Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Sure, but I would argue that Google's platform was open enough in that it was possible to download and install alternative app stores. They shouldn't need to do most of the things that are being requested here, like distribute play store apps in those alternate stores or change their requirements about what payment systems are used in apps downloaded through their app store. For the most part I think they should still be able to do what they want to do in their own app store, just like Apple.


I think the difference is Google's platform is also on other manufacturers devices? If Android only existed on Pixel devices it could be different.


Why should that matter? If anything, shouldn't that mean that Google doesn't have a monopoly on Android apps in the way that Apple has on iOS apps because the device manufacturer can pre-install their own store on their devices? Like Galaxy Store on Samsung devices


It matters because Google got to the current state (Play Store installed on more devices than it would have been) through anti-competitive behavior.

Ergo, the redress isn't to say "Keep the ill gotten gains, but don't do it any more" -- it's to attempt to return things to the competitive playing field that might have existed if Google hadn't broken the law.

From that perspective, forcing them to use their market share to distribute alternatives makes sense.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: