←back to thread

Apple just kicked Fortnite off the App Store

(www.theverge.com)
1704 points ardit33 | 5 comments | 13 Aug 20 19:03 UTC | HN request time: 0.889s | source
Show context
lordleft ◴[13 Aug 20 20:04 UTC] No.24147974[source]▶
Imagine if Microsoft did this on PCs. a) prohibiting the installation of non-windows store software (sideloading) and b) insisting that all purchases done via apps give them a 30% cut. I think this is a ridiculous practice on the behalf of Apple.
replies(41): >>24148076 #>>24148127 #>>24148143 #>>24148262 #>>24148286 #>>24148287 #>>24148292 #>>24148330 #>>24148859 #>>24149045 #>>24149092 #>>24149163 #>>24149446 #>>24149497 #>>24149512 #>>24149528 #>>24149542 #>>24149625 #>>24149734 #>>24149806 #>>24149912 #>>24149964 #>>24150003 #>>24150060 #>>24150061 #>>24150176 #>>24150200 #>>24150336 #>>24150413 #>>24150430 #>>24150437 #>>24150439 #>>24150539 #>>24150604 #>>24150740 #>>24150801 #>>24151054 #>>24151476 #>>24151607 #>>24151940 #>>24152104 #
rvz ◴[13 Aug 20 20:13 UTC] No.24148127[source]▶
Even worse. Imagine if the World Wide Web was not open and you had to go through a closed WWW like AOL and websites were "under review" by the providers and would take a 30% cut of your revenues or clicks on your web app or subscription service and websites require going only through that provider.

Thank goodness that wasn't the case.

replies(5): >>24148178 #>>24148415 #>>24150108 #>>24150629 #>>24152209 #
Seirdy ◴[13 Aug 20 20:15 UTC] No.24148178[source]▶
It could be the case if AMP grows dominant; given the market share of Google Search, it could be enough to create a controlled (er, "curated") web in a similar spirit.
replies(8): >>24148438 #>>24149443 #>>24149455 #>>24149634 #>>24149699 #>>24149739 #>>24150361 #>>24150405 #
ultrarunner ◴[13 Aug 20 20:27 UTC] No.24148438[source]▶
We're closer than we have been in a long time to something like Google deciding to license Blink or Chromium. There are some good reasons that couldn't happen (yet), but what a world that would be.
replies(3): >>24148825 #>>24149376 #>>24149850 #
1. chrisco255 ◴[13 Aug 20 21:19 UTC] No.24149376[source]▶
They can't retract the open source license that already exists for Chromium. Maybe Google could start adding proprietary features to Chrome and close-source those bits, but the code that's out there is already out there.
replies(2): >>24149610 #>>24152393 #
2. mkr-hn ◴[13 Aug 20 21:32 UTC] No.24149610[source]▶
This is basically what happened to Android as they moved an increasing number of essential features to Play Services.
replies(1): >>24152228 #
3. nmfisher ◴[14 Aug 20 01:42 UTC] No.24152228[source]▶
To be fair, these are mostly integrations with other Google services. I wouldn't expect this to be an OS-level package.
replies(1): >>24152334 #
4. zmmmmm ◴[14 Aug 20 02:00 UTC] No.24152334{3}[source]▶
Ironically, this is an example of where it is crucially important Oracle-Google case swings Google's way.

Currently, there are alternative implementations of Play Services that can be installed to replace Google's. However, if it is not fair use to use even the bare bones of an API definition without permission, then we can't even create a compatible implementation of such an API without the copyright holder's permission. In which case, we cannot replace Google Play services with anything else.

5. ROARosen ◴[14 Aug 20 02:09 UTC] No.24152393[source]▶
Actually, Google already has closed source features in Chrome that are totally not related to Google accounts and/or sync. Take for example Android app support in ChromeOS. It is closed source even though both Chromium and Android are open-source.