• Rixonomic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        A couple years ago, I used Aurora to install paid games on my Shield TV. Games that Google Play doesn’t normally allow on the Shield (like the PS2 era GTA games). Well Google changed something, and it’s no longer possible to download and install purchased apps or games through Aurora, even if you log into your Google account. This sucks, because I formatted my Shield TV expecting be able to reinstall these games, but it doesn’t work anymore.

        Yeah, Aurora is still good, but Google has been crippling it.

        • Brad Boimler@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Is it the pro or the tube shield the tube is 32 bit only and most apps and games have moved to 64 bit only so the pro would be needed but I can still install paid apps on aurora on my phone just fine.

            • Brad Boimler@startrek.website
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              Odd I used it to install GTA: SA definitive edition purchased on the play store website then installed and updated via Aurora still works just updated it recently too.

              • Rixonomic@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 months ago

                It might be the kind of thing that works sometimes in some situations, but isn’t officially supported.

                Either way, it used to work for my ShieldTV Pro, but it doesn’t work anymore. Doesn’t matter how many devices I try to spoof, or how many times I reinstall the app, or how many times I re-login, etc.

                Makes me really sad that I formatted the Shield TV. Oh well.

  • mycodesucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I hate Google as much as anybody else, but that Google has been ordered to open up when they already allow side loading, and Apple is apparently all good, is all you need to know this whole system is a joke.

    • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      It’s because Google is using their market dominance to essentially force OEMs to do what Google wants them to do.

      You can’t have a successful Android device without the Play store, or access to any Google apps. Shit, for lots of apps, they will be straight up broken without Play Services installed, or notifications won’t work.

      The market reality is that you have to have the play store. Google knows this, so they attach all kinds of extra requirements on OEMs to push Google services and tracking.

      Apple doesn’t do this. Yes, Apple’s system is more locked down than Google’s (by far), but Apple is not using their market position to force anything on anybody or any OEM. Google is. Apple has not forced Samsung, OnePlus, Motorola, Sony, etc to do anything. They are only doing things of their own accord, on their own devices.

      What Apple is doing is the same as what the games consoles do. You buy a Sony console, it has Sony software, Sony’s storefront, Sony-sanctioned games. It’s an ecosystem they’re putting on their own product, as opposed to Google strong-arming other companies into pushing Google’s ecosystem, because Google knows they have no realistic alternative. That’s why one is abuse of market dominance and the other isn’t.

            • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              Repeating my own comment back to me in a way that doesn’t even make sense doesn’t make you witty, it makes you look like someone who doesn’t know how to interract with people like an adult.

              You never addressed my comment at all. Apple isn’t abusing their dominant market position by putting what they want on their own phones.

              Google is abusing their market position by forcing other OEMs to do what Google wants, knowing they have no other choice.

              Do you understand now?

              If you want Apple to be punished, write some new laws, because they aren’t breaking the one Google is.

                • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 month ago

                  I really don’t know how you aren’t grasping this.

                  Apple isn’t forcing anybody to do anything, because they make their own device. (iPhones are made by Apple).

                  Google is forcing OEMs to do all sorts of things, because they have no choice but to use Android/the play store. (Other phones, e.g. Samsung’s Galaxy S series, aren’t made by Google).

                  Do you understand? I’m not sure I can make this any more simple. What’s going on in your head that’s not letting you understand this?

      • Soup@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        There’s that nuance again. Seems to not be very popular around here. Good point though. Well said.

      • mycodesucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        This is the clearest and most sensible explanation of the situation, but I’m still not sure what’s meant by “opening the app store”. The reality is apps can be sideloaded and distributed freely on Android, even unrooted. Sure, Google requires OEMs to push Google services and tracking, and that’s evil and horrible and nasty, but do they actually force that onto app developers as well?

        • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Perhaps they mean allowing android OEMs to ship with the play store without having to agree to all the other Google requirements.

    • misk@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Google is big enough to be considered a monopoly in mobile phone operating systems. Play Store is technically a separate service / business which enjoys unfair advantage of being installed by default. I think this approach might be good because it’s better for user experience (unlike EU web browser thing for example) and has a good shot at postiviely affecting power balance between app developers and platform owner.

      I’m curious how this will play out. Apple should be next obviously.

        • misk@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          I meant “next big corpo beaten into submission by regulators”. I don’t think Epic gave up on them yet.

          • mycodesucks@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            I wouldn’t say Google has been “beaten into submission”. They still interweave their crap services into every Android phone with no ability to remove or disable them, couple their apps with an intrusive, privacy violating, system degrading backend with special rules for its own apps versus everybody else… even force the default system web browser to be an unremovable Chrome installation, and not even a peep from regulators that any of this might be anti-competitive.

            No company has been properly beaten into submission since Ma Bell. Even the big Microsoft browser decision in the 90s turned out to be a joke - they’re right back to doing the same thing with impunity.

            • misk@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              Even if things go well it will be one thing at a time probably. This news doesn’t sound big because Google is so big but for businesses dependent on Google infrastructure this is a major win, no?

              My perspective might be skewed since I live in EU and we mostly won right to our data and privacy.

        • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Legally, yes. Dictating the rules for software on your own hardware is entirely legal, and extremely common.

          Using your market position to dictate a cabal of other manufacturers’ rules on their hardware is anticompetitive. They’re using their market dominance with the play store to mandate a variety of hardware decisions and software decisions.

            • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              That’s incorrect. There are multiple requirements, both hardware and software, to be able to ship with the play store. That’s the monopoly they’re abusing, and that’s what Epic is suing for.

                • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  One example (of many) where their requirements have directly impacted the growth of a market is refresh rate. Android ereaders are excellent devices, but because of Google’s arbitrary limitations, devices until recently (when the technology they impeded with their monopoly developed far enough to meet that restriction) were forced to require users to jump through multiple extremely convoluted hoops to enable the play store.

                  This made them almost entirely inaccessible to normal end users and almost certainly played a huge role in the availability of options. That’s textbook anticompetitive.

                  It’s not the only restriction, just the first to come to mind.

      • mycodesucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        That’s not actually true though.

        Android is open source and many devices, mostly Chinese products, launch with custom Android builds completely free of Google services. This is not a Google constraint - manufacturers CHOOSE to use Android builds that use Google’s services. Creating your own build simply stops you from integrating Google’s services into the OS, which is actually a PLUS if you ask me.

        Even if they WERE requiring it, that would have nothing to do with end user store front installation, which is already something you can do, as shown by the 2 non-Google app stores I have installed on my phone.

        Again… I’m not defending Google as some kind of good company here. I’m simply stating there is no way to make an anti-competitivity argument against Google in mobile that doesn’t apply at least as much to Apple. This is a nonsensical double-standard.

        • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Because of their market dominance. That’s what antitrust laws are about.

          The fact that it’s not just their own hardware completely changes the legal arguments in play.

    • ocassionallyaduck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Google has also made unwelcome moves recently indicating they might crack down on sodeloaded app stores. So I’m glad this ruling happened.