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

581–590 of 607 posts

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

#581

Post by eru »

acdha wrote: post #482
eru wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only: the iPhone did not have first mover advantages. There were plenty of mobile phones out there before that could download and run apps, and Apple didn't even have their famous app store at the beginning of the iPhone, either.

They were the first device with a big display and a first-class web browser. That created the smartphone market you now take for granted but was completely revolutionary at the time when most devices had tiny screens and half their physical size was a keyboard. The other big thing is more subtle: the iPhone was the first major break in the carriers’ value-extraction model. It was common that you’d get phones with hal…

Everything you say might be true, but I wouldn't necessarily call that first mover advantage.

> [...] when most devices had tiny screens and half their physical size was a keyboard.

Ie Apple introduced a new, arguably better, entrant into an existing market, and managed to grow that market.

But I can see your argument that you can re-interpret being that first to really commit to a big touch-screen only and (almost) no buttons to be a 'first move'. (Though a different comment mentioned that Apple wasn't the first here either?)

The iPhone was definitely a successful device!

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

#582

Post by eru »

giantrobot wrote: post #504
throwitaway1123 wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apps weren't what drove people to the original iPhone (the original iPhone didn't have an app store). Apple was essentially the first mainstream company to commit fully to the current smartphone design — a flat, rectangular, portrait aspect ratio brick, with a single slab of capacitive multi-touch glass. There were many other competing form factors at the time. Apple correctly deduced that touching your screen is the…

They also included WiFi in every model and iOS had transparent prioritization of WiFi over cellular. Apple's deal with Cingular (AT&T) also gave the iPhone plan unlimited data. That meant the iPhone had a full fledged browser that you could actually use. The browsers on PalmOS and Windows Mobile were jokes compared to Safari and most devices didn't have WiFi so we're always stuck on relatively slow cellular. A lot of…

> The browsers on PalmOS and Windows Mobile were jokes compared to Safari and most devices didn't have WiFi so we're always stuck on relatively slow cellular.

Again, everything in your comment this seems like Apple made an arguably better offering in an existing market. That's not a first mover advantage.

If anything you can say, Apple was late to the party and learned from the mistakes of others?

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

#583

Post by noiwillnot »

rTX5CMRXIfFG wrote: post #438
orourke wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve been working with React Native and Flutter and every time I have to interact directly with iOS/Android, I find that Android is much easier to work with and feels much better designed from a software/api/config perspective. Where Apple wins, however, imho is in hardware. The iPhone is a masterpiece and users can tell, even ~16 years in. I feel that when Apple finally chokes on hardware, or some player in the Andr…

It’s highly unlikely for Apple to choke on hardware given their cash. And as someone who’s done native for both, Android’s native SDK is a mess that even Android devs actually hate it. Meanwhile, iOS’ SDK is incredibly exhaustive and coherent. I don’t know what your basis is for “better designed software”, but being able to fork a desktop OS from 20 years prior, make it into a mobile OS, then to a tablet OS, then to…

> It’s highly unlikely for Apple to choke on hardware given their cash.

It just means that it will take a while, like Intel, or what is happening with search and Google.

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

#584

Post by acdha »

int_19h wrote: post #548
acdha wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were the first device with a big display and a first-class web browser. That created the smartphone market you now take for granted but was completely revolutionary at the time when most devices had tiny screens and half their physical size was a keyboard. The other big thing is more subtle: the iPhone was the first major break in the carriers’ value-extraction model. It was common that you’d get phones with hal…

There were high-end WinCE and Symbian devices with large displays and no physical keyboards (or sliders where keyboard doesn't encroach on screen size). To remind, first-gen iPhone was 3.5" @ 320x480 in 2007; for comparison, Dell Axim was 3.7" @ 480x640 in 2005, and by 2007 there were some WinMo handhelds with 480x800. The thing that really made iPhone different was capacitive touchscreen, and the OS designed around…

Also note “and a first-class web browser” in my compound statement. If you used devices of that era, the browsers sucked at handling most of the web. I knew people who had the previous generation devices (I’m excluding the PalmOS ones I owned since they required a stylus) but nobody used the mobile browser much because it was so unrewarding, and everyone I know replaced them with iPhones due to the web experience.

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

#585

Post by acdha »

eru wrote: post #581
acdha wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were the first device with a big display and a first-class web browser. That created the smartphone market you now take for granted but was completely revolutionary at the time when most devices had tiny screens and half their physical size was a keyboard. The other big thing is more subtle: the iPhone was the first major break in the carriers’ value-extraction model. It was common that you’d get phones with hal…

Everything you say might be true, but I wouldn't necessarily call that first mover advantage. > [...] when most devices had tiny screens and half their physical size was a keyboard. Ie Apple introduced a new, arguably better, entrant into an existing market, and managed to grow that market. But I can see your argument that you can re-interpret being that first to really commit to a big touch-screen only and (almost)…

Also note the part after “and” - I wrote that as a compound sentence because I saw more people than I expected go from both earlier smartphones or PDAs because the iPhone gave them the web in a way that earlier devices just didn’t. None of my clients had seen much in the way of public mobile web (or WAP) adoption prior to that, but that changed surprisingly quickly when the iPhone launched.

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

#586

Post by fennecfoxy »

underbiding wrote: post #309
reissbaker wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Although Epic appealed to SCOTUS, and SCOTUS rejected their appeal, which makes it seem like SCOTUS is unlikely to rule that app stores have to be open. In general the judicial system's bizarre treatment of Apple baffles and somewhat infuriates me. If Google has to allow alternative app stores on Android due to monopoly power, and has to allow alternate billing options due to monopoly power, and yet is the smaller of…

The difference is that Apple doesn't try and pretend their platform is open-source, whereas Google wants to have its cake (i.e. impose competitive blockers on their own platform) and eat it too (i.e. benefit from calling their platform open source and having free development fed back into it).

Android as a platform is open source. Android does not promise any of Google Services' features.

Meanwhile, Apple literally reinvents apps/features that developers on iOS have made and rolls them into the base OS/you can bet when an API is blocked or deprecated that Apple is just about to release their own version of something.

People like to joke that Google's "don't be evil" is no longer applicable, but they completely ignore just how evil Apple really is. Totally brainwashed.

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

#587

Post by eru »

acdha wrote: post #585
eru wrote: post #581

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything you say might be true, but I wouldn't necessarily call that first mover advantage. > [...] when most devices had tiny screens and half their physical size was a keyboard. Ie Apple introduced a new, arguably better, entrant into an existing market, and managed to grow that market. But I can see your argument that you can re-interpret being that first to really commit to a big touch-screen only and (almost)…

Also note the part after “and” - I wrote that as a compound sentence because I saw more people than I expected go from both earlier smartphones or PDAs because the iPhone gave them the web in a way that earlier devices just didn’t. None of my clients had seen much in the way of public mobile web (or WAP) adoption prior to that, but that changed surprisingly quickly when the iPhone launched.

Yes. Out of curiosity, what do you mean by your clients?

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

#588

Post by giantrobot »

eru wrote: post #582
giantrobot wrote: post #504

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They also included WiFi in every model and iOS had transparent prioritization of WiFi over cellular. Apple's deal with Cingular (AT&T) also gave the iPhone plan unlimited data. That meant the iPhone had a full fledged browser that you could actually use. The browsers on PalmOS and Windows Mobile were jokes compared to Safari and most devices didn't have WiFi so we're always stuck on relatively slow cellular. A lot of…

> The browsers on PalmOS and Windows Mobile were jokes compared to Safari and most devices didn't have WiFi so we're always stuck on relatively slow cellular. Again, everything in your comment this seems like Apple made an arguably better offering in an existing market. That's not a first mover advantage. If anything you can say, Apple was late to the party and learned from the mistakes of others?

> Again, everything in your comment this seems like Apple made an arguably better offering in an existing market. That's not a first mover advantage.

I never claimed Apple had a first mover advantage. They made a smartphone much more aligned to consumer desires than any of the competition. Palm, Microsoft, RIM, and Nokia all approached smartphones from the angle of business/enterprise users.

You can call Apple's approach being late to the party but that presumes that them entering some market is a forgone conclusion. Apple has rarely if ever been truly first to market with a product.

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

#589

Post by can16358p »

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.

It depends on the intended use case: compiling source code isn't the intended use case of neither of those platforms. It doesn't make them "bad".

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

#590

Post by hilbert42 »

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."

"even though, unlike iOS, Android is an open platform that has always allowed for choice and flexibility..."

It would be informative to know—by jurisdiction—the stats of what type of smartphone OS the key deciders had in their pockets.

Post reply on HN