• Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 days ago

        Does that answer have anything to do with the great vehicular hobo massacre of 1988?

        No?

        You’d be surprised how often it’s relevant, but kept virtually a secret.

    • Zak@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      The biggest reason is most likely that the cases had different judges.

    • wax@feddit.nu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      Apple produces hardware for their walled garden, whereas Google imposes their terms on third parties. I can’t speak to how this works legally, but thats the main difference as far as I understand.

      • kautau@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 days ago

        It’s no longer an excuse for Apple. Since the EU’s ruling they now have to allow third party stores there: https://support.apple.com/en-us/118110 and of course they’ll fight tooth and nail against it here, the infrastructure exists many of their previous arguments around not doing it are moot

    • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      How the judges see it:

      Google forces conditions onto other OEMs. They have to include a bunch of Google stuff on their phones if they want the play store and play services, which they realistically need. They have no real choice but to do whatever Google says. Google is abusing their market dominance to push their ecosystem, and the OEMs have no real choice but to play ball.

      Apple doesn’t force anybody else to use their products. They make their own ecosystem for their own phone.