Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Says Google Trying To Undermine Windows Phone
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."'"
Microsoft, you have just experienced the concept known as "khama".
Doing lots of assumptions here, but I was under the impression that simply changing the user agent string to match a known good/working one solves most hassles with web services. Is there any other reason MS can't make their app work?
I'm sure the 3 WP users are extremely upset over this.
That's how it is called in French :D
Namely they already know what happens when you let Microsoft embrace your APis. They already know what happens next, and would like to avoid that future
Maybe, just maybe, Microsoft shouldn't be complaining so much when they block or use non-standard protocols on their devices, in particular WP ones:
- Skydrive, the more or less standard way to get stuff in and out of Windows Phones, doesn't implement WebDAV in a open manner, making it difficult to use with Linux or BSD;
- The hardware search button in Windows Phone is tied to bing, and users can't change it;
- Windows Phone doesn't support standard protocols (standard MTP, USB file access) to access its filesystem, so it doesn't play well with Linux or BSD;
- Windows RT and Windows Phone specify a locked bootloader, so that users can't install anything else on their devices;
I could go on and on here, but these 4 examples should be enough... They really should fix their act before complaining that others aren't playing fair.
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.
According to TFA:
If Google are in fact doing this, then I can fully understand why Microsoft would be justified to complain. However given Microsoft's past tactics in trying to undermine the competition, perhaps they should eat humble pie. Anti-competitive browser tactics through bundling, non-compliant standards (IE6), deliberately making it hard for SAMBA to integrate with AD, these are just two things that have personally turned me against Microsoft in the past. More recently, launching Twitter campaigns to try and spread Android FUD and on the other complaining that Google aren't playing fair? Take a look in the mirror Microsoft.
It seems the cards have changed for Microsoft. Now the former bully is being bullied and he does not seem to like it.
I also don't like the fact them someone is being bullied, even a former bully itself. It is my hope the both companies stop their mutual exclusion principles and give the consumer the freedom they crave.
I would say that it serves Microsoft right, but unfortunately it's the end users that suffer.
Yeah, all both of them.
Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
Then less people will choose to buy a Windows powered phone. Just as Apple have tried to keep third party apps from their devices, Microsoft will soon learn that it slows sales and alienates users.
Get off my lawn you whippersnapper!!!
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?
Microsoft won't allow free YouTube player replacements in their app store
Source?
My exception safety is -fno-exceptions.
Apple just let Google create a Youtube app after they failed to agree on API access. the iPhone is way more popular than Windows Phone devices, so it made financial sense for Google to do so. So maybe MIcrosoft should offer to pay Google to create an app for Windows Phone.
Don't bother, there is at least one application that proves the GP is full of shit.
My exception safety is -fno-exceptions.
Surely with all their rescources Microsoft can figure it out?
how many developers does it take to make an application youtube compatible... oh wait, here's an idea, dont restrict yourself to your own blind development tools...
It's a term used by The Register as a token of their ongoing hatred of Google. In the context of Willy Wonka, it's a sort of backhanded compliment. It implies their resentment of any suspiciously clever software being brewed in Mountain View. Your average El Reg staffer, if he has any tech chops at all, is about the level of a low to midrange MCSE. Take their OpEds with a handful of salt.
Are you on crack, or just talking out your ass? There are at least 15 reasonably general-purpose YouTube clients on the Windows Phone app store, and many more that are specialized to things like specific channels, or downloading just the audio track, etc. Where the hell did you get the idea that MS doesn't allow third-party YouTube apps?
There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
Of course they are. It's called competition. As far as they stick with laws, it's all fair game trying to use tactics to "undermine" them.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
Microsoft seems to be experiencing what it is like when someone plays their game on them. That whiney sound is the smallest violin....
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
I feel a bit like most people here: That Microsoft deserves it. But it somehow also feels like the wrong way if this is indeed the case as Microsoft claiims.
If Microsoft believes this is why Windows Phone isn't getting user adoption, they are mistaken. Google needs to give them less to complain about. But I have to ask why would Google let Apple do it but not Microsoft? Surely there is something different about Microsoft's approach to it. Didn't I read yesterday something about a patent infringement case between Motorola and Microsoft where Microsoft believess it has the rights to a video codec while Motorola says "no, we're not a member of the license pool" and Microsoft says "Google owns you and Google is in the pool?" I wonder if this is related somehow.
I get that this meta data is the detail claimed to be at issue, but you know... it's not as easy to complain about actual things presently being decided by the courts. Also, in the article, there was talk about Google dropping support for a proprietary protocol in favor of open standards. Why Microsoft has to complain about that I don't know. Maybe perhaps because they believe they are still the ones setting the standards.
There are Windows Phone users?
But, I wanted socialized health insurance!
block device level access which basically forces the media to be formatted as FAT to be interoperable
Huh, what? All my USB devices are formatted as ext3 or ext4. I don't need no FAT on my devices, FAT is obsolete, not USB mass storage.
...Google will write that app for the Windows Phone platform when they consider the platform to have enough adopters to make the effort worthwhile. Perhaps they should start with a Symbian based client. Follow that up with a WebOS based one as well.
You never know...
a monopoly based on Linux is still a monopoly.
It's not a monopoly because the source code is public and available for anyone to use.
If Microsoft wants the full power of Android, they are free to create their own Android phone, provided they comply to the licensing agreement.
Fewer.
"Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
Microsoft won't allow free YouTube player replacements in their app store
BZZZT! WRONG!
General Councils are many time VPs because they are head of the Legal Department. You know, the department that handles contracts, regulations, lawsuits, etc ....
There's also a VP of Finance, Marketing, IT, etc ....
Other companies may call he VP of IT the CIO.
How did Shakepeare say it - something about a Rose by another name.
This guy could be the guy that negotiates with other companies for the use of IP - another legal issue.
I don't get why it's an issue.
I can see that from an american perspective that the register seems to be akin to the worst tabloid in the states, but it's english and everything from the headlines to the op-ed is meant ironically. It makes it funnier that way.
Microsoft: remember when you all were little children, but you were the biggest of the little children, and you used to run around giving purple-nurples to all of the other little children? Well, guess what? All of the children are grown up now, and some of them have "filled out" more than you have, and so now you know what happens?
All of those little children that you used to bully... it's their turn to take a big, full, firm grasp of your little bitch-tit nipple and twist for all it's worth.
Hope you enjoy that.
Can you whine any louder, bitch?
Microsoft isn't going to complain about those. WP users are supposed to use Microsoft email/calendar functionality. Microsoft has never been about choice, as was clearly illustrated in the initial antitrust findings.
And Skype doesn't work on Android, and contrary to djsmiley's comment yesterday, a trivial search shows it doesn't work, these have been reported many times.
This is nothing to do with Google, it's Microsoft that can't deliver that. Microsoft have not delivered even a basic youtube app, they could simply parse the webpage data, but they don't. I use things like MediaShare that does provide a youtube interface without all the incompetent whining.
Copied from my posts yesterday:
1. Video is upside down, if you rotate the device, then both the camera and video playback are upside down, but the other person does see you right way up in that case. Do a search [skype upside down video] and you'll see this has been reported to them lots of times.
2. Video is landscape only & very fuzzy, but the camera video is not fuzzy, probably the compression?
3. Audio plays back very very quietly even with full volume.
4. Lag, lots of it. (I've been told they route all connections through their own servers in the US, which explains the new found lag).
5. Occasionally Skype gets in a state where the Android tablet won't go into hibernation until you force-kill Skype. This really sucks down the battery juice.
6. Call receive ring is very quiet, even with full volume.
7. It doesn't handle timezones properly. It is 9am, a new event happened at 2am, it is not listed in the 'Today' section, it is listed in the 'Some time ago' section. What is listed in the 'TODAY' section is from 'YESTERDAY' at 18:48! (Does it get the timezone from somewhere other than the phone? Because that won't work now, the phone travels, desk computers don't, you can't assume a fixed timezone per user now).
See title.
Reminds me of a similar problem with Latitude. Google never deemed Maemo worthwhile to get an official Google maps/Latitude client, so our only option is to use the horrible iPhone-targetted web-based nonsense. Yes, using the maps API decent enough 3rd party map clients have spring up, and they can even update our Latitude position, but there's no way to access your friends locations on said map as Google won't let you (we can't trust you, they say!). ...and as they won't make the software themselves, tough shit.
Annoys the hell out of me as I don't want an iPhone, Blackberry or Android phone...but I have all the damn features on my old Symbian brick :(
Boo.
the bottom line is this: because of all the above, the migration away from this closed-shop monolith is happening - and the RATE at which it's happening is ramping up extremely quickly.
In short, we are witnessing the beginning of the end of the monopoly.
*** Don't be dull.***
WTF are you talking about. Google is restricting access to their service to competitors. Copyright has nothing to do here.
They are also the creators of the term "Freetard" used to reference anyone questioning the current "Intellectual Property" regime.
This gives you an idea of how they drifted. They used to be "bitting the hand that feeds IT", but no more. They used to get information from IT contacts inside companies. Now they are becoming standard journalist that are too dependent on the goodwill of PR departments.
When his defense asked, "Which computer has Jon Johansen trespassed upon?" the answer was: "His own."
Why does Google HAVE to let Windows phone in? It may not be good marketing, but youtube is definitely not a monopoly. If they want to exclude Windows phone from having the same bells and whistles as Android and Iphone users why shouldn't they have the right to block them?
Except Google are not doing the same. I thought there was some meta data missing (the keywords text), but when I checked the youtube webpage headers, no, Youtube puts it in the keywords header field! It's right there, grab a webpage and take a look.
I see Bing already scrapes the description data, for some reason they don't index the keywords data, but they should, youtube keywords data is the data that users enter with their videos, not SEO spam.
I see the Views Count is right there on the webpage, so they can even get the viewing rank if they want. It's even in a span labelled
class="watch-view-count"
So Microsoft gets *all* the metadata for the video, including all the stuff the user enters, description, keywords, views etc. and they currently use part of it already in Bing.
IMHO, it's just incompetence. They just don't seem to be able to do *anything* these days. I remember the Microsoft whose products could be guaranteed to be technically excellent, and I look at the modern day Microsoft with despair.
Their stuff is garbage, they have 100 times the programmers, yet they don't seem to be able to do anything.
Yes because not investing in the huge R&D effort to port Office to "Linux" (which one?) is the same as filtering an API usage based on device ID.
throw new NoSignatureException();
OK but MS does not want to copy the content. They want access to the service. And YouTube is a monopoly because this is where the users are. The existence or quality of the competing service does not matter. If you want to find a video you go to youtube. If you want to upload a video that is seen by anybody you go to youtube. This is what makes it monopoly in the sense that Windows is a monopoly.
Microsoft has shown throughout their history that they are more than willing to screw any and all competitors, legally or otherwise. And now they are complaining because Google won't play nice? Well boo-frickin-hoo. I'm not trying to suggest that Google is any better. Or Apple. Or Oracle. Or Facebook. They are all just big evil silicon valley companies. None of them seem to be happy unless they are suing someone. It just seems to me that MS wrote the playbook for this type of behavior and now it's coming back to haunt them.
Can't we all just...get along?
Now they are becoming standard journalist that are too dependent on the goodwill of PR departments.
Under previous management they had a strict policy of never signing NDAs. Has that changed?
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
You can install a ext2 driver today and map a part to a drive letter.
So fool, learn to use google.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
People in Glass Houses shouldnt throw stones - is all i have to say!
Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp
I like this "Google". But what is this "Windows Phone"?
Dear Microsoft VP and deputy general counsel Dave Heiner,
Please explain to me why the Samba project exists.
Thanks,
Everyone.
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
Netscape once use to complain about Microsoft now allowing access to it's API's for it's new O.S's. There would be a long line of companies (if they were still around) ready to call Microsoft out for this little complain.
The bully is getting bullied, I love it!!
Now they know what it is like to have a big company (bigger than them at this point) come in and manipulate things (buy outs, price fixing, etc...)
and stick it to the smaller guy....
Although this is not good news for another reason, "Do no evil" has left the building!
Netflix only works on whatever they decide to port their application to... how is Youtube any different?
At least YouTube uses webm and html5... if Microsoft wanted to they could skin the hell out of the web version.
...but let's be honest: They're behaving better than Google and Apple these days. Google left the "Don't Be Evil" philosophy behind quite a while ago. Apple is coasting. MS is innovating, regardless of what you actually think of their products.
Personally, I'd rather there be a good 3-way race/competition, with everyone pushing everyone else. If it's an iOS/Android duopoly, it'll be kind of boring, since once is basically a copy of the other. At least WP8 dares to be different.
- Spryguy
There are three kinds of people in this world: those that can count and those that can't
FYI, despite the anti-google bias of theregister (implied by the Chocolate Factory epithet) , I found this story while reading news.google.ca
They say "fight fire with fire". As soon as Microsoft would stop harrasing other Android vendors with their lawyers bringing bogus claims and "don't try this" attitude, I would assume your point valid. Yet I see Microsoft crying foul and AT THE SAME TIME doing way more cruel things to Android vendors than what Google is doing to them.
If you read or hear on how to treat psychopats getting in your way, you discover that first thing is to do (besides avoiding them) set aside ANY moral issues you have. Otherwise you get instant disadvantage because psychopats - like sharks - tend to have no empathy nor moral constraints at all. I'm bringing this up because corporate entities are the ultimate psychopats (and we still hear everywhere that "corporations are people" crap). Especially those built on deception from the start, like Microsoft.
People in the US of A have to learn what people in old communist countries leaned in their time. Double standards are forced upon us and if "we the people" don't adapt, we're in disadvantage. According to corporate executives and wall street money junkies we, ordinary people are all second class citizens. Why should we treat them differently ?
Isn't the reason you are forced to FAT that the other FS aren't readily available on windows?
On Windows, it's either FAT over USB Mass Storage, UDF over USB Mass Storage, or MTP. USB devices that include storage as one of several functions should implement MTP for the same reason that several network attached storage (NAS) devices implement FTP, NFS, or SMB instead of something like iSCSI. MTP operates at a level of files, not disk blocks, which frees clients from having to understand the server's or device's file system.
I think what grandparent is trying to say is that a USB flash drive or USB hard drive should expose an MTP interface instead of a mass storage interface. That way, any machine that understands MTP would be able to read and write files on it.
...this would have been the YoWP (year of windows phone)
Windows 8 uses Unified Extensible Firmware Interface to block the installation of any other operating system. [...] because of all the above, the migration away from this closed-shop monolith is happening
Game consoles are locked down far tighter than PCs that ship with Windows 8, yet this didn't inspire a mass migration from game consoles to general-purpose home theater PCs.
Yes because not investing in the huge R&D effort to port Office to "Linux" (which one?) is the same as filtering an API usage based on device ID.
Supporting Linux is really quite simple. You take the Mac port that already exists and recompile it using the Linux header files. Done. Give me the source code and I'll hand you a binary. I port things all the time and its not really that hard fro someone that knows what they are doing. Its not that Microsoft can't port it, its that they won't, because it gives everyone an OS exit strategy after the strangle hold on document support/creation/compatibility is over.
Microsoft document formats are a moving target, simply to keep the competition behind the curve, not because any new features were needed. If they didn't keep changing the file format people would not have to upgrade after every new version is released. That is why they hated ODF standards enough to waste MILLIONS in creating an alternate standard that could not even be implemented in a compatible manor. Even when they paid Novel MILLIONS to add OOXML support to OpenOffice, Novell was FORBIDDEN BY CONTRACT to implement the binary blob compatibility where Microsoft stuffs all the real MS proprietary implementation. What's the point of having a "standard" that isn't even a standard?
BTW - A far as I can see, Microsoft has nothing to complain about with Youtube. Google has a published API. If Microsoft wants to use a different language they can reimplement that API using C#, DCOM, powershell or *.BAT if they want to. They just want something to complain about to the authorities to keep Google in hot water as much as possible.
Who would have thought?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Guess it sucks to be a Microsoft Phone user...
WAH!!!
" "Linux" (which one?)"
Properly done, it doesn't matter.
Don't confuse idiots who write code dependent on libraries from other people or specific distro as a Linux issue.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
1. It needs to cache, somehow. Using tab-completion with an mtp-mounted device is PAINFUL. I can use tab completion with network shares, so why not with MTP - both have the same concurrency issues.
Sounds like an implementation issue. I don't think caching belongs in the wire protocol anyhow.
2. It needs to be dumber, or at least make that configurable. If I copy a file into a directory, I want the file to go into THAT directory. I don't care if I'm putting music in a pictures directory. I don't care if the driver doesn't understand the video codec. JUST COPY THE FILE!
True, they've made some concessions to "smart" devices that use peculiar media-specific storage schemes. I'm not sure it's necessarily bad, but it does not map well to generic file operations. In fact, I don't think an MTP device is even required to have a general-purpose filesystem.
My exception safety is -fno-exceptions.
There's no misconduct here. Google owns Toutube and API level access (to skip ads, tracking, etc) is a chargeable feature to them.
Obviously Microsoft doesn't want to pay the fee, or include the other conditions Google requires... Apple had the same problem... But Apple has enough customers Google couldn't afford to lose them ALL.
Fundamentally, it's still GOOGLE'S sandbox and they don't have to share toys if they don't want to. They aren't locking users out of the web page... But the web page isn't the "nicest" way to access YoiTube on a phone.
That Google is going to take Microsoft "behind the woodshed" is a given. But that's entirely legal to "discourage" doing business with a customer that was abusive, power hungry and manipulative of courts and standards bodies. Microsoft is a convicted criminal.. You don't have to "be fair" with convicted criminals in the US legal system.
One of the first apps for Windows Phone was MetroTube (originally LazyTube). It's provided great YouTube support from the beginning and continues to be updated regularly. It embraces the Windows Phone style completely and is always fast and fluid -- really a model app.
So do I care about a first-party app, or even one from Microsoft? Not really.
The only problem here is that they need to use APIs which are unsupported by YouTube -- I don't remember why, it's been a long time. I think to get at HD videos -- and thus the app can potentially break without notice. This is pretty rare, but it happens -- the most recent was about a week ago, and they fixed it within a few days. So I can see an API argument from Microsoft might have some truth to it.
I would love Youtube to be integrated into the phone like other social networks are. I'm guessing this is what Microsoft is actually after.
To: Kettle (alias Google) From: Pot (alias Microsoft) Subject: Re: Abusing market power I believe you have gamma correction on #000000 set to 0. Just FYI.
and as to disproving same i have this set of books by Woody Leonhard that detail among other things exactly where MS "excellence" can be proven to be Bovine Processed Grain. (wheels in a flatbed trolley stacked with large books)
Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
Microsoft, you drop secure boot, and Google will give you a YouTube app?
Because, for fucks sake, a giant software company like Microsoft can't code one up in a weekend. How sad is that?
Can You Say Linux? I Knew That You Could.
Not sure if you're making a joke or not, but in case you're not: GNU/Linux and Mac OS X have somewhat different APIs at the UI level. You can't just recompile a Mac OS X desktop application and it'll suddenly work on Ubuntu.
There's a kinda-sorta "clone" of the Cocoa API for GNU/Linux called GNUStep, but it's incomplete and has significant API differences due to the author's decision to base it upon the OPENSTEP operating system. And, to the best of my knowledge, there's no Carbon API for GNU/Linux.
Sorry.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Not allowing a *proper* Swype app on your device is a reason for me not wanting a Windows Phone.
So this means we will have an open skype protocol really soon right?
http://www.gnustep.org/
Different definition of "free" actually. I guessed the title would have given away.
I meant "free software" (sometimes called "open source") not freeware.
Well, then we are back to my original reply: could you provide some proof as to why any free software application, should someone create one, would be rejected? IIRC they only ban GPL3 and similarly overreaching licenses, and understandably so.
My exception safety is -fno-exceptions.
The college where I study has blocked access to Google Drive and Docs for over a year as part of their MSDNAA/DreamSpark access deal. Google's obstructionist behaviour here is negative. But I feel it is a justifiable measure in response to the above. Little different from the reactionary patent cases launched in response to litigious attacks from Apple over Android.