this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2024
449 points (97.9% liked)

Technology

58009 readers
3007 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] rimjob_rainer@discuss.tchncs.de 108 points 4 weeks ago (18 children)

Why is the Google play store a monopoly if you can sideload apps, but the Apple store isn't one although you can't sideload apps? I'm not pro-Google, I'm just trying to understand.

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 132 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (2 children)

Ok, I'm going to preface this by saying I don't agree with the ethics of this, because I've been shot for just being the messenger in the past when I've spoken about this. That somehow by explaining the situation it means I'm siding with Google or Apple. I am not.

But it's because the case and the judge aren't ruling on it from a Google > smartphone user POV (where Apple's store is objectively even more of a monopoly than the Play Store, in that you literally have to use it).

They're looking at it from a Google > phone OEM POV. Google effectively forces companies to use the play store, otherwise they can't access Android functionality that has been shifted to play services, they don't get to upstream patches to AOSP, they can't access Google Apps (which are effectively required if you want to have people buy your device), they don't even have access to Android's notification system API. Google enforces that OEMs don't have alternative app stores set as the default. Etc.

Apple has no such equivalent. They aren't forcing anything on OEMs, because they themselves are the OEM. If the only phones with a Play Store were Google's own Pixel phones, the ruling would've went like Apple's.

The case is about Google abusing their market position to push OEMs into using the Play Store. Not end users.

Everybody who talks about this case on Reddit/Lemmy seems to miss what it's actually about. It's (unfortunately) not about protecting end users directly.

[–] thrawn@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

Thanks for this summary, I haven’t followed this and didn’t know what it was about. Sensical format and structure, extremely helpful in explaining a crucial difference

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (16 replies)