this post was submitted on 12 Dec 2023
1571 points (98.6% liked)

Technology

57432 readers
3325 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Well, I’ll be damned. They finally won one it sounds like.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 173 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (11 children)

I don't understand. Android already allows other apps and app stores to be installed, and Epic already has an Android app store you can download and install without issue. What was the argument here?

Edit: tldr: apparently it is not good enough for Epic to have their own app store, they want to have their app in Google's app store and still not pay them money for purchases made in the app.

Google paid off other OEMs to make Google Play the default app store (much like they paid off other companies to be the default search engine) which the court decided was anticompetitive.

[–] [email protected] 128 points 8 months ago (22 children)

I believe that Google wanted in-app purchases in Fortnite to go through Play Store so that Google would get 30%. And Epic wanted to setup their own in-app billing and keep it all.

[–] [email protected] 65 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I wonder how that's going to play out with Apple and their monopoly.

[–] [email protected] 84 points 8 months ago (2 children)

A lot of this case hinged on the fact that Google wasn’t treating everyone the same. They had a lot of private details for big companies.

Unless Apple also has secret deals, then this isn’t going to impact them.

[–] [email protected] 80 points 8 months ago

Unless Apple also has secret deals

Apple doesn't need to make any deals at all because you simply can't install any other app stores, or any apps outside of the Apple app store.

That's the crazy thing, that they lost their case and Apple won, despite Apple having WAY more control.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Apple wouldn't need to have secret deals. They're running a walled garden over there. You can't side load, and you can't run payments through the app without Apple's approval. That case was about Apple forcing developers not to even talk in the app about the possibility of making a purchase elsewhere, like through their websites. It wasn't a deal, it was Apple strong-arming a developer because they could.

The problem is Google wanted to have what Apple has: a closed ecosystem they can exploit. But they don't have that, at least not to the same degree. Android is not "theirs", even if they've increasingly managed to make the Play Store more inseparable as time has gone by, and getting worse about that all the time.

The most they can do is scare people away from using third party app stores or doing anything with Android they don't approve of, and when it comes to things like Play Integrity and Play Protection, they can punish you for stepping outside their bounds by breaking certain functionality (for having the audacity to want to control your own device).

But they can't outright control anything.

Which is where the deals come in. They're making shady deals to keep Android as their money maker and no one elses.

It's anti-competitive, because to spite Google's efforts, there is an actual opportunity for competition on Android, where as on iPhone, there isn't.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

I'm sure they do want them to do that, the question is how is Google stopping them?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

By enforcing a rule that says apps on the app store cannot have an external paid app store. So that's why you download FN on sideload instead of the store.

load more comments (20 replies)
[–] [email protected] 38 points 8 months ago (1 children)

But Epic v. Google turned out to be a very different case. It hinged on secret revenue sharing deals between Google, smartphone makers, and big game developers, ones that Google execs internally believed were designed to keep rival app stores down. It showed that Google was running scared of Epic specifically. And it was all decided by a jury, unlike the Apple ruling.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I read that but they don't expand at all on how they're doing that. I can buy, download and install games from EGS right now on my Android phone...

I can also buy things from Amazon or any other online store from my browser without Google Play.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

They obviously aren't forcing everyone to use Google billing, but it seems like an antitrust case gains a lot more ground if the accused pays money to quite a bit of people to prevent them from using competitors. That's what's getting Google here, apparently, not real forcing.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 8 months ago (4 children)

On top of what Aatube says about secret unfair deals, Google's Play Store is necessary to run essential social services. In my case I need it to download my banking app and to sign into my university's online studies.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Even something as simple as the Wikipedia app checks to see if Google Play Services is installed and running before it'll let you use it.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Needing an app to sign into uni

Jesus fucking hell. Bet it's propriety.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Need an app to configure good ol' eduroam wifi too, but that one's on F-Droid at least

[–] [email protected] 9 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Need an app to configure good ol' eduroam wifi too

I'm pretty sure you don't, or at least didn't, it's just much more of a hassle to configure

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago

In theory you don't. In practice I couldn't get working with the 6 page step for step tutorial.

It is almost impossible to get it working without the app.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

Ah, well in that case, even better

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 25 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Phone makers weren’t allowed to include other app stores by default

[–] [email protected] 40 points 8 months ago (2 children)

The Galaxy store app on my phone says otherwise.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 8 months ago

The Galaxy Store was a special exception made for Samsung. Generally, Google is pretty "persuasive" about being the only pre-installed app store on the phone.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 8 months ago (2 children)

What's in the contract between Google and Samsung? What exactly are the conditions for including both stores? Can any phone manufacturer get the same deal? What are the requirements for licensing Android? What number of phones on the market don't include Play Store by default? What % of applications are only in Play Store?

Monopoly is not about exceptions but about market control. Until you know what companies have to do to use Android and function on the market you can't really tell if it's monopoly or not.

[–] captain_aggravated 10 points 8 months ago

I have to imagine the contract that Samsung has is "We're Samsung. We basically ARE Korean technology. We can build our own mobile OS if we want to and cut you out entirely. That's a lot of spying on customers you wouldn't get to do. We get our own app store or we walk. Oh look, LG just exited the smart phone market. Do what must be done."

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 28 points 8 months ago (15 children)

Does the Amazon store, Galaxy Store, AppGallery, Mi GetApps, and AOPPO app market not exist?

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] [email protected] 21 points 8 months ago

“Impairment means something is there, it’s being used, it just isn’t as good. Prevented means you shut it down.”

Epic’s expert Bernheim argues that Google’s expert Gentzkow “ignores four critical aspects of Google’s conduct,” including:

  1. Google impairs competition without preventing it entirely

  2. Google’s conduct targets comeptition as it emerges

  3. Google is dominant

  4. Google shares its Play profits with its competitors

“When push came to shove, he talked about whether competition is prevented” rather than impaired, says Bernheim.

The upshot of that: Bernheim believes Epic doesn’t need to prove Google actually blocked competition entirely. In his opinion (for Epic), Epic only needs to show there were no good alternatives to Google Play and Google Play Billing. It doesn’t need to show there were no alternatives at all.

For example, says Bernheim, Gentzkow presented a chart titled “Was Fortnite Blocked?” showing that revenue tanked on Google Play after the app was kicked off the store, but didn’t tank for Android phones that got Fortnite a different way.

But “If off-Google Play was a good substitute for Google Play, you’d see when one drops, the other goes up commensurably.” That didn’t happen: demand stayed stable outside of Play, according to the bar graph we just saw. “There’s no indication that any of the people here are substituting to off-Google Play.”

[–] [email protected] 16 points 8 months ago

Google effectively has a monopoly on the Android app ecosystem and this trial brought to light mountains of evidence that they maintain this through extremely anti-competitive means.

load more comments (5 replies)