this post was submitted on 29 Oct 2024
572 points (98.6% liked)

Technology

60052 readers
2840 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

For the next three years, Google must meet the following criteria:

  • Allow third-party app stores for Android, and let those app stores distribute all the same apps as are available in Google Play (app developers can opt out of this);
  • Distribute third-party app stores as apps, so users can switch app stores by downloading a new one from Google Play, in just the same way as they'd install any app;
  • Allow apps to use any payment processor, not just Google's 30 percent money-printing machine;
  • Permit app vendors to tell users about other ways to pay for the things they buy in-app;
  • Permit app vendors to set their own prices.

Google is also prohibited from using its cash to fence out rivals, for example, by:

  • Offering incentives to app vendors to launch first on Google Play, or to be exclusive to Google Play;
  • Offering incentives to app vendors to avoid rival app stores;
  • Offering incentives to hardware makers to pre-install Google Play;
  • Offering incentives to hardware makers not to install rival app stores.
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ThePantser@lemmy.world 159 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Ok now do Apple.

Google has always been the OS that allows users to get their apps anywhere. Apple has not.

Also could we throw in something that allows me to remove all Google apps from a stock OS instead of just disabling?

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 89 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

iOS is certainly far more locked down than Android.

But thats not really what courts are looking at with the Google stuff going on recently.

The courts take issue with Google strong-arming OEMs to do what Google says. Forcing them to include Google services, Google tracking, not to have other stores as default, etc. under threat of not allowing Google Apps, Play Store, or Play Services/notifications to work - something that is effectively a requirement if you want to sell your devices.

Apple isn't doing that. Apple isn't forcing OEMs to push Apple services and telemetry, because they own their own hardware business. Apple isn't forcing Samsung/OnePlus/Sony/etc to do their bidding. Google is.

I firmly believe Apple should be made to open up their devices, but it cannot be done under current US law (unlike with Google, who is unquestionably abusing their dominant market position by strong-arming OEMs). Forcing Apple to open up would require something like a US equivalent to the EU's recent Digital Markets Act.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

IIRC they are doing things like requiring payments to go through them, and all kinds of other monopolistic stuff. Yeah, they aren't doing all the same things, but they're doing a lot of it, and it's more restricted by default so it's even more pervasive.

[–] ryper@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 month ago (6 children)

The payments requirement was the only win Epic got in its case against Apple. Apple now allows external purchase links, with a bunch of requirements and restrictions.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The way Apple gets away with stuff makes me feel very conspiratorial. Like, how?

How is Apple getting a pass every time and my tin foil hat would say that they are protected by the US government. Maybe because it's just an important corporation for the US economy but maybe it's an important corporation for US spying too.

[–] Benign@fedia.io 32 points 1 month ago (2 children)

US law doesn't care what companies do to consumers. The law only cares what they do to other companies. Apple own their own hardware production and ecosystem, so they aren't harming other companies (directly).

No conspiracy needed.

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Apple absolutely harms other companies to the point where are taken to court all the time.

There's no such thing as "their own ecosystem"

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

Yes, but those companies are poorer, and have lower tier legal teams.

Das capitalism baby!

[–] btaf45@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

The law only cares what they do to other companies.

Apple doesn't allow other companies to have their own app stores. Which google already did allow, they just didn't make it easy to install one.

Apple is MUCH worse in restricting app stores. It makes no sense that Apple can continue to get away with their far worse restrictions than google. On the positive side this will make Android even better and more attractive to consumers vs AOS than it already was.

[–] laxe@lemmy.world 34 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Why for only 3 years? Why not make these changes permanent?

[–] FuryMaker@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Guess their thinking is that Google may not be a monopoly in 3 years, so the rules might not need to apply at that point, or they be reviewed?

[–] stupidcasey@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Why can’t these rules apply to everyone always?

[–] drake@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 month ago

They should apply to all platforms which have over a certain number of users, for sure. It’s not really a good idea imo to make it universally applicable because then you would end up with a situation where a hobbyist developer is legally required to deal with complying with all that legislation for their homebrew project with half a dozen users.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Aeri@lemmy.world 31 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I hope they included barring them from using scare tactics to try to coerce you to sticking with just google play "TURN ON GOOGLE PLAY PROTECT NOW"

[–] mrvictory1@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

turns off google play services

gets spammed by 976688286 apps begging for google play immediately

[–] btaf45@lemmy.world 24 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I like all of this stuff. But Apple needs to do all this even more than google.

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

That's exactly what I was thinking. I'm baffled as to how Apple won their version of this lawsuit when their system is arguably more of a monopoly than Google's, since there were still ways to use 3rd party app stores on Android but not in Apple's ecosystem.

Does it just come down to how connected Apple's lawyers were vs Google's? How about an investigation of all involved, assuming things don't go to complete shit over the next few months?

[–] pup_atlas@pawb.social 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The answer to this question is quite simple, because Google (excluding the Pixel line) isn’t making the actual phones, just the software. The actual manufacturers (Samsung, Motorola, Huawei, etc) are taking Google’s OS and putting it on their phones. This case mostly hinges on Googles behavior being monopolistic to them, not to the end consumer.

On the other hand, Apple make both the OS and the Hardware, there’s no manufacturer they’re forcing the app store on, so the same rules don’t apply here.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I love how the problem isn't the people being hurt by monopolistic behavior, but other companies.

We really are fucked.

[–] btaf45@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Yes. Sounds like the law itself is flawed.

[–] msage@programming.dev 21 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] ogmios@sh.itjust.works 37 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Or they'll be fined 0.005% of their revenue for the quarter.

[–] Vertelleus@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Sounds like the cost of doing business.

[–] TseseJuer@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

if the punishment for a crime is a fine, then that means it's legal for a fee

[–] BigTrout75@lemmy.world 14 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Just curious, does Apple allow all those 3rd party options? Not saying anything just wondering.

[–] drake@lemmy.sdf.org 12 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I believe that Apple has been given the same or similar, set of requirements from the EU, tried to soft-ball it by doing some bare minimum shit that the EU didn’t consider good enough, and is back in court over it.

[–] HK65@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yeah but they only do that in the EU, they still offer a degraded service everywhere else.

[–] drake@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 month ago

Yeah, absolutely they should be forced to opening the platform more, worldwide.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] TriflingToad@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago

Allow apps to use any payment processor, not just Google's 30 percent money-printing machine;

This is a big one. Google taxes 30% off all payments on apps from the play store and now they have to lower it to compete or lose customers.

[–] TriflingToad@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago

I know people here are gonna say it's not enough and while I agree, I still want to celebrate that a positive change has been made at all. Especially at a time where side loading is starting to be cracked down on.

[–] Ahardyfellow@lemmynsfw.com 8 points 1 month ago

We need another bell lab

[–] fl42v@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I don't really understand the 1st requirement...

allow 3rd-party app stores

So, apparently f-droid/aurora/etc are not allowed or something?

let stores distribute the same stuff gplay does

As in "give 'em a way to pull stuff from gplay and not punish for letting ppl download it"? Mb useful, but the lack of specificity may defend the purpose. Like currently, AFAIK, nobody really prevents ppl from publishing both on gplay and f-droid, for example

The rest lgtm

[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 month ago

Probably because of this?

Distribute third-party app stores as apps, so users can switch app stores by downloading a new one from Google Play, in just the same way as they'd install any app; Allow apps to use any payment processor,

[–] madis@lemm.ee 4 points 1 month ago (3 children)

I don't understand the second one "Distribute third-party app stores as apps, so users can switch app stores by downloading a new one from Google Play, in just the same way as they'd install any app".

In real life you don't see big supermarkets spread their flyers in competitors' stores, how does that make sense digitally?

[–] sjpwarren@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

It's a bit like how you use Edge to install Firefox

[–] Starbuncle@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Google made the Play Store the primary (and only, for most people) way to install apps on Android.

[–] madis@lemm.ee 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

But sideloading and OEM stores (Samsung, Huawei) have been available for years?

[–] Starbuncle@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 month ago

Preinstalled stores are limited to manufacturers and distributors and they suck, so nobody uses them. It's pretty easy for someone with a tiny bit of tech knowledge to do some research and find out how to enable the ability to download APKs from the internet, but sadly, that's not most people. Google doesn't have a monopoly because Play Store is good (it isn't), they have a monopoly because they're anticompetitive.

[–] SeattleRain@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

IT job market about to get a lot better for applicants.

[–] kayazere@feddit.nl 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Allow third-party app stores for Android, and let those app stores distribute all the same apps as are available in Google Play (app developers can opt out of this);

Developers should definitely be able to pick with AppStores their apps are distributed in. This seems strange they can’t opt out.

Pretty sure Fdroid doesn’t want PlayStore spyware apps.

[–] Jrockwar@feddit.uk 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'm not sure I'm following, it says developers can opt out!

[–] kayazere@feddit.nl 3 points 1 month ago

Whoops, I thought it said “not opt out”. Too early in the day apparently 😅

load more comments
view more: next ›