Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google’s Internal Response to Imminent E.U. Charges

recode.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 101 posts

Re: Google’s Internal Response to Imminent E.U. Charges

#81

Post by exelius »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #75
exelius wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The market would be even less competitive without Google. It would just be Apple and Samsung. Having multiple OEMs selling similar products is definitely a good thing: if Samsung starts to ship terrible products, another OEM can step in and users don't face a huge learning curve. We already have one vertically-integrated vendor in Apple, the market needs an "open" option as well if we want a healthy marketplace. And…

I disagree. We have no idea how HTC, Motorola, Sony, LG, and others would've approached the market without Google. It's nearly impossible to say with any degree of accuracy.

We can look at their past smartphone efforts: a bunch of lackluster Windows Mobile phones. These companies are not good at developing software, and they would have been crushed by Apple. Google was only successful because they were able to leverage their existing infrastructure to provide a portfolio of advanced services.

Re: Google’s Internal Response to Imminent E.U. Charges

#82

Post by nostrebored »

Sven7 wrote: post #26

Increased competition? Seriously Google. The current count of European Search Engines in your own memo is 0.

And is that a fault of Google or a terrible system for software innovation? Google was created while students in a very successful university collaborated with the means to actually make their vision a reality. Excluding GB, how many schools in the EU fit that bill? I can think of ETH Zurich and that's it.

Re: Google’s Internal Response to Imminent E.U. Charges

#83

Post by spacemanmatt »

exelius wrote: post #60
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is, to me, the big one. The OHA is a huge agreement across an entire market segment not to compete with Google on a ton of products and services. There's no way Google gets out of an investigation with that practice intact.

I disagree, and a large reason of that is the open source nature of Android coupled with the fact that Google services don't cost end users anything in most cases. Also, Google's goal in this is to commoditize an adjacent market (mobile hardware) - which is as good for consumers as it is for Google. There was an argument for antitrust when Google was making hardware under Motorola, and my hunch is that Google diveste…

The plan to divest Motorola existed before they closed the deal to buy it.

Re: Google’s Internal Response to Imminent E.U. Charges

#84

Post by spacemanmatt »

acqq wrote: post #8

EU: "Google, you use your de facto search monopoly attempting to win new monopolies." Google: "But look, we still haven't destroyed all the competition. Why don't you please wait until we do?"

Courts generally hear actual and not hypothetical controversies. If the competition can't yet show harm, there isn't a crime yet.

Re: Google’s Internal Response to Imminent E.U. Charges

#85

Post by spacemanmatt »

makeitsuckless wrote: post #27
sschueller wrote: post #15

Why is Apple not also in trouble? The way safari runs on iOS compared to other browser is very similar to how Microsoft shipped explorer with windows. Except windows did not prevent other browser from using the full API and your app didn't have to go through a approval process.

Didn't we already do this dance back in the Microsoft anti-trust days? Market share makes all the difference. That's the whole point of these rules, any company can do whatever they want on their own platform except when the become so dominant competition no longer happens. Please stop comparing actions when it's context that matters here.

I wonder that myself, sometimes. I think maybe it was a different generation that actually paid any attention during the Microsoft trial days.

Re: Google’s Internal Response to Imminent E.U. Charges

#86

Post by Sven7 »

nostrebored wrote: post #82
Sven7 wrote: post #26

Increased competition? Seriously Google. The current count of European Search Engines in your own memo is 0.

And is that a fault of Google or a terrible system for software innovation? Google was created while students in a very successful university collaborated with the means to actually make their vision a reality. Excluding GB, how many schools in the EU fit that bill? I can think of ETH Zurich and that's it.

The caliber of the schools don't matter anymore. Nobody is capable of accumulating the quantities of data/processing power Google has access too. So search innovation more or less just lies in their hands and hasn't really gone anywhere beyond where they want it to go from lack of competition. Besides ofcourse in China and Russia where local alternatives have the breathing room to exist.

Re: Google’s Internal Response to Imminent E.U. Charges

#87

Post by spacemanmatt »

kbwt wrote: post #71

I don't think Google should be allowed to get away with clauses like this one from their developer agreement: 4.5 Non-Compete. You may not use the Market to distribute or make available any Product whose primary purpose is to facilitate the distribution of software applications and games for use on Android devices outside of the Market. See: https://play.google.com/intl/ALL_us/about/developer-distribu...

Why not? Apple also won't let you go around their store for content sales in apps.

Re: Google’s Internal Response to Imminent E.U. Charges

#88

Post by ocdtrekkie »

exelius wrote: post #81
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. We have no idea how HTC, Motorola, Sony, LG, and others would've approached the market without Google. It's nearly impossible to say with any degree of accuracy.

We can look at their past smartphone efforts: a bunch of lackluster Windows Mobile phones. These companies are not good at developing software, and they would have been crushed by Apple. Google was only successful because they were able to leverage their existing infrastructure to provide a portfolio of advanced services.

And if they were crushed by Apple, Apple would be under the same scrutiny Google is now. And again, Google was only successful because they leveraged an illegal agreement over a major portion of the tech industry.

Re: Google’s Internal Response to Imminent E.U. Charges

#89

Post by ocdtrekkie »

exelius wrote: post #79
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are stopping Samsung from making it's own ecosystem. By forcing Google apps on Samsung devices, Samsung isn't able to develop their own competing ecosystem without also marketing Google's ecosystem simultaneously. So unless Samsung can compete with all Google products all at once, Samsung can't compete. Developers having to do real work is irrelevant, because developers are not the goal of antitrust law. Antitru…

They are technical issues that become competitive issues because of the presence of a strong, vertically integrated competitor. And I highly doubt Samsung's ability to create a competitive ecosystem; they have had the chance across a number of product categories and failed. Developers having to do work is absolutely a competitive issue: it's erecting a barrier to entry through regulation because it drives up the cost…

If those restrictions were removed, Samsung would likely remove most Google Apps from their ROMs in the next update. They'd keep the Play Store and Maps. Maybe YouTube.

Most other OEMs would take longer to set up their own apps, but they'd all follow suit.

Re: Google’s Internal Response to Imminent E.U. Charges

#90

Post by tdkl »

izacus wrote: post #58
eitally wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agreed with you until this past year. If you play with a Nexus 5 or 6, and then you handle a Galaxy S6/Note4, LG3 or HTC M8/9, the user experience of all the of the non-Nexus devices is actually quite good and the OEMs are now allowing users to either disable or remove OEM apps & skins or skin elements they don't want. Frankly, the UX of stock Android is pretty crappy in several areas, and a lot of third party ROMs…

"Pieces of crap"? While they might have at least some features lacking, calling N5 and N6 a "piece of crap" is just wrong. But I do agree, that OEM skins do improve some lacking features of the stock Android, they also bring in tons of dark patterns and just terrible UX design with them - TouchWiz (Lollipop) for example removes all timed audio profile functionality, brings confusing duplicated apps for pretty much al…

Lollipop turned Nexus devices into pieces of crap, specially the N5.
Post reply on HN