51–60 of 84 posts
And the US even found merit to investigate Google, before quietly burying the case.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm assuming this is a sarcastic post. It's an interesting thought experiment to extrapolate antitrust ideas onto free software. If Linux grew big enough could it attract antitrust lawsuits despite not being the product of any single company? My first impression was to draw the line at organizations that make money, but that leaves the possibility for free software growing so big as to hinder progress, which isn't ne…
> I'm assuming this is a sarcastic post. More like satirical. I just returned to this tab 56 minutes after the fact, and wanted to delete the comment, but when I clicked the delete link, "1 point" flipped to "13 points". :) My point is, why is something like GNU Emacs or GNU/Linux above anti-trust with regard to bundling? Suppose that GNU/Linux had only one distribution, and it was so popular that it was on 99% of th…
Yes, I know there are commercial Linux distributions, but they're almost exclusively targeted towards corporate and server use.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm assuming this is a sarcastic post. It's an interesting thought experiment to extrapolate antitrust ideas onto free software. If Linux grew big enough could it attract antitrust lawsuits despite not being the product of any single company? My first impression was to draw the line at organizations that make money, but that leaves the possibility for free software growing so big as to hinder progress, which isn't ne…
> It's an interesting thought experiment to extrapolate antitrust ideas onto free software. But this is about Google.
Google seems to be singled out and especially targeted by these antitrust allegation and investigations, I mean in the larger sense not just here where it's mostly a protectionist outcome as the fact that they technically don't have a "dominant market position" at ~50% market share is the least of it. I'm curious How a ruling like that gels with the fact that on an iPhone (the other half of the market) all services a…
It's about dominant position. Having the sort of stifling monopoly that Google has opens it up to additional regulation, just like Microsoft was before it. Apple is a niche market still, to this day, and isn't under as much scrutiny.
Google seems to be singled out and especially targeted by these antitrust allegation and investigations, I mean in the larger sense not just here where it's mostly a protectionist outcome as the fact that they technically don't have a "dominant market position" at ~50% market share is the least of it. I'm curious How a ruling like that gels with the fact that on an iPhone (the other half of the market) all services a…
It's about dominant position. Having the sort of stifling monopoly that Google has opens it up to additional regulation, just like Microsoft was before it. Apple is a niche market still, to this day, and isn't under as much scrutiny.
And how much has 'Yandex', whatever that is, contributed to Android? Android exists and is relatively free (as in beer and speech) because it drives traffic to Google. If you don't like it, write your own mobile operating system from scratch (good luck). Edit: actually, they'd only need their own app store if I understand the terms correctly.
Despite being open source, Google does not really accept submissions of code from third parties. Yandex does in fact have their own app store, but many apps are only published on the Google Play Store.
Let's see Yandex can indeed fork Android and deliver a device in Russia without Google apps..what anitrust issue here? Maybe Yandex anticompetitive desires?
Google makes it impossible for a single manufacturer to ship both google services android and yandex flavor adroid. Or any other custom android; just ask Samsung, Google pressurized them to drop their own ecosystem. This is anticompetitive if you ask me.
And how much has 'Yandex', whatever that is, contributed to Android? Android exists and is relatively free (as in beer and speech) because it drives traffic to Google. If you don't like it, write your own mobile operating system from scratch (good luck). Edit: actually, they'd only need their own app store if I understand the terms correctly.
"'Yandex', whatever that is" - Yandex is a $10B public company, a legitimate innovator and the top internet player in Russia. Ever heard of that country, or is it yet another "whatever that is" for you?
Not to mention $10B is probably less than the amount Google alone has spent developing and promoting Android. Please explain how their direct competitor should be entitled to piggy back on that work for free.
Edit: apparently they even have their own 'Yandex Browser' based on Chromium. Shameless.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's about dominant position. Having the sort of stifling monopoly that Google has opens it up to additional regulation, just like Microsoft was before it. Apple is a niche market still, to this day, and isn't under as much scrutiny.
But, Google isn't the dominant Search engine in Russia. Yandex is.
You're looking at the wrong monopoly!