Slashdot Mirror
Google Blocks YouTube App On Windows Phone (Again)
dhavleak writes "From Gizmodo: Earlier today, the Microsoft-built YouTube app for Windows Phone was unceremoniously disabled by Google. These kind of little inter-corporate kerfuffles happen from time to time, and usually resolve themselves without screwing too many users. But boy, Microsoft didn't take it quietly."
Really so what you're saying is that if Google builds the apps and distributes them, that's Okay but if Microsoft or any third party ISV builds an app using their public APIs and then distributes that is a blood-soaked hitchhiker?
Since Microsoft has been through the Anti-Trust wringer before, you can bet that this little problem will get all the attention they can dig out of it, in the press and with the DOJ lawyers and the FTC. If Google publishes an API and says "use it, it's open" and then somebody picks up that mantle and builds something using it only to have Google shut it down for fictitious reasons, then at that point you have to call bullshit on the whole openness agenda and "do no evil." When Apple pulled Google Maps out of IOS, Google cried foul because Apple has to approve all apps on their platform and yes, Apple's customers cried foul as well because the Apple Maps app sucked but it seems that Apple, Google and Microsoft are all in this little arms race of what they call "open" APIs and services but when somebody implements an API using them that happens to be another 800 lb gorilla you bet the games will start. Eventually if they don't play nice, it'll wind up in court with a long drawn out legal proceeding and while Google has dodged a few bullets of late, they won't dodge a bullet if MSFT comes back with documentation that Google is playing tricks to maintain a competitive advantage. After all, Google announced that they wouldn't be building apps for Windows Phone.
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
Wait. You forgot to say "Microsoft says". Surely that is relevant.
not to mention smarmy bits like
Which basically means
Microsoft are a bunch of hypocrites as ever. Google should not be opening up anything for them until Microsoft fully opens all of their server protocols; clearly shows remorse for the things they have done in the past (including clearly identifying who was responsible and ensuring that they are handed over to the justice system) and fully and clearly compensates all of the companies and people (Sendo; Netscape; Borland; Novell; IBM etc.) they have damaged in the past through abuse of their monopoly situation.
If some guy has come by and been caught robbing you several times, that does not make it discrimination if you don't invite him when you invite all your other neighbours over.
=~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
It's easy to hate Microsoft.
So you say, but to be fair, how can you hate them when they've generously retracted all the vicious slanders they've hurled at Google and other competitors over the years? Scroogled, anyone?
How can you stay angry with them when they've so publicly recanted their "235 patents", "FOSS is a cancer" and "Get the Facts" lies and done so much to redress the damage to Linux and the FOSS community?
Why would you hold them in contempt when they're reversed all the damage they caused by whiteanting ISO and blocking the adoption of genuinely open document formats? Though it's true that it would be better if they stopped issuing fake DMCA takedowns of their competitors.
And of course, there's no way in the world they could have deliberately provoked this latest contretemps by publishing a non-conforming app without informing or consulting the Google engineers who'd been working with them. That'd be really unlikely, especially given how much contrition they've shown for their past misadventures...
Let me just add that that's 3 times the count of Linux desktop users.
(MS has 3.7% share of phone market, Linux has less than 1% of desktop. If we assume the size of two markets to be almost the same, then that's what we can conclude).
While you are technically correct (normally the best kind of correct), this is slashdot and pointing out elephants will not be tolerated.
It is my understanding that the original version of the app didn't show any ads at all, and this updated version shows only the ads that Google themselves serves up.
Assuming my understanding is correct, then this isn't about ad revenue; this is about user experience. Microsoft wants a good Youtube app on their phones because they know their users want one; not having it makes them look bad.
Which is also a very good reason for Google to want them to NOT have such an app. I don't have any idea if that is the actual reason they pulled MS's API key, but I find it infinitely more likely than an ad dispute.
My sig can beat up your sig.