This is the behaviour I, unfortunately, expect out of Apple.
But to actually answer the question, I think this is a strategic mistake. I'm broadly of the opinion that:
The android ecosystem is reliant on Android capturing part of the high end market, without it their won't be sufficient money in the ecosystem. Money in the ecosystem is necessary to justify things like developers making apps, phone companies investing in product lines, advertisers paying high prices for in app ads, etc.
Android captures part of the high end market only because of enthusiasts and developers choosing and evangelizing the less abusive company. From other perspectives (hardware quality, software quality, signalling wealth, etc) Apple has generally been better. There's the occasional exception like Android being the first to flip-phone-touch-phones, but not enough to sustain an ecosystem.
And thus Google's general movement to matching Apple here is shortsighted, and likely to significantly contribute to the collapse Android's phone ecosystem, which in turn will destroy the huge source of profit that is Google Play.
But still better than Apple, yeah? Last I checked, still allows alternate stores, still allows sideloading (but requires verification), still allows customization, still allows OEM choice ..
You didnt say it explicitly what you'll switch to, but my assumption is that you were going to go to iPhone but isnt it worse over there?
TorrentFreak are the first to respond to our emails, Getting the news out is hard.
(i am the one who alerted Ernesto, but i had no input in the article.)
They are not at the same level.
A bit meta, I lament the loss of the 'hacker' spirit that should be more pervasive here in general; no company should be above criticism, and actions ought to be treated with the same praise and disdain. Unfortunately it is not the case for a while.
So when stuff like this happens, it's kind of the expected outcome. Cue the lawnmower analogy.
I always thought a lot of developers who were big Apple fans would fall off as Apple started pushing stuff like the Mac App Store and Gatekeeper on macOS, but no. At this point I am unsure there is much Apple could do to lose support of its biggest supporters. All Apple needs is some plausible excuse for why something is a good idea and people take it largely at face value. (At least, Apple never really seems to lose much supporters in the long run.)
I pay too much attention to comment votes and replies on this website, probably mainly because all of the other discussion forums I used to go on are dead. But in threads about Apple, I kind of get the idea of what the votes really represent.
Nevertheless, this serves as an excellent demonstration of the problem with the changes Google are making, since they would allow Google to do exactly what Apple just did.
This is the kind of conduct I expect from Apple and the reason I have no interest in using one of their devices. I think it's bad for them to do this. I think it's bad for them to have the ability to do this. I don't think ranting about it on HN will accomplish anything. It has been this way for nearly 20 years and it will only change if governments make even stricter laws against it.
Google, on the other hand is trying to lock down a previously (somewhat) open platform. That's a rug pull for those who picked Android for its openness, and it's possible that sufficient outrage from the tech community will stop that plan.
I highly doubt that. It would take the common non-tech person to be outraged. This is where google makes all their money. Not from a small minority of tech workers.
And Apple being a middleman parasite for every app wasn't something that I had much sympathy for.
I use a macbook pro as my main laptop because macos is bearable (also it's become steadily worse in the last few years) and their hardware is great. But, ipads and iphones are just locked down trash from my perspective and I refuse to use money to get a device that I can't control.
As mentioned in TFA:
> While there may be a perfectly logical explanation for iTorrent’s revoked rights, Apple’s handling of the matter so far only fuels speculation. Some might even argue that the lack of transparency in revoking distribution rights violates the letter or the spirit of the EU’s Digital Markets Act.
If Apple is truly trying to block an app that has substantial legal uses that is being distributed outside of its own App Store, there is a problem.
You're technically right that we havent seen Apple do the thing _in this instance_ but why do you still give the company the benefit of the doubt.
One one hand we have an official policy announcement from Google, and on the other hand we have speculation about why one developer is having issues distributing one app.
Speculation is not on the same level as an official policy.
The EU changed the laws within their jurisdiction to require third party app store availability.
Historically speaking, Google made claims that Android would allow you to run anything you like (they didn't even have their own app store at first), and also that Android was open source.
They have incrementally been rolling back those stances ever since.
Look, kids! It’s a poor, little trillion dollar mega corporation. Everybody wave!
Meanwhile, walled gardens remain perfectly legal, unless you explicitly change the law.
Look at Microsoft, which created and marketed Xbox as a walled garden with no legal repercussions in the decades since.
However, Microsoft created Windows as an open platform, and then used anticompetitive tactics to retain control (just as Google did) and was found just as guilty as Google in the courts.
When Apple created iOS it was a closed platform. When they added the ability to create third party native apps they were clear that the platform would be a walled garden.
It clearly was not a closed platform in the way that Apple believed. It never should have been closed. I own my devices, so I get to decide what they run. It’s my electricity driving the chips, so I decide which bits get flipped. Simple as.
I do hear you, I just don’t know if I have the same perception of the facts on the ground. Google and Apple should be compelled to support users’ decisions about whether to defer to the corporate overlords, or not.
That's not how the law works.
As long as the device creator is absolutely clear to consumers that choosing their platform means that consumers will be buying into a walled garden, it's perfectly legal.
The only way to change that is to change the law, as the EU did.
A right that can’t be exercised is a wrong.
I appreciate you for making a point of bringing this up. I care as you do and want better for computing and computer users.
The judge who ruled in Epic vs Apple did mention in the ruling that Epic could have had more success if they had focused on the size of the 30% cut instead of arguing that Apple could not take a cut from the App Store at all.
You do have the right to choose an open platform instead.
Hopefully from a vendor that doesn't break its promises.
This hasn't really been the case for the past year or two. People are pretty fed up with Apple's BS, even here in their historic stronghold.
And today it is Apple, and I'm curious to see whether HN folks feel the similar passion. Historically, people pick up pitch forks for Google but give Apple a pass - so looking forward to the conversation here.