Mastodawn

Fabio Manganiello

Outside of Europe, #Google's monopoly gets slammed by India too. The ruling says that:

- Google must allow alternative app stores (like F-Droid or ApkPure) on the Play Store. This is really the step zero for fair competition: give everybody the same visibility, and let users pick what they like.

- Google should not force Android providers to install its own apps in order to be a certified Android provider. Step one for fair competition: competition only works if none of the involved party starts from a position of advantage.

- Google should make the Play Store available also on Android forks. Step two for fair competition: if the competitors' stores are available on your store, then your store should also be available on the competitors' forks, and users eventually will pick what they like the most. All the distribution asymmetries should be removed.

This is a good and balanced ruling that aims to create a level playing field by removing all the bumps that, as of now, strongly consolidate Google's position of dominance.

And it's going to hit Google quite badly too: India is the largest global market for Android (arguably on par with China), and Google may be on its way to lose its unfair advantage there.

https://9to5google.com/2023/01/20/google-play-stroe-third-party-india/

Google Play Store will be forced to house other app stores by next week as India upholds ruling

A ruling in India will force the Google Play Store to distribute third-party app stores as soon as January 2023.

9to5Google

Enrique Barcelli Jan 22, 2023

@blacklight
"Google claimed they would “hurt consumers” and “stall growth” of the Android platform."

Yeah... too bad. We don't care! 😆

❄️Jan 22, 2023

@kikobar @blacklight if the growth of the "android platform" is at the detriment of competition and humane technology, then maybe that growth shouldn't happen

Fabio Manganiello Jan 22, 2023

@ShadowJonathan @kikobar I actually believe that #Android may grow better and stronger without Google's anti-competitive behaviour.

The core of Android is open-source and it has a vibrant community around it. If other stores and app suites alternative to Google's had the same visibility as Google's, if phone producers weren't forced to do a deal with the devil in order to get the Android certification, if all the barriers were removed, then people would have more choice. With more choice comes more competition, with more competition comes more push for Google to make its product less shitty (take the case where the user can uninstall the Google's default apps and install the alternatives they like the most).

Not to mention the big push that the whole industry could have if only Google and Apple invested more on progressive web-apps instead of native apps: the real convergence between desktop and mobile that was dreamed by Steve Jobs. Unfortunately, both of them have strong incentives from the status quo because it puts them in a position where they are the sole gatekeepers that get 1/3 of the revenue stream that would go to app developers.

So when Google talks of "growth" they're talking about "growth of their own profit", not "growth of the industry" - those two metrics have been inversely proportional for a few years already.

❄️Jan 22, 2023

@blacklight @kikobar i have a hard time believing android wouldn't just fracture and get scavenged by other mobile manufacturers the moment google loses grip of it, and that before they could even start to piece it back together, that apple has already overtaken everyone

Fabio Manganiello Jan 23, 2023

@ShadowJonathan @kikobar I don't see much of that risk (I call it the "Linuxification" risk).

Fragmentation happened in Linux because the Linux environment has always been fragmented by design. It was just a kernel, with anything you want around it. After 30 years, we can't even agree on a universal package manager or desktop environment - let alone an editor.

Android is a bit different. After 15 years, you can say that most of the paradigms and foundations are pretty much in place, and everybody agrees on what an "Android experience" usually looks like (that's something that never happened on Linux).

Andrew Bartlett Jan 22, 2023

@blacklight Very interesting situation and potentially as pivotal as the Samba vs Microsoft case in the EU.

Here is the original wire article from Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/world/india/indian-startups-rejoice-android-ruling-against-google-upheld-2023-01-19/

Indian startups rejoice as Android ruling against Google upheld

Startups in India cheered a decision by the Supreme Court on Thursday to uphold an antitrust order that forces Google to change how it runs its popular Android platform, saying the ruling would open the market for rivals and boost competition.

Reuters

@blacklight BASED INDIA LES GO!!!

atomic Jan 22, 2023

@blacklight What about Apple tho

Fabio Manganiello Jan 22, 2023

@atomic they've been in their legal quarrels with Epic for a while by now, both about the store commission and the fact that users can't install apps from other sources.

I also believe that #Apple should be punished more than Google in this regard. At least on Android you can still download another store from another website or install an APK directly.

Abhinav1217 Jan 22, 2023

@blacklight finally a good decision from Indian Govt in terms of IT infrastructure.

Ashwan Jan 22, 2023

@blacklight
It's undoubtedly a good ruling but I'm afraid of "who" and "where" it's being implemented. Sadly, none of them persist for long in my country where laws are always in favor of deep pockets.😔

Kat Ravenwolf Jan 23, 2023

@blacklight How does this work though from a security prospective? That could cause Android malware to run rampant. (I want to believe that Google had that in mind when they disallowed third-party stores for a while.)

Fabio Manganiello Jan 23, 2023

@cambridgeport90 stores like F-Droid are actually much, much safer than the Play Store. Before something gets approved there's a real human behind the scenes testing the app, you're also forced to disclose the source code, and they run static analysis tools on it.

Uploading malware to the Play Store, on the other hand, is actually quite easy: you just have to activate the malware logic only when the app receives a certain payload from upstream (and there are also ways to obfuscate this logic so a code analyzer that uses a Java decompiler won't flag it). No payload=no malware=it'll pass the automated tests put in place by Google. And, since you aren't required to upload the source code, there's no easy way to statically monitor when the app initializes new connections. This is actually the way many malicious actors still upload malware to the Play Store today: https://www.zdnet.com/article/google-play-malware-if-youve-downloaded-these-malicious-apps-delete-them-immediately/

So when Google says "but user security...", they're just trying to throw excuses to defend their dominant position. The safest way to distribute any software is by forcing developers and distributors to share the source code and make it accessible to the user - and there are already stores that do that.

Google Play malware: If you've downloaded these malicious apps, delete them immediately

Cybersecurity researchers identify 35 apps, many downloaded over 100,000 times, that have been serving up malware to millions of Android users.

ZDNET

Kat Ravenwolf Jan 24, 2023

@blacklight Interesting. I never knew how it really worked. I wonder then whether Apple is the same way? (It seems easier to get something into the play store or something like F-Droid than it does to get into the Apple App store.)

newsorpigal Jan 29, 2023

This is great news!