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

Google “bought off Samsung” to limit app store competition, 36 states allege

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 105 posts

Re: Google “bought off Samsung” to limit app store competition, 36 states allege

#91

Post by LegitShady »

bythckr wrote: post #55
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of Samsung's seemingly odd back and forth antics can be explained by realizing that: Samsung is the manufacturer most capable of forking Android and telling Google to shove it, and that most of their product development has been making sure that it's possible to do so (Galaxy Store, Bixby, Tizen watches, etc.) And that Google, knowing Samsung has the brand loyalty and wide userbase to devastate Android's market…

I feel that the software products & services that Samsung builds is half-baked. It might be a pressure tactic to ensure Google keeps paying. Also, I am wonder what happened of Samsung & Microsoft plans of Samsung shelving its app & services for Microsoft. I feel that was the "real motivation" for Google to start paying. Google needs to be challenged for an improvement in Android space. They should stop rushing in hal…

apple has an order of magnitude fewer device models to support. I'm not sure android will ever have similar performance and feature support as apple - the business models are so totally different.

Re: Google “bought off Samsung” to limit app store competition, 36 states allege

#92

Post by deregulateMed »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #85
deregulateMed wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't imagine people paying 450$ more for a handicapped computer because battery life. Do 90% of people use a computer without it being plugged in? I can see 90% of people buying a logo. "I say 123 take your hand and come with me bc you look so fine that I really want to make you mine"

Yes, I would easily bet the average person values not worrying about battery and heat. Coffee shops, lecture halls, airplanes, or even just around the house. It is amazingly liberating to almost never have to worry about charging it, and just be able to close the lid at a moments notice and not worry about Windows’ problems hibernating or standby or whatever. Look at the comments in this thread: https://news.ycombina…

It's not higher quality. You just said so.

Yikes.

Re: Google “bought off Samsung” to limit app store competition, 36 states allege

#93

Post by Lammy »

This article is missing a huge part of the story. Google weren’t scared of just a competing app store but of Samsung replacing Android itself with their own Tizen OS. The Galaxy Store was just the consumer bridge to that possibility. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tizen

Re: Google “bought off Samsung” to limit app store competition, 36 states allege

#94

Post by mcphage »

vimacs2 wrote: post #89
mcphage wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Super Mario Party was not up to their content standards—the minigames were good, but there were only 4 boards, and they were both tiny and dull. Animal Crossing is a mixed bag—it has stuff previous entries don't, and is missing a lot that previous entries contained. But that might have gotten derailed due to Covid. The Mario Golf game that just came out supposedly has minimal content too, but I haven't played it. On…

. . . That's not what people mean when they say "half finished". It's when a game with a defined scope fails to meet that scope. You might not like the dearth of content with those titles but there is no indication that they were ever meant to go beyond what was provided on release.

I certainly can't speak to what their defined scope was—generally Nintendo doesn't specify, and when they do say something—like saying Animal Crossing was designed to have "two or three years worth of content"—there's no indication what that actually means. All I can speak to is, when playing a game, does this game feel complete and finished? Traditionally Nintendo has been pretty good about that. Recently, not so much. I've been playing Mario Party since the late 90s, you develop a feel for what Nintendo considers a complete release. Whether that's changed intentionally not, is pretty immaterial.

Re: Google “bought off Samsung” to limit app store competition, 36 states allege

#95

Post by lotsofpulp »

deregulateMed wrote: post #92
lotsofpulp wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I would easily bet the average person values not worrying about battery and heat. Coffee shops, lecture halls, airplanes, or even just around the house. It is amazingly liberating to almost never have to worry about charging it, and just be able to close the lid at a moments notice and not worry about Windows’ problems hibernating or standby or whatever. Look at the comments in this thread: https://news.ycombina…

It's not higher quality. You just said so. Yikes.

No, I did not. Higher quality components is not the same as higher specs. For example, I would bet that Apple is using components binned for higher survival rates, than a $500 discount laptop. And I am sure other company's premium products use higher quality components too, it's not an Apple thing. But for this specific product, the all around package of an Air is very competitive.

Re: Google “bought off Samsung” to limit app store competition, 36 states allege

#96

Post by jiscariot »

modeless wrote: post #52
tyingq wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps, though if it's not voters, what is causing the uptick in interest among politicians?

Fear that tech companies were becoming more influential than the politicians. They're protecting themselves from a perceived threat.

Along those lines, the NYT isn't writing their 100th FB hit piece "for the good of the people", they see a competitor with a platform. And NYT has a lot of cultural power.

Re: Google “bought off Samsung” to limit app store competition, 36 states allege

#97

Post by kbelder »

deregulateMed wrote: post #50
lotsofpulp wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have yet to see a better laptop for 90% of people who want a laptop than a MacBook Air. Battery life, portability, weight, heat production, reliability, adequate performance, price, ports. They seem to have made all the right compromises.

The price is poor and the performance is worse(compared to anything with a GPU). Reliability is questionable given the numerous hardware issues Apple denied over the years. And I'm shocked you thought to mention Ports. I've been at parties where someone couldn't present a PowerPoint because of the ports on the Air.

>I've been at parties where someone couldn't present a PowerPoint because of the ports on the Air.

You go to fun parties.

Re: Google “bought off Samsung” to limit app store competition, 36 states allege

#98

Post by 1123581321 »

throwaway1777 wrote: post #90
tinalumfoil wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a much higher bar to ratify a constitutional amendment than to sue Google.

Agreed. Mainly I think it’s interesting that we can get that many states to come together on anything. Generally the red/blue divide is very strong.

States agree on many things. You can see some of them with these kinds of search queries. https://www.google.com/search?q=%22all+50+states+agree%22

They wouldn’t have nearly as much agreement if each was presented as a constitutional amendment, of course.

Re: Google “bought off Samsung” to limit app store competition, 36 states allege

#99

Post by aejnsn »

Lammy wrote: post #93

This article is missing a huge part of the story. Google weren’t scared of just a competing app store but of Samsung replacing Android itself with their own Tizen OS. The Galaxy Store was just the consumer bridge to that possibility. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tizen

Yessir. This exactly.

Re: Google “bought off Samsung” to limit app store competition, 36 states allege

#100

Post by _coveredInBees »

bythckr wrote: post #55
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of Samsung's seemingly odd back and forth antics can be explained by realizing that: Samsung is the manufacturer most capable of forking Android and telling Google to shove it, and that most of their product development has been making sure that it's possible to do so (Galaxy Store, Bixby, Tizen watches, etc.) And that Google, knowing Samsung has the brand loyalty and wide userbase to devastate Android's market…

I feel that the software products & services that Samsung builds is half-baked. It might be a pressure tactic to ensure Google keeps paying. Also, I am wonder what happened of Samsung & Microsoft plans of Samsung shelving its app & services for Microsoft. I feel that was the "real motivation" for Google to start paying. Google needs to be challenged for an improvement in Android space. They should stop rushing in hal…

Samsung gets a bad rap when it comes to software imo. There used to be a time when it was perhaps well deserved but that was a LONG time ago. Samsung's browser is hand's down the best Android browser I have used in years and continue to use. It has fantastic built-in dark mode support, ad blocking and is amazingly snappy and responsive. Far superior to Chrome and Firefox as well as anything else I've tried.

I've used my S9+ with their flavor of Android and other integrations for many years now and my phone still feels just as snappy and great as the day I bought it.

Post reply on HN