atcoates Posted July 18, 2018 Posted July 18, 2018 Google has been fined a record 4.34 billion euros ($5bn; £3.9bn) over Android. The European Commission said the firm had used the mobile operating system to illegally "cement its dominant position in general internet search". The firm's parent Alphabet has been given 90 days to change its business practices or face further penalties of up to 5% of its average daily turnover. It represents the largest fine imposed by the regulator against a single firm. Google's chief executive Sundar Pichai was pre-briefed about the decision by Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager on Tuesday. In a statement she said Google had "denied European consumers the benefits of effective competition in the important mobile sphere." https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-44858238
TwistedHelixis Posted July 18, 2018 Posted July 18, 2018 I think that all the issues listed can also be applied to Apple or does the fact they make the hardware have a difference? If so, surely not letting other manufactures create apple phones could also be viewed as anti-competitive.
hardtailstar Posted July 18, 2018 Posted July 18, 2018 Margrethe Vestager is obviously an Apple fan.... I think that all the issues listed can also be applied to Apple or does the fact they make the hardware have a difference? If so, surely not letting other manufactures create apple phones could also be viewed as anti-competitive. It will interesting to see!
localzuk Posted July 18, 2018 Posted July 18, 2018 Its an interesting case, as Google don't appear to hold a monopoly position in search, ads or phones, unlike Microsoft back in the day who did have. I suspect Google will file their appeal soon. Isn't using one part of your business to encourage use of another just part of being a business? Confused a little really.
TwistedHelixis Posted July 18, 2018 Posted July 18, 2018 Also its not like LG or Samsung etc cant create their own operating systems and push their own apps, oh wait Samsung do have their own OS but also push their own apps on Googles OS.
TwistedHelixis Posted July 18, 2018 Posted July 18, 2018 Isn't using one part of your business to encourage use of another just part of being a business? Confused a little really. That's the way I look at it. Other manufactures have basically been given (almost free) an OS which sells their hardware and makes other companies lots of money.
LeMarchand Posted July 18, 2018 Posted July 18, 2018 Isn't using one part of your business to encourage use of another just part of being a business? Confused a little really. While I'm not a huge Google fan, I have to agree. AFAIK neither Apple nor MS bundle any other browsers than their own with their OS releases. MS phones certainly default to Bing. (OK, there aren't many about!). Most people will use the default, but it's not as if Google are preventing users from employing alternatives.
atcoates Posted July 18, 2018 Author Posted July 18, 2018 Microsoft have had their run ins with the EU as well in the past... "Two fines totalling €1.46bn against Microsoft related to the bundling of its Explorer browser with Windows, and failing to keep a pledge to provide users a choice of other browsers. The two penalties were announced in February 2008 and March 2013"
Dos_Box Posted July 18, 2018 Posted July 18, 2018 IIRC, the Microsoft fine was due to IE being hardwired into the OS, but TBH, back in the day browsers were much of a muchness with not much between them. Once browsers such as Firefox and Chrome arrived, the market made it's own decisions. Also, does anyone use anything but Google for the #1 search option?
hardtailstar Posted July 18, 2018 Posted July 18, 2018 Also, does anyone use anything but Google for the #1 search option? Was in a presentation evening providing support and one of the teachers said during their speech to Bing something, I heard one parent at the back ask the person next to her 'Whats Bing?'
Norphy Posted July 18, 2018 Posted July 18, 2018 I think that all the issues listed can also be applied to Apple or does the fact they make the hardware have a difference? If so, surely not letting other manufactures create apple phones could also be viewed as anti-competitive. The issues that the BBC article mentioned: It required Android handset and tablet manufacturers to pre-install the Google Search app and its own web browser Chrome as a condition for allowing them to offer access to its Play app store Not applicable. Apple don't license iOS to third parties. It made payments to large manufacturers and mobile network operators that agreed to exclusively pre-install the Google Search app on their devices Not applicable either, Apple don't have a search engine. The closest behaviour to this is bundling and promoting the likes of Apple Music and Maps on their phones but they don't make payments to networks to do so. It prevented manufacturers from selling any smart devices powered by alternative "forked" versions of Android by threatening to refuse them permission to pre-install its apps Not applicable either, Apple don't license iOS to third parties 1
LeMarchand Posted July 18, 2018 Posted July 18, 2018 Also, does anyone use anything but Google for the #1 search option? Only on my Windows Phone! Though I do use a FF extension that allows you to highlight text and search directly on an appropriate site a lot. e.g. "That game sounds interesting" - Highlight - RightClick - Search Steam for price/YouTube for trailer, so Google gets bypassed.
Arthur Posted July 18, 2018 Posted July 18, 2018 Google has tried to prevent other manufacturers from creating their own Android-based OSs and selling products based on Amazon's FireOS. Surely that results in less choice? www.engadget.com/2018/07/18/eu-commission-google-record-fine ... the EU's competition commissioner Margrethe Vestager noted that Google stopped a large number of manufacturers from building and selling Amazon Fire TVs and other devices based on FireOS, an Android Fork. (That might explain why Amazon Fire TVs, conspicuously absent in Europe, are reportedly now coming soon.) "Google is entitled to set technical requirements to ensure that functionality and apps within its own ecosystem run smoothly, but these technical requirements cannot serve as a smokescreen to prevent the development of competing Android ecosystems," she said during a press conference this morning. "Google cannot have its cake and eat it." www.androidauthority.com/google-changes-its-terms-and-conditions-to-stop-android-fragmentation-132013/ Google has changed the terms and conditions for the Android Software Development Kit to include a clause about Android fragmentation. The new clause is probably a response to the collaboration between Acer and Alibaba to form a new mobile operating system derived from Android called Aliyun. Although Android itself is released as open source the SDK isn’t. Under the SDK’s license Google owns all the legal and intellectual property rights and it licenses developers to use the SDK solely to develop applications that run on the Android platform. In September Acer and Alibaba’s cloud computing unit planned to launch a new smartphone which used the Android based Aliyun OS. However, according to Alibaba, Acer were told in no uncertain terms by Google that if it went ahead with the launch then Google would terminate all Android product cooperation and related technical authorization.
mavhc Posted July 18, 2018 Posted July 18, 2018 Basically Android isn't really open source, being open source hasn't really helped it as Google don't really let anyone else contribute to it, so it's just caused fragmentation. No one wants an Android AOSP phone. Open source OS and an app store with paid products don't really work together. Battery life means you really want one centralised point for message passing (firebase cloud messaging), etc etc.
Arthur Posted July 18, 2018 Posted July 18, 2018 Google warns Android might not remain free because of EU decision The EU’s decision to force Google to unbundle its Chrome and search apps from Android may have some implications for the future of Android’s free business model. In a blog post defending Google’s decision to bundle search and Chrome apps on Android, Google CEO Sundar Pichai outlines the company’s response to the EU’s $5 billion fine. Pichai highlights the fact a typical Android user will “install around 50 apps themselves” and can easily remove preinstalled apps. But if Google is prevented from bundling its own apps, that will upset the Android ecosystem. “If phone makers and mobile network operators couldn’t include our apps on their wide range of devices, it would upset the balance of the Android ecosystem,” explains Pichai, carefully avoiding the fact that phone makers will no longer be forced to bundle these apps but can still choose to do so. Pichai then hints that the free Android business model has relied on this app bundling. “So far, the Android business model has meant that we haven’t had to charge phone makers for our technology, or depend on a tightly controlled distribution model,” says Pichai. “But we are concerned that today’s decision will upset the careful balance that we have struck with Android, and that it sends a troubling signal in favor of proprietary systems over open platforms.” Pichai’s subtle talk of a “careful balance” of the Android business model will be seen as a warning shot to consumers, phone makers, and the European Commission. The EU has made no suggestions on exactly how Google should solve its app bundling violations. But it’s clear that if phone makers can bundle their own browsers instead of Chrome and point search queries toward rivals, then that could have implications for Google’s mobile ad revenue, which constitutes more than 50 percent of the company’s net digital ad revenue. Google is warning that its Android business model could now change, and that may mean the company will need to consider licensing Android to phone makers. It’s an unlikely scenario that relies on consumers not seeking out Chrome or Google search on Android after Google’s unbundling. Given Google’s dominance in search and browsers and the popularity of its many web services, Pichai’s warning looks more like a bluff to court popular opinion than a genuine threat that Android will no longer be free. ^ Would this be such a bad thing?
Accura2k7 Posted July 19, 2018 Posted July 19, 2018 If they are pushing this old band wagon again, why not jump back on Microsoft! Edge being push as a default no matter what we do? GPO's being ignored, Adobe Reader installed, nah, ill default back to Edge to read that PDF for you... VLC Player installed, not happy with that, ill default DVD's to an app that then asks us to buy an addon to play DVD's. If this isn't forcing a monopoly based on an already won case, i don't know what is. Maybe they feel they have milked Microsoft enough? Maybe Microsoft gets away with it because they gave Windows 10 away for free.... oh wait, that doesn't add up with Android being free! Google have simply given us what we wanted! Microsoft force things on us that we do not want!
Arthur Posted July 19, 2018 Posted July 19, 2018 GPO's being ignored, Adobe Reader installed, nah, ill default back to Edge to read that PDF for you... That's partly Adobe's fault... https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20170517-00/?p=96175 VLC Player installed, not happy with that, ill default DVD's to an app that then asks us to buy an addon to play DVD's. VLC doesn't make itself the default DVD player during installation. It's the same (or was) in Windows 7. The other reason Microsoft asks you to buy a DVD playback app is because most computers now come without optical drives so it doesn't make any financial sense to include the required codecs with Windows. Why doesn't Windows 10 come with free DVD playing software? There is no such thing as free DVD playing software, at least in the United States. DVD playback requires licensing and royalty payments for an MPEG-2 decoder from MPEG LA and the Dolby Digital decoder from Dolby Laboratories. Microsoft has no desire to add that cost to their operating systems. VideoLAN’s VLC is produced in France, and French law does not recognize software patents and therefore does not consider VideoLAN’s work illegal. VLC sits squarely in an unlitigated grey area. It’s possible that VLC is illegal in the US, but nobody has tested that assertion in court. If VLC can ship a free DVD player, why can't Microsoft? If the code that enables playback of DVD movies is included in the base operating system, the PC maker must pay $2 in royalties for each device it sells, even if that device has no DVD drive. Over the past three years, I have purchased four notebooks—two from Dell, one from Samsung, one from ASUS. In each case, the PC maker had to pay $2.00 per notebook even though none of those notebooks included a DVD player. I am actually surprised Apple still includes a DVD player app in macOS especially since none of their Macs have DVD drives. They would save millions of dollars per year by removing it. www.macobserver.com/link/macos-mojave-64-bit-dvd-player
Arthur Posted July 24, 2018 Posted July 24, 2018 Google’s iron grip on Android: Controlling open source by any means necessary If a company even wanted to consider forking Android and creating a viable commercial competitor, they would have to replicate everything in this article. Even then, you've only broken even. You would still have to give your users a reason to switch from Google's Android to your fork of Android. Google does everything in-house. The company gets Maps and all of its cloud services basically for free. Any company trying to follow in these footsteps will probably have to outsource something on this list. Amazon having to license Nokia's Map data is an excellent example. Google sells ads against Maps—it actually makes the company money—while Amazon has to pay a per-user fee for its mapping data. This is the kind of radically different income situation an Android forker will be facing on a daily basis. Google's services cost less than nothing, and anyone competing will end up paying a monthly fee to some other company. If a company does manage to fork Android and make something compelling outside of Google's ecosystem, there's the little matter of nearly every manufacturer being contractually barred from manufacturing a device that runs the new OS. Even if this new Android derivative is better, for an OEM jumping out of the Google ecosystem, it's probably more trouble—and risk—than it's worth. While Android is open, it's more of a "look but don't touch" kind of open. You're allowed to contribute to Android and allowed to use it for little hobbies, but in nearly every area, the deck is stacked against anyone trying to use Android without Google's blessing. The second you try to take Android and do something that Google doesn't approve of, it will bring the world crashing down upon you. ^ If Microsoft, Samsung, Amazon (and others) worked together could they create a viable Android-based alternative OS?
sted Posted July 24, 2018 Posted July 24, 2018 Google’s iron grip on Android: Controlling open source by any means necessary ^ If Microsoft, Samsung, Amazon (and others) worked together could they create a viable Android-based alternative OS? ms and Samsung have tried. the problem isnt creating a phone os (imo windows phone is a much much better os than ios/android) its getting people to make apps for a 3rd platform its just not going to happen app makers i cant imagine want a 3rd platform to write for and if they wont write apps for it a new platform wont work because if you cant get all your apps why would you get a windows phone over say an android?
TwistedHelixis Posted July 24, 2018 Posted July 24, 2018 (edited) While Android is open, it's more of a "look but don't touch" kind of open. You're allowed to contribute to Android and allowed to use it for little hobbies, but in nearly every area, the deck is stacked against anyone trying to use Android without Google's blessing. The second you try to take Android and do something that Google doesn't approve of, it will bring the world crashing down upon you. This all comes down to the Play Store. Even I can do what I like with Android but if I want to use the App Store then that's an issue. If I had created one of the largest stores in the World I would not others using it to promote their devices. Edited July 24, 2018 by TwistedHelixis
Arthur Posted July 24, 2018 Posted July 24, 2018 (edited) ms and Samsung have tried. That's my point. They have all tried (and failed) individually. However if all of Google's competitors teamed up perhaps they would stand a better chance? It is too big of a job for one company. the problem isnt creating a phone os (imo windows phone is a much much better os than ios/android) its getting people to make apps for a 3rd platform If the 3rd platform was Android and compatible with Google's APIs (similar to how microG works) it would potentially be a lot easier. Edited July 24, 2018 by Arthur
TwistedHelixis Posted July 24, 2018 Posted July 24, 2018 If Microsoft, Samsung, Amazon (and others) worked together could they create a viable Android-based alternative OS? Amazon = Kindle Fire
TwistedHelixis Posted July 24, 2018 Posted July 24, 2018 If the 3rd platform was Android-based and compatible with Google's APIs (similar to how microG works) it would potentially be a lot easier. Why would Google give them access, would you???
mavhc Posted July 24, 2018 Posted July 24, 2018 Seems like Google should just offer to sell GAndroid to companies for a higher cost if they don't want GApps
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now