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

91–100 of 607 posts

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

#91

Post by protimewaster »

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…

That sounds more akin to a standard exclusivity agreement and seems much different (at least to me) from what Google got in trouble for.

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

#92

Post by ApolloFortyNine »

ethbr1 wrote: post #25
xnx wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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."

It's probably not a great idea to point at a monopoly, as a defense of one's own monopoly, and claim "Yeah, but he did it worse." Both Google and Apple's platforms need to be cracked open to competition.

If apple literally hadn't won their own case 2 years ago you'd be right.

If the company that literally doesn't allow users to install ANY application, yet alone a whole store, is in the clear, it's mind boggling that Google's situation is the one they took issue with.

Apple literally has a higher market share in the US.

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

#93

Post by [deleted] »

zamadatix wrote: post #51
ethbr1 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's probably not a great idea to point at a monopoly, as a defense of one's own monopoly, and claim "Yeah, but he did it worse." Both Google and Apple's platforms need to be cracked open to competition.

I can see why they'd want to say "our competitor does it worse but we're the only ones being regulated". Sure, they'd rather not be regulated at all... but, if they are, then they want to be regulated no worse than their competitor.

[deleted]

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

#94

Post by Mindwipe »

hooli42 wrote: post #61
whimsicalism wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, just like how they've done on desktop environments

This is exactly the situation for desktop games right now, something Epic is profiting immensely from. It's an extremely annoying situation for users, having a dozen launcher/store apps around contributing to bloat.

No it isn't, the competition is great and is lowering prices across the board, and no arbitrary censorship exists.

The desktop games market is much heathier and less dangerous for users than the mobile app market.

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

#95

Post by Mindwipe »

jpc0 wrote: post #68
akira2501 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. Then consumers can decide which one is best for them. Then they can compete. Then the best features with the best pricing, no only for customers, but the cut for developers, can be discovered. You pay such a high price for living in the walled garden. I honestly can't imagine why you would _want_ it.

Amazon Prime Video... Netflix... Disney Plus... The choices are great... Yo ho ho and a bottle of rum...

Yes, they are. This competition means an enormous boom in quality content has been produced that would have never existed otherwise because of the competition.

Choices are great and have resulted in far better services.

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

#96

Post by sigmar »

I've been pretty anti-google on this topic (and a long time fdroid-lover). but this ruling is nuts to me, particularly where it says google "must give rival third-party app stores access to the full catalog of Google Play apps"

I don't think we are going to see a healthy competitive marketplace with 4 years of chaos where every app store has the same apps, there's no curation at all or incentive structure for stores to win over app listings, and app stores get created and destroyed at the whims of a random single person.

Maybe the committee will operate within the confines of this outline to set more structure and make this workable, but it seems very handy-wavey in how this is going to work...

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

#97

Post by wiseowise »

frizlab wrote: post #49
gjsman-1000 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

THIS. And this is the main reason why I hate the EU decisions. Apple was always 100% clear on their message. The App Store is a closed ecosystem. You hate it? You don’t have to use it. You can do PWAs. If they attacked Apple on their PWA support, I’d have backed the case (though nobody cares, obviously). But the case as it is now is dumb.

You hate EU decisions because they cracked down on clown monopoly?

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

#98

Post by ssl-3 »

ethbr1 wrote: post #25
xnx wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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."

It's probably not a great idea to point at a monopoly, as a defense of one's own monopoly, and claim "Yeah, but he did it worse." Both Google and Apple's platforms need to be cracked open to competition.

It's not a court of public opinion. This isn't a popularity contest; they're not running for public office or something here.

In real court (with real lawyers and real judges), precedent often matters (often, it matters quite a lot).

Informing the court of [what may be] meaningful precedent is important; without this deliberate informative step, the court might not know about it at all. The court cannot take anything into consideration that it has no knowledge of.

(Despite the black robes and literal ban-hammers, judges aren't all-seeing or all-knowing.)

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

#99

Post by brink »

hooli42 wrote: post #61
whimsicalism wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, just like how they've done on desktop environments

This is exactly the situation for desktop games right now, something Epic is profiting immensely from. It's an extremely annoying situation for users, having a dozen launcher/store apps around contributing to bloat.

That's exactly the competition that keeps PC from having the hiked prices the likes of Switch/XBox/PS5 stores and having to pay $15/mo to play games with your friends online.

I'll happily have to deal with a few extra launchers on PC in comparison to what the alternative is.

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

#100

Post by tadfisher »

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?

What is the downside for the consumer here? Put all the scary warnings in front that you want, just have a "developer mode" toggle that unlocks the bootloader and lets us run arbitrary code. There's a huge reverse-engineering hurdle to get over anyway, this just stops the cat-and-mouse game of having to find exploits to run code on your device.
Post reply on HN