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

551–560 of 607 posts

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

#551

Post by xelamonster »

kbolino wrote: post #519
rezonant wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally no that doesn't happen. It may be very specific to Amazon though. Android uses signing keys to validate updates, and if the signing key doesn't match, it is impossible to install the update. My guess is Amazon (was?) using the same signing keys between the two stores. Most developers use Google's app signing service to ensure that a loss of the signing key will not strand their users on old versions. In tha…

Interesting. I assumed there was some kind of internal identifier, which was the same between the two variants of the app, but I guess that identifier is just (a hash of?) the public key. Nevertheless, it seems like the Play Store had priority for providing updates. Tangentially, how does Android handle signing key rotation/expiration?

The identifier would be the package name baked into the APK, "com.amazon.mshop.android.shopping" in this case, likely the same for both versions. I'm sure there's several ways that issue could have happened but my first guess would be some OEM nonsense, a lot of them bundle Amazon and probably have poorly written updaters that can't tell you've modified the install.

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

#552

Post by Aerroon »

telgareith wrote: post #471
can16358p wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting, I have the exact opposite: I'm also a React Native developer and it's _always_ Android that creates all sorts of problems when developing where iOS is just fine. And it's not me: many devs in my team (and all the teams that I've also worked in the past) think the same way. Though I'd agree with provisioning+codesigning can be a mess with iOS.

I think that this boils down to people wanting a handheld computer that sometimes can make phone calls (android), or a phone that can do other stuff (apple). Just compare how android and iOS handle backgrounding.

Can I easily put a compiler on either platform? My understanding is that you can't, which makes both platforms kind of bad.

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

#553

Post by frizlab »

wiseowise wrote: post #539
frizlab wrote: post #466

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Then you need to cure your OCD and don’t ruin experience for normal people.

yeah. resorting to insults is the sign you should have stayed silent.

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

#554

Post by Aerroon »

r00fus wrote: post #536
rblatz wrote: post #486

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would I take with me? My photos and email will move just fine. The last app I bought was a while ago, and it was an app to block Google AMP. I’m honestly not sure I use any other paid apps.

Do you use MFA? How about meetings (zoom/teams)? What about MS Office or Google Apps? Is the new email client up to snuff? All of these are much better as apps. Users do not want to browse the web on mobile for all their activities, when Apps are generally faster, more secure, and has all their prefs recorded EVEN if a webapp is functionally equivalent (and most are only 70-90% equivalent) So the new entrant has to c…

You're right that apps can be better, but phone apps seem to always miss functionality compared to desktop web versions of the same thing. Even phone web version of Google doesn't have functional parity with desktop web Google. The phone app for Google is even worse.

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

#555

Post by hotstickyballs »

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.

They also built both the hardware as well as the OS. Google has never been able to do that for a new product line.

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

#556

Post by viraptor »

Aerroon wrote: post #552
telgareith wrote: post #471

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that this boils down to people wanting a handheld computer that sometimes can make phone calls (android), or a phone that can do other stuff (apple). Just compare how android and iOS handle backgrounding.

Can I easily put a compiler on either platform? My understanding is that you can't, which makes both platforms kind of bad.

You can easily put compilers on Android. Put the whole system on it if you want https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=tech.ula

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

#557

Post by NotPractical »

ribosometronome wrote: post #80
whimsicalism wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it should all be circumventable. My phone, like my computer, should be able to install whatever code I damn well please.

The idea that we aren't allowed to sell limited purpose electronics seems pretty novel. A lot of the things I own have processors in them nowadays, are you suggesting the courts should require them all to create methodologies for us to run our own code on them?

Smartphones are special, since they're practically mandatory at this point, are the primary gateway to the Internet and digital platforms for a lot of people, and are specifically designed to be general purpose computing devices (even if unnecessary restrictions on who gets to write apps for them are placed on top of that). I mean heck, even Apple all but advertises the iPad Pro (an iOS device) as a computer [*]. I don't care if Nintendo locks down their gaming console. Nobody needs a gaming console. The Nintendo Switch's OS was made solely to run games and has very limited functionality by design. (I'm also overjoyed when I see people hack it, but that's a bonus and I have no expectation of that.)

For example, the EU's DMA provides a precise definition of "digital gatekeeper" and the rules only apply to them [1]. Gaming consoles and other embedded devices are excluded.

If there were more than two real choices available, I'd feel less strongly about this. And I realize that Apple isn't necessarily responsible for there only being two options (if anything, Google may be more to blame for this). But that's just how it is.

[*] I don't know if their marketing materials ever unambiguously refer to the iPad as a "computer", perhaps intentionally, but they've run ads like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3S5BLs51yDQ

[1] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv%...

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

#558

Post by viraptor »

immibis wrote: post #518
rblatz wrote: post #486

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would I take with me? My photos and email will move just fine. The last app I bought was a while ago, and it was an app to block Google AMP. I’m honestly not sure I use any other paid apps.

If you used iMessage, Apple phones remember this and will continue sending you iMessages which you won't receive on your non-Apple phone.

https://selfsolve.apple.com/deregister-imessage/

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

#559

Post by dathinab »

cryptonym wrote: post #501
dathinab wrote: post #497

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If apple literally hadn't won their own case 2 years ago you'd be right. how does some previous judge decision matter for weather you _should_ crack down on a company? it doesn't, right the government can change laws, and judges can overrule decisions and as the US supreme court has shown even if there isn't "any new evidence in favor of the new decision but even evidence in favor of the old decision" decisions can…

> how does some previous judge decision matter for weather you _should_ crack down on a company? Looking at previous decisions and leveraging them basically is the job of a lawyer. IMHO this decision won't stand long. You cannot apply different decisions to similar cases.

yes but that doesn't mean that the us should not crack down on marked power abuse

being atm. in a position where suing you doesn't work well doesn't mean you are not causing harm nor doesn't mean you are not acting outside of the law. It only means that there is currently no effective way to use the law against you. But that can always change. And the US cracking down on them isn't limited to judge orders from cases of 3rd party companies against them. More specifically it's not even part of the state cracking down as that only refers to legislative and executive organs of the state judicial organs are supposed to be neutral.

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

#560

Post by samatman »

red1reaper wrote: post #453
eru wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two 'monopolies' in app stores aren't a monopoly. They are at most a duopoly..

Not really because they are different monopolies. The IOS apps and Android apps are different markets

The reductio ad absurdum of this style of argument would hold that every retailer is a monopoly, because once you walk into the store, you can only buy things from them.
Post reply on HN