211–220 of 303 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it's not only your problem. If Google is a monopoly and this is probed in some court (EU/US) the issue will crystallize in another way. Meanwhile, it can be analyzed in an ethical way and some people think that the problem extends beyond you.
No one said "only your problem" until you just then.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Really annoying Google blocks IMs from other services > now as well. Lots of people complain to me they can't IM > Google users any more. Apparently Google removed server > to server XMPP support, a standard open IM protocol, in > favor of their own lock in protocols. Google Talk still works, and still supports server-to-server XMPP federation. Some users have chosen to switch to Hangouts, which is a separate produ…
> Some users have chosen to switch to Hangouts, which is a separate product. This is only partially true. Many folks had no choice. For example, on Android, anyone who had automatic updates enabled was automatically upgraded to Hangouts. No choice involved, Talk simply worked one day, and was gone the next, replaced with an purposely-incompatible 'Hangouts' app. Additionally, if your device doesn't have the Talk apk…
> Users have to either root, or hunt down the APK from
> random internet sites to get Talk back).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cry me a river. If users buy a Windows Phone expecting to have a YouTube app, when one is not legally available, it is their problem. There is no inherent right to a YouTube app on a phone. Just as it was the problem of users buying early Linux notebooks / eees and expecting it to run Windows software. And it's not like the WP users are left out in the rain. They can just use the browser to view YouTube videos. Lesse…
Great point. Amazon should do the same thing. Since they host all these sites on their cloud. The only browser that should be allowed to access it should be Amazon's.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One difference is that Microsoft and Nvidia are considered evil and are derided for it and they don't pretend that SMB or graphics drivers are open. While Google has a 'do no evil' official policy which many folks seem to think they comply with. Similarly, with regards to openness.
Google has obligations (both legal and moral) to both the content providers of YouTube and to the organisations who buy adverts on it. In order to 'not be evil' they have to take actions that respect these obligations. Microsoft's original version of the app either: a) deprived YouTube partners of their share of the revenue from adversing b) caused advertisers to be charged for adverts that were not shown The downloa…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The experience you can provide with an HTML5 app are many times subpar as compared to a native app. Note how facebook abandoned their HTML5 app and went native.
LinkedIn also abandoned their HTML 5 mobile app experiences. the biggest problem with HTML 5 video is that it does not support adaptive bitrate streaming. notice that the desktop experience of YouTube still uses a flash player instead of an HTML 5 video player. notice that apple used QuickTime as their default player on their site. in short, HTML 5 video player is an absolute last resort player.
> notice that the desktop experience of YouTube still uses
> a flash player instead of an HTML 5 video player
The author was given the tricky task of padding out 60 or so words to nearly 1000, it's almost prose. The hypocrisy is truly hilarious, lambasting others for "Antitrust violations". They can still be the victim here though, I'm not ruling that out at all. Microsoft is truly synonymous with Antitrust in my mind, on an unparalleled level. With regards to Windows/Xbox/anything they can really. I don't think Google are p…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One big difference is that you can choose to use or not to use Google Search. For all intents and purposes you can't avoid using Microsoft products.
You can't avoid AdWords. Have you tried to sell your software products via Bing/Yahoo? There is no audience there.
Why doesn't Google write a youtube app for the windows phone? Google has written one for the iphone. Am I missing something with what is going on here? Disclaimer: I don't have a windows phone and have no intention of getting one.
Your disclaimer probably says it all. Why bother when there just aren't that many people on windows phone. It seems like a matter of "who is helping who?". if Google didn't support the iPhone, there would be an outrage and people would move to other video service because of the number of people on iphone. If google didn't support android... well that would be silly, wouldn't it? But there aren't enough people on wind…