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

European Commission fines Google €4.34B in Android antitrust case

europa.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 975 posts

Re: European Commission fines Google €4.34B in Android antitrust case

#431

Post by jeroenhd »

mrweasel wrote: post #339
VikingCoder wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, Apple is a brutal dictatorship that doesn't share anything? That's fine. Oh, Google, you're willing to share almost everything with anyone for free, but you want to put terms on that? Hey, here's a giant fine. I just don't understand the logic of this at all.

The logic is that you're not allowed to use your position in one marked to gain influence in another. Google knows that most manufacturer needs their devices to ship with the Play Store, because that's where the apps are and smartphone without apps are useless. But they use the Play Store as leverage, forcing manufactures to also ship Chrome, rather than Opera, Firefox or their own browser and that's the bit that is…

Based on what I see around me, people just use the first browser they see. Until someone with technical know-how comes along, people will use Edge on Windows (and usually complain about how the internet is acting up, but that's another story).

The same goes for Samsung and its own browser, simply called "Internet": people often have heard of Google Chrome but won't go looking if there's a working "internet button" right in front of them. Other vendors use the same trick.

Personally, I would think this is a good thing as it takes away some of the monopoly Google has, if Samsung etc. would just give their browsers regular updates through the Play Store/their own app store (latest version I can find on the Play Store still uses Chrome 59).

There is no technical reason to install the Google app or to install Chrome. Vendors can easily install their own WebKit/Blink engines for all the WebView/technical requirements (as seen by alternative ROMs) and the Google app can be deleted without affecting the other Play Services.

I think this is a ploy to prevent companies like Microsoft from coming with their own ROMs that focuses on Microsoft applications (Cortana, Bing, Edge mobile, Outlook, Microsoft Office etc., MS have a near complete stack of applications for Android) without offering any pre-installed competition like Google does.

Re: European Commission fines Google €4.34B in Android antitrust case

#432

Post by ghosterrific »

eeZah7Ux wrote: post #236
bwb wrote: post #61

This one frustrated me to read, i think they should have gotten involved sooner and worked with google. Instead they slap a crazy high fee for something that is vague in violation. It does feel a bit like a vendetta here by the EU.

"crazy high fee"? Fining Google 4 billions after they forced all sort of lock-in strategies on the users for a decade is less than a slap on the wrists.

No one forced you to buy their phone.

No one locked you up at gunpoint.

Stealing from a corporation 5B and lining the pockets of politicians as "justice".

Corrupt af

Re: European Commission fines Google €4.34B in Android antitrust case

#433

Post by lloeki »

mrweasel wrote: post #339
VikingCoder wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, Apple is a brutal dictatorship that doesn't share anything? That's fine. Oh, Google, you're willing to share almost everything with anyone for free, but you want to put terms on that? Hey, here's a giant fine. I just don't understand the logic of this at all.

The logic is that you're not allowed to use your position in one marked to gain influence in another. Google knows that most manufacturer needs their devices to ship with the Play Store, because that's where the apps are and smartphone without apps are useless. But they use the Play Store as leverage, forcing manufactures to also ship Chrome, rather than Opera, Firefox or their own browser and that's the bit that is…

> People would install Chrome anyway

Which only serves as strengthening Chrome's position (Chrome being a I/O vector for Google's ad market).

> and they already dominate search, so why bother.

Which obliterates any chance of a remotely widespread alternative emerging. The homescreen search bar is technically a widget like any other yet it is the only one that cannot even be removed from any stock launcher!

Imagine a manufacturer whose part of its proposition (whether through deals or genuine customer interest) is for whatever reason to sell a phone that comes loaded up with Firefox (or Opera) and has Bing (or DuckDuckGo, or Qwant) as a search widget. This is currently impossible and the decision aims to change that. The fact that Google uses its Android - because there is no viable alternative platform - and Play Store - because without the apps the platform is useless to the general public - dominance in the phone market to strong-arm manufacturers into preloading extensions of its search and ad market is a huge issue, turning the "Google experience" on Android into an all-or-nothing proposition.

But there is a related yet more subtle issue that isn't addressed: log into the Play Store, and you're helpfully logged into all other Google services such as Gmail, Chrome, Calendar, Photos... The only thing you can subsequently prevent is automatic syncing, but cannot disable each one of those services at all (unless you disable the whole app). So basically you log in to download whatever app on the Play Store and you turn on a huge firehose aimed at Google's datacenters. As an Android user the feeling I have of the "Google experience" is one of coercion, not freedom.

BTW your iTunes/Apple Music example is interesting, although it could be developed further to better match the situation.

Re: European Commission fines Google €4.34B in Android antitrust case

#434

Post by sly010 »

mrweasel wrote: post #339
VikingCoder wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, Apple is a brutal dictatorship that doesn't share anything? That's fine. Oh, Google, you're willing to share almost everything with anyone for free, but you want to put terms on that? Hey, here's a giant fine. I just don't understand the logic of this at all.

The logic is that you're not allowed to use your position in one marked to gain influence in another. Google knows that most manufacturer needs their devices to ship with the Play Store, because that's where the apps are and smartphone without apps are useless. But they use the Play Store as leverage, forcing manufactures to also ship Chrome, rather than Opera, Firefox or their own browser and that's the bit that is…

> Imagine that Apple forced telcos to block Spotify. But they do. Telcos are not allowed to pre-install Spotify on iPhones, are they? iTunes on the other hand is pre-installed along with Safari, Apple Maps and Apple Podcast.

Of course once you have the device you can do whatever you ... can. Similarly once you have your Android phone you can install an alternative browser.

In fact I have had Samsung phones with two app stores and two browsers. Guess which one was was I unable to delete without rooting the phone first?

I am not a fan of whataboutism, but in this case it just seems unfair that the creator of a (more) open ecosystem is taking all the beating.

Note: I actually hate the search widget as well as the assistant, but there are hundreds of alternative home screen apps.

Re: European Commission fines Google €4.34B in Android antitrust case

#435

Post by n1231231231234 »

Dayshine wrote: post #327
kyrra wrote: post #321

Google's response to the ruling: https://www.blog.google/around-the-globe/google-europe/andro...

Oh wow, the arrogance they show with that "It's easy to replace an app" video. Yes, it is, which is why the EU commission have a whole section on explicitly why "default install" is still anti-competitive.

it's certainly far from trivial to remove the search bar at the top of the home screen. i tried once, it broke android, and i had to reset the entire OS. but, tbf, the entire process did take <1 minute

Re: European Commission fines Google €4.34B in Android antitrust case

#437

Post by Ajedi32 »

Dayshine wrote: post #316
endorphone wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that not clearly breaching d? They're a part of the same suite of apps that provide the "Android experience" (Google experience, whatever -- the thing that most consumers think of when they consider Android). They manifestly have a profound connection with each other. And let's be clear here lest there be any confusion -- zero customers want a vendor to do anything different, and the only reason some vendors w…

>And if we just go around clubbing everything coarsely, why does my BMW have a BMW entertainment system Because BMW don't have market dominance in either the car industry or the entertainment system industry. If they used dominance in one to affect the other, they would be in breach of that legislation. >This is absolutely not at all clear cut. It is incredibly nuanced So how do you explain Google's non-compliance wh…

So it's only against the law once the company becomes big enough?

If, for example, BMW _did_ become an extremely successful car manufacturer to the point where they were capturing >80% of the market, would they suddenly no longer be allowed to bundle their own entertainment system with their cars?

Re: European Commission fines Google €4.34B in Android antitrust case

#438

Post by archi42 »

MaxBarraclough wrote: post #397
archi42 wrote: post #279

Site is under maintanance, Google Cache link (hahaha): http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:europa.... //edit: oh, took only a minute or two :) nice work I really like this point: > [Google] has prevented manufacturers wishing to pre-install Google apps from selling even a single smart mobile device running on alternative versions of Android that were not approved by Google (so-called "Android forks")…

> I would buy the Google-Facebook-Other_BS-free variant of your otherwise commercial high-to-mid-end, google-and-other-stuff-infested mobile phone! Isn't that what the BlackPhone has been doing for some time? https://www.silentcircle.com/products-and-solutions/blackpho...

The problem with these offerings is: They are special developments targeting a niche. For that, they're great.

But I am not willing to spend 650 Euro on a BlackPhone2 when a 250 Euro phone is technically/hardware-wise enough for me. If things go as the EU wishes, Silent Circle could offer mass market phones at competitive prices and with the software most users expect (full Google Android experience) in addition to their current offering - allowing for MUCH better scaling effects and thus lower prices for their phones.

You can s/Silent Circle/ with any other manufacturer, e.g. HTC or Samsung. Those are already targeting the mass market and thus are already producing at scale. In theory they "only" need to develop a source tree variant, add some bucks to the price for Enterprise phones and could then serve a (gut feeling: growing?) privacy niche as well.

I don't know if that's really worthwhile for any them, I honestly have my doubts; what's the local saying? Hope dies last... Whatever way this turns out, at least now the manufacturers have more legal options (in the EU).

Re: European Commission fines Google €4.34B in Android antitrust case

#439

Post by mkirklions »

endorphone wrote: post #286

This is a dangerous ruling that pushes the world further into the potential for trade wars by proxy. Contrary to numerous posts- -no, the law isn't "clear". This is an incredibly nuanced situation, and the notion that Google was just overtly flouting (ed: thx sjcsjc) the law is outright nonsense. Google has a huge litany of bad practices (I personally recently switched my daily driver to an iPhone for that reason), b…

>I personally recently switched my daily driver to an iPhone for that reason

Thats funny you think Apple doesnt have bad practices... They are seemingly the worst when it comes to IP and giving customers and developers what they want.

Re: European Commission fines Google €4.34B in Android antitrust case

#440

Post by rusk »

frockington wrote: post #422
rusk wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No shortage of competition and innovation here my friend. We're having this very discussion atop the world wide web which came from CERN. There's no reason why I should have to sacrifice my privacy so that a few oligarchs can add a few more zeros to their bank accounts.

All I can think of is Nokia and possibly Vodafone if those count as technology. What other big tech companies are there? Not trying to be rude, just generally curious as I don't know much about the European technology scene

I started to write a list ... but easier to google!

* https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/10/meet-europe-top-tech-...

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_European_compa...

I actually hadn't realised Spotify was Swedish! Deezer is French.

Pretty much every high-end car manufacturer.

ARM.

Did you know the modern three-point tractor hitch was invented by an Irishman? Modern motor cars come from Germany. The Web as I mentioned earlier comes from CERN which is a joint European project.

Ericsson, Siemens, Philips.

Airbus is also another joint European cooperative.

Raspberry Pi.

Arduino.

Betfair.

Jetbrains.

Interesting exercise!

Post reply on HN