• halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    63
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 month ago

    So if I’m reading this correctly, this is only a change in One UI, which Samsung makes, and only affects their devices… So why is Google being sued other than for headlines?

    Also, it’s still not blocked, just additional warnings educating users about security, or lack thereof with side loading.

    Not really on Epic’s side here honestly.

    • rtxn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      66
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 month ago

      You’re talking about the same Epic that intentionally broke TOS, threw a tantrum when it was correctly kicked off the store, responded with a prepared 80-page lawsuit a day later, lost on all but one count, and is now strutting around pretending it was all for the players while taking their money by the fistful.

      • lud@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        45
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 month ago

        Apples TOS is complete bullshit and I support anyone that breaks it.

        • rtxn@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          30
          arrow-down
          19
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          Wow, what a freedom fighter.

          Apple’s (and Google&Co’s) walled garden policies are absolute bullshit and should be outlawed, but in this, Epic is in the wrong. They agreed to a contract, they didn’t like it, so they chose to break it. Besides, saying that you “support something” does fuck all. Go and do something. Call a politician and get the law changed, you rebel.

          • hate2bme@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            1 month ago

            To be fair, calling a politician will do fuck all to change a law, unless you have a giant bag of money, which Google and apple have.

            • rtxn@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              The relevant part in simple terms: if an app is distributed on the App Store, all in-app purchases must be made through the App Store (so Apple can have their 30%), the app can’t bypass this, and the app can’t contain links/buttons/calls to action to have the user bypass it. Epic implemented their own independent in-app purchase solution that violated this, and they got kicked out.

              Whether or not the 30% cut is fair is not relevant to the topic. I think it’s a baseless amount, and Apple’s walled garden is clearly anti-competitive and anti-consumer. The point is that Epic’s violation of the TOS was a premeditated action in order to inject their fake “for the players” narrative into their litigations and rally the Fortnite-addicted kids who didn’t know better. They had an 80-page lawsuit and a pissing CGI short film ready on the day. Apple wants all of the money, Epic wants all of the money, and they’re not above using every dirty trick they know.

              Obligatory IANAL, and this is old info, TOS may have changed. Hoeg Law on Youtube specializes in video games, it probably has a more in-depth and up-to-date analysis of the situation.

              • JackbyDev@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 month ago

                Specifically because Apple is engaging in anti competitive and anti consumer practices (your words) I have a very difficult time seeing this action as “dirty.” Companies will do what companies do and pursue money, but if their pursuit of money coincidentally happens to fight for consumer rights then I don’t think we should say it’s dirty.

                Sort of like “if you don’t have your own, store bought is fine” lol

                • atrielienz@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  They didn’t have to play. That’s the point. They didn’t have to agree to the contract. But since they did agree (and then intentionally broke the contract), they’re wrong too. They can’t be absolved of their part in this because the other party also did wrong. This is a two wrongs don’t make a right situation.

          • lud@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 month ago

            Besides, saying that you “support something” does fuck all.

            So what? Am I not allowed to express my opinion because of that?

            Also, my politicians have already started to outlaw these practices. There is obviously still much work to be done but it’s happening.

      • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        They broke TOS in order to serve the letter. You can’t sue for something that doesn’t affect you. Saying they threw a tantrum is disgraceful

        And they should have won the Apple suit but Apple was deemed to not have a large enough market share to have a monopoly…even if they have a monopoly on Apple products

        It was terrible news for consumers

      • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Eh a lot of TOS bullshit is exactly that. And Apple is very far from perfect, especially with anything that could even think of threatening their walled garden. I assume everything Apple does is bad for the consumer, because 99% of the time that’s accurate.

  • umami_wasabi@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    1 month ago

    How about all app stores (including Play Store and Samung own app store) not installed as system apps and show warnings equally when user install something new?

    • kamen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 month ago

      Imagine a case similar to what we had about the default web browser on Windows.

    • IHave69XiBucks@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      you can get this on something like graphene os. You can choose to install google play, or not to. and use any other app store like android and they all have the same permissions.

  • stardust@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    Was curious of what the step is and found this video for Samsung https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6TMvBQ7Sm0

    And for Google Pixel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hD9nsSmDG_8

    Doesn’t seem too different from the old enable unknown apps aside from Samsung requiring an additional step. Unless third party apps get completely blocked having to enable it doesn’t seem like a bad thing with how clueless lot of people are about apks and risks associated with them if they didn’t get it from a safe source.

  • bruhSoulz@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    1 month ago

    I hate it, my shitty xiaomi gives me a 10 second cooldown before letting me install one 😤

    • zerozaku@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Afaik new feature in android 15

      Edit: Nvm, just read the article, apparently a feature in latest OneUI. So unless you use Samsung you wouldn’t know it. That aside, with android 15 you will get some sort of “feature” which discourages sideloading.

      • Psythik@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Well my Z Fold 3 stopped updating after Android 14, so I guess I need to make this phone last as long as humanly possible cause this is bullshit.

        • zerozaku@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          Lol same thought. I just got a new phone which came with Android 14 and I’m not updating this device.

  • IndomitableAlbus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 month ago

    Samsung user.

    Spotted the inclusion of Auto Blocker in the last system update.

    The App can be disabled, or as I did, adb uninstalled.

    • Phuntis@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      1 month ago

      except there’s no warning for apps distributed through google you just hit one button the default state of android as a result is google = safe 😃 anything else = BAD SCARY VIRUS DON’T ⚠️ it never used to give such warnings endlessly and it was fine the average person these days is unfortunately really tech illiterate for some reason and googles intentionally trying to scare them into thinking sideloading is dangerous sure windows does it but windows does it for literally everything windows is constantly giving warnings so no one cares about warnings on windows android basically never gives warnings but then you try and leave google’s ecosystem and it starts with the security theatre

      • stardust@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        Well tech illiterate people are the last ones I’d trust to properly side load and doing their due diligence of knowing the source of their apk instead of a random one they found on the web.

        Personally when I install F-droid on a new phone I make sure to check the signing keys or at the very least the checksum. As unsafe as Google Play can be I trust tech illiterate people even less of safely getting apks.

        • Phuntis@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 month ago

          I trust people to get apks online most people manage just fine getting exes online some people just get scared easily by warnings

          • stardust@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            If that is enough to turn them away I don’t buy them being able to get apks properly.

          • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            most people manage just fine getting exes online

            Spoken like someone who has never had to support tech illiterate people who install software they find online.

  • circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Epic Games

    …it rings a bell, but I’m too busy worrying about people who aren’t corpo shitheads trying to convince the market they can offer something different

    • eacapesamsara@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      The issue is treating all third party stores as side loading, when no other category of device does this. It violates EU anti trust laws, and possibly US antitrust laws as this lawsuit explores. We trust people to have figured this out for PCs and macs, mobile is quite literally no different at this point.

    • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      If you don’t know what you are doing why would you be side loading? It seems pretty easy to avoid

      • Firipu@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        I’m very happy my 12y old kid can’t just sideload shit nilly willy. He legit Googles minecraft hacks and downloads random apks and stuff if he gets the chance)

        (his phone is also fully locked down with parental because a 12y old should have free reign on the internet, but that’s beside the point)

        • IHave69XiBucks@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          honestly i think letting kids experiment on their own devices and get them full of malware is a good thing. its the perfect time to learn since a kid doesnt have any money to steal anyway, and the parent can just come in and factory reset the device if needed. Too much protecton means people never learn how to be responsible without it.

          • Firipu@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            Oh yeah, I don’t have an issue with them ruining their devices. I just have them locked down because I don’t want them to have free use on the internet. So much mindrot on there…

    • red@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      what if I have a store that checks security properly? I mean how do you believe app store and play store then? belive them simply because they are corporate overlords? this is like saying “we don’t deserve freedom because we may do crimes”