6 ms·

Interestingly, this is exactly what's happening in the console gaming market today; Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft have been paying subsidies of millions dollar t

Interestingly, this is exactly what's happening in the console gaming market today; Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft have been paying subsidies of millions dollar to renowned studios as well as various preferential treatments on advertising, publishing and marketing of their games. The difference is that the console market has real competitions which gives more leverages to developers. Google didn't have to do this thanks to its iron grip on the market until Epic have revealed its arsenal. This is why we need to bring more competitions in the app store market; Even if it doesn't bring any real alternatives, this tiny possibility of competition will force Google and Apple to yield more and more to developers. The first step should be breaking the Duopoly cartel. It's only possible because Apple has no competitions and Google simply enjoys its follower-ship, enabled by their non-aggression pact. Force Apple to allow third party store and payment solutions to dismantle its unfair advantages against competitor apps thanks to 30% fee. This will force Apple to develop Web and Android version of its services which will effectively nullify the non-aggression pact.

Joeri 5y ago
Microsoft tried and failed to make a third alternative and force competition, spending billions to make it happen. As they found out, app makers don’t want to build for yet another platform. It doesn’t matter whether you make an awesome mobile OS, you’ll never get the app makers to support you enough to convince the users, and without the users you cannot convince the app makers. Meanwhile, in desktop land, there are real alternatives because almost everything you’d want to do runs in the browser well enough (for regular home users at least). But on mobile the browsers are locked down, so the web is not a credible mobile app strategy. Linkedin and facebook oroginally tried a mobile web strategy and discovered that mobile browsers aren’t good enough. The lack of real competition, especially on iOS keeps mobile browsers underpowered for apps and maintains the strong gatekeeping function of mobile app stores. For me a possible solution is to force platform owners to allow real browser competition on their platforms (again: especially iOS) and hope that is enough to kickstart a browser arms race like we enjoyed on the desktop a decade ago, with the end result being that mobile web apps become a real alternative and we weed out much of the bad behavior by apple and google because they have a genuine competition for the native platform.
Hokusai 5y ago
Google and similar get 30% of all sales. Many companies will lose money in games and apps published in the store meanwhile Google profits. It seems an unsustainable model.
sunshinerag 5y ago
Force?
- swiftcoder 5y ago
  Force is the correct term for a government mandating a solution. Whether by introducing new anti-monopoly regulations, or even just enforcement of existing anti-monopoly regulations.
rewq4321 5y ago
The evidence of collusion between Apple and Google coming out of the Epic case is amazing to me. I'd always thought it was a sort of unspoken "game theoretic" type of collusion (which I'm sure it is in part), but it looks like they've had very explicit communication about it: https://mobile.twitter.com/jowens510/status/1428417681351348224 https://mobile.twitter.com/jowens510/status/1428417681351348... > After another meeting between Apple and Google senior executives, notes showed that the execs agreed: "Our vision is that we work as if we are one company." Just incredible.
- _cs2017_ 5y ago
  While it makes an awesome headline for a tabloid or HackerNews, it's not necessarily imporant. See comments on Reddit that provide some thoughts on that: https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/p970st/after_another_meeting_between_apple_and_google/h9w5sfg/ https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/p970st/after_another... https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/p970st/after_another_meeting_between_apple_and_google/h9w7m8x/ https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/p970st/after_another... Obviously, I don't claim these two comments are correct. I do claim, however, that people are better served by not quoting random statements from a lawsuit without understanding either the context or the applicable law. Especially when only one side in the lawsuit is quoted from.
  - elliekelly 5y ago
    Those Redditors don’t know what they’re talking about. Documented evidence of two competing companies agreeing to “operate as one” is absolutely damning in an antitrust trial. There’s almost no context that could be given to make that statement not damning unless it turns out this was some sort of antitrust training seminar put on by the legal department and it was given as an example of what not to say when you’re giving the opportunity to collude with the competition.
    - _cs2017_ 5y ago
      By "damning", do you mean that the quote alone is obviously sufficient to materially tip the scales in favor of the government should the antitrust lawsuit occur? If so, what is your best guess as to why the executives (who surely know that) might have chosen to use those words?
f6v 5y ago
> The difference is that the console market has real competitions which gives more leverages to developers. I see the exact same duopoly as in Apple-Google world. There's Sony and Microsoft(with no independent app stores). Nintendo isn't in the same market as the other two.
- helloiloveyou23 5y ago
  I don't think that is correct unless you have a very narrow "market" in mind. Both Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft and PC vendors sell gaming hardware. And both Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft and Steam own stores that sell video games. Sure, Nintendo's hardware and software has some distinguishing features. But, they still all compete for gamers attention and money. As a case in point, it's clear that Nintendo themselves think they are competing with Microsoft, Sony, and the PC space. They pay tons of money to game developers in order for their games to not show up on Xbox, PS, and PC. That would make no sense unless there was some actual competition. I could mention Hades and Monter Hunter Rise as two recent examples where Nintendo paid money to devs in exchange for exclusivity.
  - ZoomerCretin 5y ago
    Unless I’m missing something, these stores are NOT in direct competition because they all monopolize their respective platforms.
- hnlmorg 5y ago
  > I see the exact same duopoly as in Apple-Google world. There's Sony and Microsoft(with no independent app stores). Nintendo isn't in the same market as the other two. Nintendo might be a running joke amongst hardcore gamers but ironically they're the most successful console manufacturer out there. The Switch is going from strength to strength and I'd estimate it will outsell the Playstation 4 before Nintendo retire it (it's been outselling the PS4 since 2019 already but that's to be expected given the expectation of the PS5). And from the same trial that bought us this submission we've seen Microsoft admit that they've never made a profit on the Xbox. Let's also not forget that games on the Switch are typically more expensive than the same game on other platforms. And that's without even touching the topic of Nintendo's 1st party games -- they make an absolute killing on their IP. Animal Crossing, for example, was seen by many as the unofficial game of the 2020 lockdown. I predict Nintendo's market position will only get stronger too. With many Xbox fans giving up on buying new consoles because they're basically just PCs at this point. So switching to PCs that can be upgraded over time and still have access to Xbox content. Plus the struggles Sony have had just shipping their latest consoles and many gamers there saying they might just stick with the PS4. Yet Nintendo have calved out their own corner of the market that sits between the ultra competitive hardcore market and casual gamers who want more than crappy mobile apps. And it's a segment that's increasing in size too. It'll be interesting to see how Valves offering does. I can't see it competing with the Switch directly but it might take more market share away from Sony and Microsoft given Valves new portable offers the capability of desktop gaming on the move. So anyway, back to your point. You might scoff but actually Nintendo are in a far more stable and successful position than Sony and Microsoft (with regards to consoles).
ZoomerCretin 5y ago
Why are you comparing consoles to phone app stores when the more clear comparison is console app stores to phone app stores? As far as I know, every console manufacturer monopolizes all sales to their platform, which is no different than Apple or Google’s app stores.
atatatat 5y ago
> Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft have been paying subsidies of millions dollar to renowned studios That's old news =] — now they just purchase all of the studios and "let them do their thing". Probably for significantly less % at the dev end, but, I digress.

Joeri 5y ago

Microsoft tried and failed to make a third alternative and force competition, spending billions to make it happen. As they found out, app makers don’t want to build for yet another platform. It doesn’t matter whether you make an awesome mobile OS, you’ll never get the app makers to support you enough to convince the users, and without the users you cannot convince the app makers. Meanwhile, in desktop land, there are real alternatives because almost everything you’d want to do runs in the browser well enough (for regular home users at least). But on mobile the browsers are locked down, so the web is not a credible mobile app strategy. Linkedin and facebook oroginally tried a mobile web strategy and discovered that mobile browsers aren’t good enough. The lack of real competition, especially on iOS keeps mobile browsers underpowered for apps and maintains the strong gatekeeping function of mobile app stores. For me a possible solution is to force platform owners to allow real browser competition on their platforms (again: especially iOS) and hope that is enough to kickstart a browser arms race like we enjoyed on the desktop a decade ago, with the end result being that mobile web apps become a real alternative and we weed out much of the bad behavior by apple and google because they have a genuine competition for the native platform.

Hokusai 5y ago

Google and similar get 30% of all sales. Many companies will lose money in games and apps published in the store meanwhile Google profits. It seems an unsustainable model.

sunshinerag 5y ago

Force?

swiftcoder 5y ago
Force is the correct term for a government mandating a solution. Whether by introducing new anti-monopoly regulations, or even just enforcement of existing anti-monopoly regulations.

rewq4321 5y ago

The evidence of collusion between Apple and Google coming out of the Epic case is amazing to me. I'd always thought it was a sort of unspoken "game theoretic" type of collusion (which I'm sure it is in part), but it looks like they've had very explicit communication about it: https://mobile.twitter.com/jowens510/status/1428417681351348224 https://mobile.twitter.com/jowens510/status/1428417681351348... > After another meeting between Apple and Google senior executives, notes showed that the execs agreed: "Our vision is that we work as if we are one company." Just incredible.

_cs2017_ 5y ago
While it makes an awesome headline for a tabloid or HackerNews, it's not necessarily imporant. See comments on Reddit that provide some thoughts on that: https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/p970st/after_another_meeting_between_apple_and_google/h9w5sfg/ https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/p970st/after_another... https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/p970st/after_another_meeting_between_apple_and_google/h9w7m8x/ https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/p970st/after_another... Obviously, I don't claim these two comments are correct. I do claim, however, that people are better served by not quoting random statements from a lawsuit without understanding either the context or the applicable law. Especially when only one side in the lawsuit is quoted from.
- elliekelly 5y ago
  Those Redditors don’t know what they’re talking about. Documented evidence of two competing companies agreeing to “operate as one” is absolutely damning in an antitrust trial. There’s almost no context that could be given to make that statement not damning unless it turns out this was some sort of antitrust training seminar put on by the legal department and it was given as an example of what not to say when you’re giving the opportunity to collude with the competition.
  - _cs2017_ 5y ago
    By "damning", do you mean that the quote alone is obviously sufficient to materially tip the scales in favor of the government should the antitrust lawsuit occur? If so, what is your best guess as to why the executives (who surely know that) might have chosen to use those words?

f6v 5y ago

> The difference is that the console market has real competitions which gives more leverages to developers. I see the exact same duopoly as in Apple-Google world. There's Sony and Microsoft(with no independent app stores). Nintendo isn't in the same market as the other two.

helloiloveyou23 5y ago
I don't think that is correct unless you have a very narrow "market" in mind. Both Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft and PC vendors sell gaming hardware. And both Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft and Steam own stores that sell video games. Sure, Nintendo's hardware and software has some distinguishing features. But, they still all compete for gamers attention and money. As a case in point, it's clear that Nintendo themselves think they are competing with Microsoft, Sony, and the PC space. They pay tons of money to game developers in order for their games to not show up on Xbox, PS, and PC. That would make no sense unless there was some actual competition. I could mention Hades and Monter Hunter Rise as two recent examples where Nintendo paid money to devs in exchange for exclusivity.
- ZoomerCretin 5y ago
  Unless I’m missing something, these stores are NOT in direct competition because they all monopolize their respective platforms.
hnlmorg 5y ago
> I see the exact same duopoly as in Apple-Google world. There's Sony and Microsoft(with no independent app stores). Nintendo isn't in the same market as the other two. Nintendo might be a running joke amongst hardcore gamers but ironically they're the most successful console manufacturer out there. The Switch is going from strength to strength and I'd estimate it will outsell the Playstation 4 before Nintendo retire it (it's been outselling the PS4 since 2019 already but that's to be expected given the expectation of the PS5). And from the same trial that bought us this submission we've seen Microsoft admit that they've never made a profit on the Xbox. Let's also not forget that games on the Switch are typically more expensive than the same game on other platforms. And that's without even touching the topic of Nintendo's 1st party games -- they make an absolute killing on their IP. Animal Crossing, for example, was seen by many as the unofficial game of the 2020 lockdown. I predict Nintendo's market position will only get stronger too. With many Xbox fans giving up on buying new consoles because they're basically just PCs at this point. So switching to PCs that can be upgraded over time and still have access to Xbox content. Plus the struggles Sony have had just shipping their latest consoles and many gamers there saying they might just stick with the PS4. Yet Nintendo have calved out their own corner of the market that sits between the ultra competitive hardcore market and casual gamers who want more than crappy mobile apps. And it's a segment that's increasing in size too. It'll be interesting to see how Valves offering does. I can't see it competing with the Switch directly but it might take more market share away from Sony and Microsoft given Valves new portable offers the capability of desktop gaming on the move. So anyway, back to your point. You might scoff but actually Nintendo are in a far more stable and successful position than Sony and Microsoft (with regards to consoles).

ZoomerCretin 5y ago

Why are you comparing consoles to phone app stores when the more clear comparison is console app stores to phone app stores? As far as I know, every console manufacturer monopolizes all sales to their platform, which is no different than Apple or Google’s app stores.

atatatat 5y ago

> Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft have been paying subsidies of millions dollar to renowned studios That's old news =] — now they just purchase all of the studios and "let them do their thing". Probably for significantly less % at the dev end, but, I digress.