654
Android's new developer verification rollout begins, sideloading changes are next (www.androidauthority.com)
submitted 5 months ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
169 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 134 points 5 months ago (12 children)

Ummm... Isn't this precisely against the whole EU's make sideloading (ie. installing) as easy as main app store installing thing?
Taking steps backwards...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 104 points 5 months ago (7 children)

    Apple shat all over those regulations with their implementation and got away with it so now Google are doing the same

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 41 points 5 months ago (6 children)

    Yeah, my thoughts exactly.

    Accountability is key in regulations. Without it, why should anyone follow them?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 27 points 5 months ago (5 children)

    I also blame the Epic lawsuits. How the fuck did they lose to Apple but win against Google, the platform where Fortnite was still fully playable and monetised?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 5 months ago (4 children)

    I don't know anything about those. What's the story?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 18 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    Basically Epic weren't happy with the 30% cut that Apple and Google take from app sales and in-app purchases so they introduced a direct payment method which bypassed Apple and Google's payment methods, but was in violation of their app store rules. In response both Apple and Google removed Fortnite from the app store. Fortnite remained playable on Android because of sideloading but was unplayable on iOS (I'm not even sure if it's back yet)

    In response Epic sued both companies claiming they held an illegal monopoly. Somehow Apple won and Google lost

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    Oh I do recall that now that you mention it. But I wasn't aware that they lost to Apple. That sounds ridiculous, isn't it the same thing?!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    I looked further into it and it seems to be because on iPhone the restrictions were purely technical, it just wasn't possible to publish anywhere other than the app store which apparently isn't monopolistic.

    However Google were apparently making deals to make the play store the more attractive choice despite the alternatives existing, which did count as monopolistic behavior.

    Now in isolation I can sort of understand both of those decisions, and I don't really care either way because fuck Google Apple and Epic, I want them all to lose. But in the context of both lawsuits happening pretty much at the same time this was literally the one result that made no sense. I could understand Epic winning or losing both cases, or even beating Apple and losing to Google, but this way round was just stupid and I think Googles recent behaviour is partially because of it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 6 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

    It took years and legal pressure and fines to have other app stores decently recognized and allowed. I don't understand how we are going so back. I mean I understand. Capitalism + monopoly + orange guy.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    I doubt it. EU regulations demand all manner of documentation, including who supplied software. Tech companies should also protect users and enforce "our" laws, which means a lot of surveillance.

    App stores already have to do developer verification, under the celebrated DMA.

    There's a pro-business loophole meant to keep bureaucracy low. Very small companies are exempted. It's kind of ironic, because Lemmy usually hates this kind of pro-business anti-regulation thing. To be fair, using this loophole to shield devs, as F-Droid wants, is an abuse. It's only meant to allow small companies to grow until they have the resources to handle the verification.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (1 child)

    It's only meant to allow small companies to grow until they have the resources to handle the verification.

    Most projects served by F-Droid are not backed by companies. Then they are righfully exempted from the DMA, it's not a "loophole".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •