Technology

37794 readers

238 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Google seeks to undo Epic Games antitrust win over app store (techxplore.com)

submitted 2 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

10 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Alphabet Inc.'s Google is asking a federal appeals court to throw out a ruling in an antitrust case brought by Fortnite-maker Epic Games that would force the search giant to overhaul its Play mobile app store.

[...]

A San Francisco jury concluded in December 2023 that Google violated antitrust law by blocking rival app stores through a series of revenue-sharing agreements with mobile device makers like Samsung. Following up with a fix in October, Donato ordered Google to allow developers to set up app marketplaces and offer consumers billing options other than its own payment system.

Alphabet Inc.'s Google is now asking a federal appeals court to throw out a ruling in an antitrust case brought by Fortnite-maker Epic Games that would force the search giant to overhaul its Play mobile app store.

[...]

Epic first sued Google and Apple in August 2020, accusing them of blocking competition for rival app stores. The judge in the Apple case largely ruled against Epic, though she directed the iPhone maker to make some changes to its App Store rules. Epic and Apple are currently fighting in an Oakland federal court over whether the iPhone maker is abiding by that ruling.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

I just want to play games.

Edit: On a more serious note, I am actually a bit on Googles side here. Because everyone can actually install an alternative store. It's like asking Steam to add an installer for GOG and Epic Games Store in the Steam store. There is no technical limitation on the smartphones why anyone could not install alternative stores or software. The lack of installed alternative stores right from the start is not a fault of Google, but the phone manufactures who did not put these by default.

Overall, am I wrong with my observation? I really think Google is not at fault for this particular thing.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

I think the difference is that on a PC, the barrier to installing Epic or GOG is the same as Steam, but with phones and tablets, the operating system itself does everything it can to scare you away from installing an "unofficial" app. There have been plenty of bad actors on the Play Store, but Google is fine pretending like their store is perfect and secure. The fact is, we live in a world where most people take the path of least resistance, and Google is using their money and power to incentivize manufacturers and end-users into certain behaviors. That just harms smaller companies from being able to properly compete.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

But that is a decision the user takes, not Google. If people don't want to install alternative stores because its too much work, then its not Googles fault. The problem is that phone manufactures do not have the alternative stores installed (besides Samsung). Its entirely in the hands of phone manufacturers and they should be sued over, not Google.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Google has agreements with the manufacturers that prevent or heavily disincentivize the manufacturers from doing that, otherwise they essentially can't use Android.

It's all Google.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

In that case, its all Google I agree.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I know it's insidious. This shit sandwich has so many layers by design that it's easy to misinform even courts, much less people with limited time or willingness to talk about these things.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

From now on whenever I talk about Android with Google Play Services I'll refer to it as the "shit sandwich OS"

[–] dracs 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

The reason that Google got ruled against originally was that they were paying and offering incentives to developers to keep them from releasing their apps on other app stores.

Google also doesn't support a user installing the Play Store themselves (and the required Google Play Services dependency). So phone manufactures have to choose to include it on everybody's phone from the get go, or their users won't be able to use it at all.