Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Says Google Trying To Undermine Windows Phone

Posted by samzenpus on from the who's-to-blame dept.

First time accepted submitter Bent Spoke writes "In a bit of delicious irony, Microsoft laments Google is not playing fair by excluding access to meta-data on YouTube, preventing the development of the kind of powerful app readily available on Android. From the article: 'In a blog post on Wednesday, Microsoft VP and deputy general counsel Dave Heiner said the software giant has spent two years trying to get a first-class YouTube app running on Windows Phone, but to no avail, thanks to the Chocolate Factory's stonewalling. "YouTube apps on the Android and Apple platforms were two of the most downloaded mobile applications in 2012, according to recent news reports," Heiner wrote. "Yet Google still refuses to allow Windows Phone users to have the same access to YouTube that Android and Apple customers enjoy."'"

8 of 476 comments (clear)

  1. What goes around comes around by mrpacmanjel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Microsoft, you have just experienced the concept known as "khama".

  2. Nothing to celebrate if it's true by 00_NOP · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If Microsoft's allegations are true and there is no reasonably technical justification for it then there is nothing to celebrate here.

    Of course, my first reaction was "payback's a bitch" like many others, but in the end a monopoly based on Linux is still a monopoly.

    1. Re:Nothing to celebrate if it's true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      but in the end a monopoly based on Linux is still a monopoly.

      There's no monopoly, and if MS really wants to bitch about it maybe they should launch their own video service just like they did with Bing. Or work out a deal and have google develop the app for them, just like they did with Apple. Note that the google-made iphone app only was launched a few months ago. If MS had a better phone with a better market share they'd probably be a more appealing target for a native app, but it's not like Google is going to dump time and money into supporting every last bastard child of a device.

      And you can still watch youtube using a web browser, assuming that MS actually has a standards-compliant browser on their phone. I've never found anything in the youtube app to be superior to just using the mobile site, in fact personally i never bother with the app and would remove it from my phone if it would let me.

    2. Re:Nothing to celebrate if it's true by brunes69 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Please explain to me how Google has a monopoly on anything, let alone how YouTube is a monopoly.

      Something being very popular does not de-facto make it a monopoly. People need to stop throwing around terms like this.

      YouTube has a ton of very large and viable competitors who could take it out in a second if Googe let their guard down, like Vimeo, DailyMotion, blip.tv, Viddler - not to metion Facebook and Bing themselves.

  3. Lawyer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Microsoft VP and deputy general counsel Dave Heiner

    What the FUCK is a FUCKING lawyer doing working as a FUCKING VP for a software company?

  4. Re:Irony? by gigaherz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem, I think, is that Microsoft is just too large. Some parts of Microsoft are opening up, releasing loads of details about protocols and such, helping opensource projects and even supporting Linux development, while others work in walled gardens, patent wars, and everything else related to competing in the phone & tablet markets.

  5. Re:Fair for the goose... by Nerdfest · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm sorry, but accessible mass storage is an anachronism? So, users are *supposed* to be forced to access their devices through proprietary clients only, forcing them to be tied to single marketplaces, 'approved' OSes, etc? Somebody's been drinking the Apple Kool-aid.

  6. Re:Irony? by JanneM · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "If Google are in fact doing this, then I can fully understand why Microsoft would be justified to complain."

    Why, exactly? You can use Youtube on Woindows phones just fine. They simply don't have an open API for anybody else to write players that interface to it.

    Does Twitter have a legal obligation to provide an API for third-party clients? Does Facebook have such an obligation? Does my bank? Does Microsoft have an obligation for its online Word service? Or provide API-level access to Echange servers? Does everybody with a web-facing interface have a legel obligation to provide API-level access for others to use?

    And it's not as if Youtube is a monopoly either. My banks online service is as much a monopoly in that case, or Twitter.

    --
    Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.