Google also can’t:
- Offer developers money or perks not to launch their apps on rival stores
This is pretty hilarious if you know about Epic’s strategy on PC.
Yeah, Epic are being pretty hypocritical, but hopefully this will result in some positive changes. I’m just shocked at how much judges are taking Apple’s side in those lawsuits.
Yeah Apple was the one that really needs actual side loading with how absolutely locked down it is. Makes me wonder if this is just some equivalent of an empty gesture to avoid having to make Apple actually open up.
Google will have to distribute rival third-party app stores within Google Play, and it must give rival third-party app stores access to the full catalog of Google Play apps, unless developers opt out individually.
what the fuck. I don’t like google, I run fully Foss, and only recently installed microG, but I don’t agree with this garbage.
It’s easy enough to install any third party appstore. I don’t agree with this at all.
It’s easy enough to install any third party appstore.
There is one of the differences between the average Lemmy user vs the average android user.
I could guarantee most people in the two English courses I’m in or the humanities course I’m in would struggle with how to install a 3rd party app store since they either use apple or aren’t super tech savvy.
I don’t agree with this. Anybody can send a link right to the APK or even a QR code. The Epic Game Store could have a nice button right there that says install it and boom, you’re installed and off to the races. And unless you’re doing that Samsung bullshit, it’ll just work on the vast majority of devices after you click one pop-up box.
I honestly don’t know anybody who couldn’t do that. Unless it is Samsung because Samsung does have that new bullshit.
It’s one thing because you have to know about fdroid. You have to go explicitly look for fdroid, someone and so forth. But if you’re epic and you’re trying to push people to your game store, you’re going to have it right on your front page.
What’s the problem? This will make Aurora Store more stable
Don’t get me wrong. I love Aurora store. I love what they do and I donated a couple all the counts that I no longer use to them. But that does not mean I believe that this move is correct at all in any way.
Putting aside the extremely slippery slope of forcing Google to allow app stores on their store, You have actually rather significant security issues too because of the catalog.
This means any app store that is now can now download the apps, patch them with great features or malicious features and serve them as legitimate.
Security has already been such a massive headache because no matter what you do, you just can’t stop people from shooting themselves in the foot. But Android, that’s their target market and they need to do their best. And this is going to be such a massive issue. Now they did say individual apps can opt out but quite frankly I doubt many are going to unless their applications like banking apps which are almost definitely going to because attestation is extremely important for stuff like that.
Pardon me if I said anything that doesn’t make sense, I am using Speech to text.
Yeah I’m not sure this is a good precedent unless it’s attached to “only because of your monopoly position.” Like… Does that mean every app store needs to give a way for every other app store to use their selection? That’s not how it works in any other industry (I can’t buy Aldi brand cereal at Meijer).
Samsung implemented auto blocker a few updates ago, but now has enabled it by default on all their phones, and you need to know where to look to dissable it.
So any other app store that isn’t the samsung app store and Google play store wouldn’t work with this enabled, which is why they are in this lawsuit as well.
Epic filed a second lawsuit against Google (and Samsung) one week ago, arguing the companies were already attempting to sidestep this upcoming injunction by adding additional friction for third-party app stores. Since that case is now officially related to this one, Judge Donato will be hearing it as well.
Why do you care? You’re giving off big “boohoo, poor Google” vibes here and I’m not sure how else to take that.
This is intended to promote competition, which only benefits consumers. It’s not setting some sort of precedent, this is exclusively for Google because they’ve been legally declared a monopoly because of how fucking massive they are.
There’s also the new shit about “Play Integrity API” where Google intentionally makes apps unusable when downloaded from outside Google Play.
I’ve installed Amazon’s app store, and FDroid and never had an issue. Are these not considered third-party stores?
I’m initially feeling, “Great, now do Apple.”
But I do wonder how some of this ruling will be implemented. Forcing Google Play to host other app stores seems like it may be excessive.
Let me download F-Droid or whatever, drop anti-competitive barriers to it, don’t prevent anyone from using their device how they want. But I am savvy to the risks. There are a lot of non-techie people for whom the Google Play walled garden more keeps out threats than keeps them imprisoned, if we’re being honest. It’s one thing for Google to host an app it can scan for malware and designate as safe. Hosting an app store is impossible to verify is safe, I think.
Good overall, but I think Google isn’t entirely acting in bad faith in promising to appeal.
Nah. They tried to do the same to Apple. Somehow, Apple won.
That makes no sense at all why they impose this ruling on Android that had side loading to begin with but don’t force Apple wide open to actually allow side loading. Makes the whole thing seem like an empty gesture of nothing actually being accomplished.
That’s exactly what this is. Apple bought off more politicians than Google did, apparently.
What’s taking so long for side loading to be wide open for Apple.
The long and short of it is that Google has well documented instances of bribing/paying companies to not offer their apps on other stores, and Apple simply runs their walled-garden. Google deleted evidence of them doing this, which looks very shady. Also, the judge in the Apple case took an incredibly narrow view, something like “digital mobile gaming transactions”. So Apple’s 30% cut seemed to be in line with competitors.
Of course, I don’t think either should be allowed to do this, but the legal argument against Google is stronger imo.
I didn’t know judjes came in different rarities. I don’t want no Common Judge I want a Legendary on my case.
Ok, guys, this is epic.
rofl at this title trying to victimize google for being monopolistic assholes
How does the title victimize Google?.. It literally just summarizes the article, and then in the first sentence of the actual article they flat out call Google an illegal monopoly.
“Must crack open”
crack open has negative connotations. “Must allow” is a much more neutral way to phrase it.
“Epic Judge”
The judge isn’t epic’s, it’s just the judge that happens to be dealing with this case.
Judge:
Dudes: Whoa… epic!Ok, they got me on the second one… I was seriously wondering how epic had their own judge and it wasn’t conflict of interest.
Welcome to America, where the judges might as well wear racing suits full of sponsors. Actually, that might be an improvement on the status quo.
Lots of Google cock Gobbler’s around here it seems
