this post was submitted on 08 Oct 2024
351 points (98.6% liked)

Technology

60112 readers
2187 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
all 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] mycodesucks@lemmy.world 101 points 2 months ago (4 children)

I hate Google as much as anybody else, but that Google has been ordered to open up when they already allow side loading, and Apple is apparently all good, is all you need to know this whole system is a joke.

[–] misk@sopuli.xyz 28 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Google is big enough to be considered a monopoly in mobile phone operating systems. Play Store is technically a separate service / business which enjoys unfair advantage of being installed by default. I think this approach might be good because it’s better for user experience (unlike EU web browser thing for example) and has a good shot at postiviely affecting power balance between app developers and platform owner.

I’m curious how this will play out. Apple should be next obviously.

[–] mycodesucks@lemmy.world 27 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Apple was first. And the courts ruled it no problem.

[–] misk@sopuli.xyz 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I meant "next big corpo beaten into submission by regulators". I don't think Epic gave up on them yet.

[–] mycodesucks@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I wouldn't say Google has been "beaten into submission". They still interweave their crap services into every Android phone with no ability to remove or disable them, couple their apps with an intrusive, privacy violating, system degrading backend with special rules for its own apps versus everybody else... even force the default system web browser to be an unremovable Chrome installation, and not even a peep from regulators that any of this might be anti-competitive.

No company has been properly beaten into submission since Ma Bell. Even the big Microsoft browser decision in the 90s turned out to be a joke - they're right back to doing the same thing with impunity.

[–] misk@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Even if things go well it will be one thing at a time probably. This news doesn’t sound big because Google is so big but for businesses dependent on Google infrastructure this is a major win, no?

My perspective might be skewed since I live in EU and we mostly won right to our data and privacy.

[–] mycodesucks@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

I appreciate you guys fighting the good fight.

At least SOMEONE'S on it.

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 24 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

It's because Google is using their market dominance to essentially force OEMs to do what Google wants them to do.

You can't have a successful Android device without the Play store, or access to any Google apps. Shit, for lots of apps, they will be straight up broken without Play Services installed, or notifications won't work.

The market reality is that you have to have the play store. Google knows this, so they attach all kinds of extra requirements on OEMs to push Google services and tracking.

Apple doesn't do this. Yes, Apple's system is more locked down than Google's (by far), but Apple is not using their market position to force anything on anybody or any OEM. Google is. Apple has not forced Samsung, OnePlus, Motorola, Sony, etc to do anything. They are only doing things of their own accord, on their own devices.

What Apple is doing is the same as what the games consoles do. You buy a Sony console, it has Sony software, Sony's storefront, Sony-sanctioned games. It's an ecosystem they're putting on their own product, as opposed to Google strong-arming other companies into pushing Google's ecosystem, because Google knows they have no realistic alternative. That's why one is abuse of market dominance and the other isn't.

[–] mycodesucks@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

This is the clearest and most sensible explanation of the situation, but I'm still not sure what's meant by "opening the app store". The reality is apps can be sideloaded and distributed freely on Android, even unrooted. Sure, Google requires OEMs to push Google services and tracking, and that's evil and horrible and nasty, but do they actually force that onto app developers as well?

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Perhaps they mean allowing android OEMs to ship with the play store without having to agree to all the other Google requirements.

[–] mycodesucks@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Edit: Sorry! I misread your comment at first. Yeah, now that you say that, that makes the most sense.

But from the standpoint of anti-competitivity and Android vs iOS with Apple...

One's behavior is denying access to their app store without agreeing to a set of device restrictions, but everything on the app store is available without the app store at developer discretion.

The other is an app store which MUST be installed, and is in fact the ONLY way to get software for the device.

One is CLEARLY more anti-competitive than the other, and yet the one that's LESS problematic is the one that gets court action. It's a joke.

[–] Soup@lemmy.cafe 3 points 2 months ago

There’s that nuance again. Seems to not be very popular around here. Good point though. Well said.

[–] conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Apple isn't on third party hardware.

They aren't controlling access to software on other manufacturers devices like Google is.

[–] mycodesucks@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

That's not actually true though.

Android is open source and many devices, mostly Chinese products, launch with custom Android builds completely free of Google services. This is not a Google constraint - manufacturers CHOOSE to use Android builds that use Google's services. Creating your own build simply stops you from integrating Google's services into the OS, which is actually a PLUS if you ask me.

Even if they WERE requiring it, that would have nothing to do with end user store front installation, which is already something you can do, as shown by the 2 non-Google app stores I have installed on my phone.

Again... I'm not defending Google as some kind of good company here. I'm simply stating there is no way to make an anti-competitivity argument against Google in mobile that doesn't apply at least as much to Apple. This is a nonsensical double-standard.

[–] conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 months ago

Because of their market dominance. That's what antitrust laws are about.

The fact that it's not just their own hardware completely changes the legal arguments in play.

[–] ocassionallyaduck@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

Google has also made unwelcome moves recently indicating they might crack down on sodeloaded app stores. So I'm glad this ruling happened.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 50 points 2 months ago (2 children)

good. now do apple, microsoft, amazon, meta....

[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 months ago

First Apple then Google. On Android you can at least side-load properly

[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Do PlayStation, Xbox, and Nintendo next.

[–] Rixonomic@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Does this mean Aurorastore will be useful again?

[–] Wildly_Utilize@infosec.pub 21 points 2 months ago (1 children)

when did it stop being useful?

[–] Rixonomic@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

A couple years ago, I used Aurora to install paid games on my Shield TV. Games that Google Play doesn't normally allow on the Shield (like the PS2 era GTA games). Well Google changed something, and it's no longer possible to download and install purchased apps or games through Aurora, even if you log into your Google account. This sucks, because I formatted my Shield TV expecting be able to reinstall these games, but it doesn't work anymore.

Yeah, Aurora is still good, but Google has been crippling it.

[–] bradboimler@startrek.website 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Is it the pro or the tube shield the tube is 32 bit only and most apps and games have moved to 64 bit only so the pro would be needed but I can still install paid apps on aurora on my phone just fine.

[–] Rixonomic@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Aurora stores GitHub page states under the Limitation section that it is not able to install, or update paid apps.

Provides only base minimum features Can not download or update paid apps.

https://github.com/whyorean/AuroraStore

[–] bradboimler@startrek.website 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Odd I used it to install GTA: SA definitive edition purchased on the play store website then installed and updated via Aurora still works just updated it recently too.

[–] Rixonomic@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

It might be the kind of thing that works sometimes in some situations, but isn't officially supported.

Either way, it used to work for my ShieldTV Pro, but it doesn't work anymore. Doesn't matter how many devices I try to spoof, or how many times I reinstall the app, or how many times I re-login, etc.

Makes me really sad that I formatted the Shield TV. Oh well.

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

OH SHIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII