, in such games). Minus the tens of billions in annual fees on gacha games, and with litigation and regulation around the world I think…

Apple would probably just start charging gigantic fees for apps that meet certain criteria to replace some of the lost revenue or maybe even drive higher and more consistent revenue. If I recall correctly, that’s what they did in the European Union.

I’m not very convinced that “opening up” the Apple App Store will amount to much but

I know this is a contrarian view.

Changing the accounting to decide what split multi-billion dollar company Epic gets versus multi-hundred-billion dollar Apple gets has nothing to do with innovation or competition, and this is particularly true in gaming.

In fact, it seems like these rulings are likely to have the opposite intended effect on new and innovative apps as costs to do business increase and navigating publishing across various app stores will come with their own rules, costs, and headaches all the while establishes firms who already have the resources can create their own app stores and further extract rent.

Epic charges I think 12% or 17% on their store? Maybe the costs are lower than Apple, idk, but now Epic who is your competitor dictates what you publish on their store and you get the privilege of paying them to do so.

I think we’re cutting off the head of a snake and it’s growing 10 more in response.

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

#463

Post by getfroggie »

xnx wrote: post #9
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.

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."

[dead]

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

#464

Post by UncleMeat »

015a wrote: post #382
johnnyanmac wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

and likewise, 90% of people still converge onto some dozen websites per region anyway. If people really want that "one true platform", they will congregate and make that platform a monopoly. Against their best interests in my experience, but humanity sometimes need to re-learn the same pitfalls every generation.

I think that's a critical piece that anyone opposing a more free and open mobile computing paradigm needs to recognize. We point to PC gaming as a horrible state of affairs no one in the mobile world wants; but it really isn't. There were a half-dozen storefronts a few years ago. Today: Everyone is on Steam. There's EGS if you play Fortnite. I think Rockstar still has their own stuff, maybe? A couple blizzard games a…

But this is already the state of things prior to this ruling. You can install 3rd party stores on Android. They can auto-update their apps just like Play.

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

#465

Post by Tyr42 »

FridgeSeal wrote: post #363
al_borland wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what happens at the end of the 3 years? If apps are pulled, are people who downloaded the apps through those alt-stores going to lose access to updates, causing security issues or a support nightmare when the users don't see new features? We'll see Android users needing to have multiple app stores just to get all the apps they want/need, along with the updates. From a user experience point of view, that sounds wo…

Are devs going to be forced to support all the app stores too? Will they need to go through N separate registrations, N separate support processes? I can see a good number of devs going “eeuuuggghhhhh” and just letting an app rot, just only publishing to one store, rules-be damned, or just going to iOS.

Will devs be forced to make accounts on all the stores in order to collect earnings from sales on that store? Are stores opt in or opt out from a developer pov?

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

#466

Post by frizlab »

wiseowise wrote: post #461
frizlab wrote: post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are no closed-ecosystem alternatives!! However there are thousands of alternatives to Apple. It is don’t like don’t buy, as literally NO ONE NOR ANY SITUATION FORCES YOU TO BUY AN iPhone. You need a PHONE, not an iPhone. Also in what world does Apple have half the market?

> There are no closed-ecosystem alternatives!! Any Android phone is closed-ecosystem if you don’t enable sideloading. > However there are thousands of alternatives to Apple. Nice! So you have plenty of choice if you don’t like where it goes with Apple. > It is don’t like don’t buy, as literally NO ONE NOR ANY SITUATION FORCES YOU TO BUY AN iPhone. You need a PHONE, not an iPhone. That’s correct, so there’s no issue w…

> if you don’t enable sideloading.

My point exactly. I don’t want side loading to be possible. Now I do not have that option anymore.

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

#467

Post by whywhywhywhy »

LadyCailin wrote: post #70
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 will find it deliciously ironic and welcomed if precedents set by Epic are eventually used against them. The even more hilarious news though is that apparently PC users hate their platform so much though, that exclusivity on Epic is perhaps more of a liability. I read the other day that that new open world Star Wars game had “disappointing” sales because of that.

> apparently PC users hate their platform so much

This is silly too though, it's no different to Steam both are consumer hostile systems where you own nothing. It's just Steam had the early years where it built up good will through some sales.

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

#468

Post by DannyBee »

dialup_sounds wrote: post #120
DannyBee wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, apple won on the exact same claims in front of a different judge.

Both suits were brought over the same things, but the actual arguments presented were different.

i'm aware? How does that change whether apple is next?

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

#469

Post by DannyBee »

enragedcacti wrote: post #131
DannyBee wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, apple won on the exact same claims in front of a different judge.

In the Apple case the judge defined the relevant market as "digital mobile gaming transactions" and that Apple is not legally a monopoly there in part because of competition from Google, Nintendo, and Stadia (lol). A suit from another company could result in a different market determination and a different outcome without being inconsistent with that ruling.

I'm very aware of the legal intricacies.

As for whether someone else will win, maybe, maybe not. Look up res judicata.

Keep in mind - the judge deciding the market is x will not affect whether it is considered the same set of facts. So if you filed a case with the same facts, or very similar facts, you wouldn't escape res judicata on the grounds that you think the market is different.

You would have to come with a different claim than federal antitrust law (state unfair competition law in a different state or something) or significantly different facts.

In any case, i strongly doubt apple is next given the state here.

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

#470

Post by DannyBee »

vitus wrote: post #39
DannyBee wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, apple won on the exact same claims in front of a different judge.

That's an unfair characterization of the situation. Epic v Google was decided in a jury trial, whereas Epic v Apple was decided by a judge (as preferred by both parties). The other big difference is that Tim Cook wasn't caught trying to destroy evidence, so the judge in that case had no reason to sanction Apple. https://www.fastcompany.com/90955785/google-deleted-chats-in... https://www.gibbonslawalert.com/2023/05/01…

"That's an unfair characterization of the situation."

Gonna strongly disagree on that one.

1. Apple is not next, which is the main point

2. The sanctions are 100% irrelevant here? Why do you think they mattered?

3. The legal portion would have still been decided by a judge anyway - juries decide facts, not law. The judge decided the relevant market, etc.

None of your points seem to matter as to whether Apple is next or not?

Post reply on HN