Google May Have To Make Major Changes To Android in Response To a Forthcoming Fine in Europe (washingtonpost.com)

Google could face a new record penalty this month from European regulators for forcing its search and Web-browsing tools on the makers of Android-equipped smartphones and other devices, potentially resulting in major changes to the world's most widely deployed mobile operating system. From a report: The punishment from Margrethe Vestager, the European Union's competition chief, is expected to include a fine raging into the billions of dollars, according to people familiar with her thinking, marking the second time in as many years that the region's antitrust authorities have found that Google threatens corporate rivals and consumers. At the heart of the E.U.'s looming decision are Google's policies that pressure smartphone and tablet manufacturers that use Google's Android operating system to pre-install the tech giant's own apps. In the E.U.'s eyes, device makers such as HTC and Samsung face an anti-competitive choice: Set Google Search as the default search service and offer Google's Chrome browser, or lose access to Android's popular app store. Lacking that portal, owners of Android smartphones or tablets can't easily download games or other apps -- or services from Google's competitors offered by third-party developers.

Comments

So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

So how much did Microsoft and Apple pay to get this against Google ?

Re:So how much

[FaxeTheCat]

Nothing.

The EU are trying to avoid a Microsoft Windows situation on mobile phones.

With Android being the only realistic OS available outside of Apple, it seems like a smart move to avoid another monopoly.

Re:So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

Zero. EU regulators don't need any incentive to burn down companies they don't like.

Re:So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

apple hides this kind of stuff under R&D

Re:So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would you even think they got involved in this? Clearly, their help wasn't even needed here.

Re:So how much

[Wycliffe]

Nothing.
  The EU are trying to avoid a Microsoft Windows situation on mobile phones.
With Android being the only realistic OS available outside of Apple, it seems like a smart move to avoid another monopoly.

But Apple is 10 times worse. There is no alternative app store at all for Apple. Android has some minor hoops but it's fairly simple to download apps from Amazon or several of the other third party android app stores. There is no way to replace siri with google or alexa. There is no way to change the default map program, the default email program, or the default anything. Android isn't without its flaws but it even lets you replace the desktop manager. It is infinitely more flexible and open than Apple.

Why go after Google first when Apple is by far the bigger offender?

Re:So how much

[tlhIngan]

But Apple is 10 times worse. There is no alternative app store at all for Apple. Android has some minor hoops but it's fairly simple to download apps from Amazon or several of the other third party android app stores. There is no way to replace siri with google or alexa. There is no way to change the default map program, the default email program, or the default anything. Android isn't without its flaws but it even lets you replace the desktop manager. It is infinitely more flexible and open than Apple.

Why go after Google first when Apple is by far the bigger offender?

Apple is not "far bigger". Kind of hard to be "biggest" offernder when 4 Androids are sold for every iPhone. And all those Androids have one common theme - all the manufacturers have to obey Google's rules to put Google's stuff on it.

And the reality of life is, if you don't have the Play Store, you don't have crap.

You have to remember this probably came out of a long-simmering debate when Nokia tried to release their phone with their maps instead of Google's...

And Apple may be a monopoly, but it's only one phone out of a sea of phones. Just like you don't complain when you buy a Ford Mustang and it has a Ford motor inside of it, or that Ford dealerships only provide Ford options even if you wanted that JVC headunit.

Re: So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

Because Apple is a closed ecosystem owned and controlled by apple. Apple doesn't let others make hardware for their software.

Where as Android is open source and has plenty of hardware from a a number of different companies, including Samsung, htc, Sony, Motorola, etc.

That's the difference. Google is locking out other companies and businesses from using software that they are allowed to provide.

Re:So how much

[Artem S. Tashkinov]

That doesn't make any sense. Android is Google's product and if you're an OEM you are free not to use it and come up with your own mobile OS. If you use Android, Google politely requires you to adhere to their rules because that's the only way to provide a high-quality OS and good experience.

I don't understand this antitrust lawsuit against Google at all. What are Europe authorities advocating for? For breaking Android up into incompatible versions? For breaking up Google's Android department?

Re:So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

Why go after Google first when Apple is by far the bigger offender?

I guess the crux of the matter here is the fact that android is a open software with other device manufacturers can license and build a resellable mobile device with. Where as apple is the only manufacturer out that making (Apple owned) iOS mobile devices. There's no competition and hence you can't say they are not "playing fair" with others.

Re:So how much

[Frankie70]

> Why go after Google first when Apple is by far the bigger offender?

Because Apple's marketshare is not much.You are allowed to do anti-competitive things unless you are a monopoly.

Being a monopoly doesn't break anti-trust laws by itself. Doing anti-competitive doesn't break anti-trust laws by itself. It's when both happen together is when it's a problem.

Re: So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

Citation needed. Please list a case where the EU fined a company because they weren't native and/or had no evidence against them.

Methinks you are talking out of your ass.

Re:So how much

[Julz]

And allow the other one (Apple) to continue monopolising and suing third service outfits unabated.

Surely the OEMs can still install their own browsers and stores and won't lose the ability to offer the user the ability to configure those at first start?

Re: So how much

[Artem S. Tashkinov]

Google is locking out other companies and businesses from using software that they are allowed to provide.

Don't use Android then. Also, Google doesn't lock anyone from providing their own software. Google wants their software to be included by default and they have the right to.

Re:So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

All the EU needs to do to avoid that is stipulate Google must keep the Android Open Source Project (AOSP) repository going and up to date. Then manufacturers (or anyone else for that matter) can fork that and build their own Android-compatible OS (without Google Services).

So it's 100% feasible today to fork Android, and make a completely no-Google competing product that Google gets 0% of the revenue from. This is what Amazon does with FireOS.

Re: So how much

[FaxeTheCat]

That is pretty much like saying "Don't use Windows" in the PC market, which translates to "leave the market".

Re:So how much

[FaxeTheCat]

Android is (according to others here - I have not verified) four times bigger measured by the number of units sold. It is pretty logical that EU goes after the biggest player first.

Re:So how much

[Artem S. Tashkinov]

And the reality of life is, if you don't have the Play Store, you don't have crap.

Really? What about f-droid and more than a dozen of other app stores?

Re: So how much

[Artem S. Tashkinov]

Fuck no.

There's one just one Windows which is developed solely by Microsoft.

Then, there's Android which you can perfectly use without Google services and which is free to download, modify and compile.

Something is really messed up in your head.

Re:So how much

[FaxeTheCat]

The problem is that Android is (as I wrote) now the only realistic alternative for mobile phone manufacturers.
Is it in the interest of consumers that Google gets more power than they already have?

Was it good that Microsoft ruled the PC platform for 20 years?

Re:So how much

[Artem S. Tashkinov]

Because Apple's marketshare is not much.

Have you compared Apple's profits vs. the rest of the mobile industry? Apple's margins are insane in comparison to everyone else. Android OEMs basically give out their devices for free. And what about Apple using all the loopholes in the world not to pay taxes? Why isn't Europe fining Apple for billions of dollars because in the real world Apple is a far worse offender.

Re: So how much

[FaxeTheCat]

Ad hominem attack. You lost.

Re: So how much

[Hognoxious]

Google doesn't lock anyone from providing their own software. Google wants their software to be included by default

In practice there's no difference - their stuff is so bloated there's no space left for anything else.

Re:So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

Android has much more market share: https://www.statista.com/statistics/266136/global-market-share-held-by-smartphone-operating-systems/
This is a monopoly situation that is dangerous. It must be broken and changed.

Googles policy of giving away Android, but with rules that cement its monopoly. are illegal. Google should be forced to change this.

There is concensus amongst economists that monopolies are bad and must be prevented/dissolved.

Re:So how much

[Artem S. Tashkinov]

All the EU needs to do to avoid that is stipulate Google must keep the Android Open Source Project (AOSP) repository going and up to date.

Hitherto, Google has made the entire source code available almost the same day they released a new version.

Re:So how much

[Hognoxious]

Have you compared Apple's profits vs. the rest of the mobile industry?

Yes. They're large.

Monopoly, though, is defined by market share.

Re:So how much

[Aereus]

Microsoft still does rule the PC platform. They're also trying to pull an Apple/Google by forcing patches, tying their search bar to cortana instead of being a basic explorer search, trying to push people onto the Windows store, etc.

Re:So how much

[Artem S. Tashkinov]

Monopoly, though, is defined by market share.

Windows is still a monopoly in regard to x86 desktop hardware. Windows has so many limitations and obligations, Android pales in comparison. When was the last lawsuit against Microsoft? Or they are regularly paying billions of dollars in fines to EU each year? Enlighten me please.

Re:So how much

[Baki]

If Microsoft would behave like this and dominate 80% of the mobile market, just as it once dominated the Web with IE, people here would scream.

Somehow, Google with its historic "don't be evil" seems to have an unlimited amount of credit here.

Monopolies are always bad. Monopolies lead to power, and power corrupts, always.

Re:So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

well its counter intuitive, but apples walled garden actually ensures EU regulators cant go after apple.
its hard for me to explain this properly but i will try.

the relevant regulations of the EU do not enforce any kind of openness.
those regulations more or less just say: if there is market you are not allowed to manipulate it.

since apple does not allow any alternatives to its own programs(especially by being the only hardware vendor by itself), there is no market. since there is no market you cant manipulate it.
android on the other hand does allow different app stores, browsers and searches to be installed, so there is a market.
since google forces hardware vendors to shut out alternatives or at least make the google apps the default, they are manipulating said market.

a fine against google would be consistent with previous punishments e.g. against microsoft who abused there market power in operating systems to push their own internet explorer.

the regulations leave a lot of room for improvement, but they are simply the rules we have now.
i am actually a little bit envious about the proposed right to repair laws in some US states.
i hope we will get similar legislation on the way in the EU aswell.

Re: So how much

[Artem S. Tashkinov]

Facts please.

I have a 32GB Android phone and Google apps consume less than 500MB of space (including updates which still leave built-in apk files intact - that's the only way to provide safe and secure factory reset and revert to the original apps if their new versions misbehave).

Re:So how much

[FaxeTheCat]

That is correct.

But as endpoint computing has moved over to mobile platforms, their real power has been severly deminished.

And as we move even further over to mobile platforms, we may not want Google to be the Microsoft of mobile phones.

Re: So how much

[ColdWetDog]

No he didn't, you dipshit.

Re:So how much

[Baki]

Due to the network effect that is hardly possible today.

Amazon is big enough to have a limited amount of Android fork for its own devices, that are kind of dedicated to accessing Amazon services. Other manufacturers are not in that position.

Just like it was 100% feasible to create a windows API clone (remember reactos?), it just wasn't practical, and MSFT had (and still has) a damanging monopoly for office software.

Now Google has gained an almost monopoly for the mobile market, which might be even more significant than any monopoly MSFT ever had. It is trying very hard to cement and even expand it.

It is clear that something must be done. People should not be so short sighted and believe that a Google monopoly won't be a problem.

Monopolies always lead to problems, too much concentration of power, and all the other problems that flow from that.

A free market economy can only function with healthy competition. For that reason, authorities in market econoies have always tried to prevent, or otherwise dissolve, monopolies.

If this would not be done, the company will become more powerful than the state, than the democratically chosen government, and corrupt it. It will end in fascism.
 

Re:So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

74% market share vs 24% market share.

Re: So how much

[FaxeTheCat]

Yes, he did.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Re:So how much

[Artem S. Tashkinov]

Wow!

Are you saying Google will be better off by making Android a closed platform just like Apple does? Craptastic thinking on behalf of European authorities! Maybe Google should listen to them and do just that.

Re:So how much

[Hellasboy]

> And the reality of life is, if you don't have the Play Store, you don't have crap.

And if you want to sell an Android phone without access to Google's services, good fucking luck. Any manufacturer who wants to sell a non-google Android phone cannot sell an Android phone with Google Play access. Amazon had to find a manufacturer who could build their phone without having to worry about losing their Google Play access.

Re: So how much

[Wycliffe]

Because Apple is a closed ecosystem owned and controlled by apple. Apple doesn't let others make hardware for their software.

Where as Android is open source and has plenty of hardware from a a number of different companies, including Samsung, htc, Sony, Motorola, etc.

That's the difference. Google is locking out other companies and businesses from using software that they are allowed to provide.

Apple is completely closed and controlled by Apple and won't even let other companies use their software or create hardware for their platform and somehow you think Google is locking other companies out?
Would you rather Google become a closed ecosystem and ban other manufacturers from using their software?
Your argument makes no sense. You are basically saying that because Google is more open it has to be even more open while Apple is completely closed so that's ok.

Re:So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

It's nothing like the Microsoft Windows situation.

Microsoft got into trouble because they actively prevented OEM's from selling any other OS - you wanted to sell BeOS, or Linux, then you couldn't sell Windows.

Google is not doing that.

Google is not preventing OEM's from selling devices using any other OS.

Google is not preventing OEM's from using Android for themselves.

Google is not preventing OEM's from making their own app stores.

Anyone thinking Google is the problem need only to look at the success Amazon has with their Android based devices using the Amazon app store. Just because Samsung or some European company can't convince anyone to not use either Google or Amazon is not Google's problem.

All Google is saying is you want Google Play then you take the Google Apps, and that is a fair trade.

Re:So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

Why go after Google first when Apple is by far the bigger offender?

Because apple is a small player. Their 'monopoly' is only among apple devices. Ford has a monopoly on genuine Ford parts - but if you don't like that, there are other brands. Google is big. All phone/tablet manufacturers except Apple uses their os. So we won't let them leverage that fact.

Re: So how much

[dnaumov]

âthey have the right toâ ... citation needeed, because apparently not all authorities tasked with handling monopoly malpractices happen to agree.

Re:So how much

[Wycliffe]

I guess the crux of the matter here is the fact that android is a open software with other device manufacturers can license and build a resellable mobile device with. Where as apple is the only manufacturer out that making (Apple owned) iOS mobile devices. There's no competition and hence you can't say they are not "playing fair" with others.

I'm sure there are plenty of manufacturers that would love to create hardware that runs iOS. The reason Apple has no competition is because they refuse to allow any competition by locking out competition. Google is playing much more fair than Apple. They allow anyone to use their core OS even Amazon one of their primary competitors.

Re:So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

Not relevant.

The only realistic alternative for consumers / developers is Apple and iOS as marketshare is a meaningless number.

The fact that Android has 70% of the European market doesn't change the fact that 80% to 90% of the profits are being sucked up by iOS and Apple.

There is a reason Apple starts off every WWDC with how much money they have paid out - they are pointing out the obvious to app makers that the only way to make money in the mobile space is to target iOS.

Then consider the tablet space, where Android is effectively dead and the only viable tablets are iOS/Apple - where is the European commission on this?

This is all about protecting Apple, because if the Europeans force the fragmentation of Android then that only makes Apple products that much more attractive.

Android is not the threat, not the least of which because it is based on open standards, while on the other side Apple is now doing their best to pull up the drawbridge with actions like killing off OpenGL and forcing developers onto the proprietary Metal, making cross platform apps that much more difficult to do and thus much more likely that Android won't get the apps.

Which isn't to say that there aren't problems in the mobile world, but the biggest threat isn't Google but it is Apple.

Re:So how much

[Wycliffe]

The problem is that Android is (as I wrote) now the only realistic alternative for mobile phone manufacturers.
Is it in the interest of consumers that Google gets more power than they already have?
Was it good that Microsoft ruled the PC platform for 20 years?

If you want to decrease the market share of Android, probably the quickest way to do this would be to force iOS to allow other manufacturers to create hardware for their device.

Apple has no incentive to allow this because they currently have insanely high profit margins.

Re:So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, it only applies if Android were a closed platform SOLD on Google devices. It's not craptastic thinking, it relates to the fact that Google bind other companies from amending software they have licensed to sell to individuals google don't have a relationship with, to require them to enter a relationship with google (and to benefit google).

Once you licence your platform, you have to allow those you license it to to customise it.

The reasoning in this case, and the microsoft case are the same.
In both cases, the hardware vendor is obliged to not modify the software (effectively) to remove additional revenue streams (or competitive advantage) from the supplier of the software, and is effectively obliged to force the user to enter into an agreement with a third party.

Re:So how much

[grahamtriggs]

When I install Windows, I expect it to have a web browser. I don't care if it is IE or EDGE - if I don't want to use what's provided, the first thing I do is download an alternative. But I can't do that if the operating system is crippled.

Same with Android. If I buy an Android phone, I expect it to have certain defaults, and I expect it to have the Play store. From there I can go and do whatever I want to configure it to my needs.

Yes, there are problems with limited choice - but there are also practical problems with switching between platforms.

But ultimately most people look at these type of decisions and don't see any benefit in them - if anything, they see it as something that undermines their expectations.

Re:So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

Give me malware over govt spying anyday. At least there is an active effort by companies like McAfee trying to snuff out malware.

Re:So how much

[farble1670]

Android is Google's product

Well that couldn't be more wrong. Android is an OSS operating system.
https://source.android.com/

Manufacturers like HTC and Samsung take AOSP* and customize** it for their devices. They then pre-load the Google suite of apps like Maps and App Market, etc. Google apps are NOT part of Android proper.

Now, Google employees are by far the largest contributors to Android and the surrounding ecosystem. But nonetheless the source is sitting right there for any company to take and build their own product (which many companies do). You just don't get the Google apps with it (unless you pass their test suite and agree to the licensing terms).

* In some cases the initial code comes from a chip manufacturer like Qualcomm who has tailored AOSP for their chipsets.
** This isn't just UI work but can include things like hardware drivers as well. Android doesn't come with a bazillion drivers like Linux or Windows.

What are Europe authorities advocating for? For breaking Android up into incompatible versions?

They are advocating for Google not to require Google app A if you pre-install Google app B. They want the flexibility to say install Google Maps without Google Search. Today Google requires them as a bundle.

Re: So how much

[Carewolf]

Facts please.

I have a 32GB Android phone and Google apps consume less than 500MB of space (including updates which still leave built-in apk files intact - that's the only way to provide safe and secure factory reset and revert to the original apps if their new versions misbehave).

Must be a magic phone. I have 16GB phone and the mandatory google apps take up 10+GB or space.

Re:So how much

[TheFakeTimCook]

Because Apple's marketshare is not much.

Have you compared Apple's profits vs. the rest of the mobile industry? Apple's margins are insane in comparison to everyone else. Android OEMs basically give out their devices for free. And what about Apple using all the loopholes in the world not to pay taxes? Why isn't Europe fining Apple for billions of dollars because in the real world Apple is a far worse offender.

So, you're just complaining that Apple has a more successful business model than their copycats.

Re: So how much

[farble1670]

That is pretty much like saying "Don't use Windows" in the PC market, which translates to "leave the market".

It's sort of a no good deed goes unpunished deal. Google builds and supports an entire operating system and gives it free of charge including all of the source and licensing to do with it whatever you want. Then they provide their entire app suite, again FREE of charge to anyone that signs the ToS.

But that's just not enough. The companies that use Android + Google for their devices aren't happy that the licensing doesn't allow them to pick and choose the Google apps they want to install on the device. E.g., they want to install Maps, but not Search... even though that's the only way Google makes any money at all out of the deal. So the Samsungs of the world can include Maps, Gmail, Calendar... all of which have zero advertising, then get paid by MSFT to include Bing search instead of Google.

Awesome.

Re:So how much

[Applehu Akbar]

The EU are trying to avoid a Microsoft Windows situation on mobile phones.

The Microsoft Windows situation went like this:

1. MIcrosoft was falsely accused of 'monopoly' because at the time of the accusation a large majority of computer users happened to be running Windows.

2. In a Kurt Vonnegut-style attempt to settle the dispute, MS was made to cripple its virus detection by pulling it out of Windows and replacing it with a motley band of third-party antivirus systems. The best of these merely sucked, as opposed to fatally bogging down PCs.

3. Other operating systems sprang up in competition with Windows and, finding that Microsoft was not actually emitting any special radiation that prevented people from using competing systems, began to draw off market share.

4. Windows still has a majority of users, but nobody cares any more because the other operating systems work so much better. People use Windows because it comes "for free" on their new laptop and because they have to run their legacy software.

Re: So how much

[pnutjam]

Shit, I think the Google Keyboard takes up more then that, especially if you check the cache, which is not simple to clear.

Re:So how much

[mrvan]

The point of antitrust law is that if you have a (near) monopoly in one area, you are not allowed to (ab)use that to also gain a monopoly in another area. Antitrust law always removes freedom of enterprise for the (assumed) benefits of consumers. The justification for this is that free markets work well iff there is healthy competition; and that if left alone companies tend to concentrate by merger or natural growth and then get monopoly pricing power (see e.g. the history of US railways). If there is only two companies left, they have a very strong incentive to merge because as monopolists they can make much more profit than when they are in competition with each other. So, in reaction to the abuses of (especially) 19th century capitalism the government stepped in to break up companies, prevent mergers, and restrict the freedom of (near) monopolists if break up is not sensible or not needed.

Concretely, it is fine if a random linux distro would by default install its own browser. However, if MS by default installs its own browser on its (near) monopoly desktop OS, it is abusing its OS market power to increase its market share in the browser market.

So, yes, if android didn't have a (near) monopoly there would be no problem. However, now that it is a near monopoly they lose the freedom to use their mobile OS market share to effectively push their other services onto users.

Re:So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

Oi! Bellend! It dominates the home (and work) PC markets with Windows.

Now your argument was?

Re: So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

No, claiming that he had a bad argument because something was messed up in his head would be an ad hominem. Claiming something is messed up in his head because he had a bad argument is not a logical fallacy.

Re: So how much

[nnull]

Umm, my phone has only f-droid on it and no google play store. Works fine.

Re:So how much

[farble1670]

Monopolies are always bad. Monopolies lead to power, and power corrupts, always.

You need to look at the big picture. Google provides an entire mobile operating system, free, including the source and the licensing to use the source however you want (see: Amazon). To anyone. Then they provide an entire suite of apps, again FREE (but no the source).

The Google suite of apps only makes money off search. Most of them have zero advertising. If you allow companies to take most of the Google apps then leave out the one app that makes Google any money in the whole deal, what do you think is going to happen? What's the end game? To have Google stop providing an entire operating system for free? To have them start charging you $ to use *any* of the apps?

Re:So how much

[tlhIngan]

Windows is still a monopoly in regard to x86 desktop hardware. Windows has so many limitations and obligations, Android pales in comparison. When was the last lawsuit against Microsoft? Or they are regularly paying billions of dollars in fines to EU each year? Enlighten me please.

Yes, Windows is still a monopoly. It's why there are special editions of Windows without Media Player and IE by default for EU regions. And even Korea gets its own version (The K version).

The big thing that MIcrosoft did was stop leveraging - that is, using their power in one area to distort the marked in another - like bundling a browser and media player with the operating system, which distorts both markets and why Microsoft offers versions of Windows with both disabled by default.

Google is attempting to leverage a much-desired feature (i.e., Play store) to insert their other services (e.g., YouTube, GMail, Drive, etc) along side it by forcing manufacturers who want Play Store to make those apps one-tap away at most, punishing OEMs and ODMs who are Play-licensed to not produce any vanilla Android without Play (see Amazon) and of course, defaulting to Google search.

Nokia a few years ago wanted to do just that - replace Google Maps with their HERE Maps. Google slapped them down - they could not license Play unless Google Maps was a part of it, and it had to be default - you can't bundle your product in and have it be default.

Of all the manufacturers and ODMs out there, only Samsung has possibly the most complete collection of replacement apps, so they could theoretically dump Google at any time.

Re:So how much

[TheFakeTimCook]

If you want to decrease the market share of Android, probably the quickest way to do this would be to force iOS to allow other manufacturers to create hardware for their device.

Can't be done, legally, and thank $Deity it can't.

No more than the EU can force Samsung to allow other companies to make their smartphones under license.

See how absurd it sounds when the word "Apple" isn't in the sentence?

However, IMHO, this is an absurd position by the EU. Samsung, HTC, LG, et al. are absolutely free to write their OWN mobile OS. After all, one could start with any flavor of Embedded Linux, or like Apple did, a Mach/BSD Unix, and write their OWN mobile OS. Apple did. What's THEIR excuse?

But if Apple suddenly wanted to crush the rest of the Android market by releasing an Android-based phone, then, just like the other guys, THEY would have to embed Google's App Suite, too, or at least secure an Agreement with Google to exempt them from that requirement. But the Google App Suite is simply the "price" of having Google pay $$$$$$$$$$$ to develop and maintain Android.

Since any OEM is free to write their OS, then there IS no Monopoly, regardless of the size of Google's marketshare.

Re:So how much

[TheFakeTimCook]

And allow the other one (Apple) to continue monopolising and suing third service outfits unabated.

Surely the OEMs can still install their own browsers and stores and won't lose the ability to offer the user the ability to configure those at first start?

In case you haven't noticed, iOS has alternative browsers, and there are alternative iOS App Stores (F/OSS Repositories and .ipa Repositories) and independent websites galore.

But as usual, Slashtards have Willful Blindness when it comes to ANYTHING Apple.

Re: So how much

[Khyber]

Stating that something is wrong with your head - because you made a bad statement - is not an ad hominem attack no matter how you try to youtube (that's not a valid source) yourself out of it.

Then to boot, your fallacy is the Fallacy Fallacy.

Back to school for you, moron.

Re:So how much

[TheFakeTimCook]

All the EU needs to do to avoid that is stipulate Google must keep the Android Open Source Project (AOSP) repository going and up to date. Then manufacturers (or anyone else for that matter) can fork that and build their own Android-compatible OS (without Google Services).

So it's 100% feasible today to fork Android, and make a completely no-Google competing product that Google gets 0% of the revenue from. This is what Amazon does with FireOS.

Exactly!

And at least the Samsungs, LGs and HTC of the world are big enough to pull that off, if Amazon can contract out an OS, so can they, FFS!

Apple wrote their mobile OS FROM SCRATCH (as much from "scratch" as ANY OS is made, that is); so why can the rest of the Freeloaders?

Re:So how much

[TheFakeTimCook]

Amazon is big enough to have a limited amount of Android fork for its own devices, that are kind of dedicated to accessing Amazon services. Other manufacturers are not in that position.

Bull FUCKING Shit!!!

Do you REALLY think that Amazon actually wrote their flavor of Android? No. They contracted it out. And so can Samsung, LG, HTC, et al.

Apple did it from the ground-up. Those lazy Android OEM bastards can Fork a perfectly working copy of Android and take it from there. Talk about a Leg-Up!!!

But they are too LAZY, STUPID and GREEDY to do it!

Re:So how much

[Etcetera]

Google is attempting to leverage a much-desired feature (i.e., Play store) to insert their other services (e.g., YouTube, GMail, Drive, etc) along side it by forcing manufacturers who want Play Store to make those apps one-tap away at most, punishing OEMs and ODMs who are Play-licensed to not produce any vanilla Android without Play (see Amazon) and of course, defaulting to Google search.

Nokia a few years ago wanted to do just that - replace Google Maps with their HERE Maps. Google slapped them down - they could not license Play unless Google Maps was a part of it, and it had to be default - you can't bundle your product in and have it be default.

This is exactly it. It's not the underlying Android OS, it's the Google Play Services -- the middleware that enables smartphone ecosystem functionality -- that's the key issue. Google's been moving more and more functionality into that, and then locks manufacturers down in the exact same way Microsoft used to do with various hardware manufacturers vis-a-vis Windows licenses.

Frankly, we would be a in a much healthier place if Android OS was strong and it was forced to allow a choice of various middleware systems. Don't like Google Services? Use something else. True freedom even if you're not compiling your own smartphone OS yourself.

To do this will require serious anti-trust work, DOJ oversight, demands that non-Google-Inc functions be placed in the OS layer, and a removal of restrictions on hardware makers by Google.

Re:So how much

[TheFakeTimCook]

apple hides this kind of stuff under R&D

Citation, Hater.

Re: So how much

[Khyber]

"I have a 32GB Android phone and Google apps consume less than 500MB of space"

You lying sack of shit.

Fact #1: GOOGLE PLAY SERVICES ALONE is 538 MB.
Fact #2: Chrome is 203 MB.
Fact #3: "Google" itself is 214 MB.
Fact #4: Google Maps is 181 MB.

With 4 facts we're more than double your '500MB' bullshit claim. All that took was sorting by fucking size in the app manager.

Fact #5: You have no fucking clue what you're talking about.

Re:So how much

[Khyber]

"You are allowed to do anti-competitive things unless you are a monopoly."

Wrong.

Re: So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

Those numbers include cache and user data. But they're actually not far off: Play Store is 414MB and Chrome is 193MB. Still, it's a far cry from 'taking all of the space'.

Re:So how much

[Calydor]

Try asking your parents or grandparents how they'll install a new app, and when they say they'll use the Play Store (I'm assuming they're not saying they'll call you), say "Other than that." Make sure to snap a picture of the deer-in-headlights look you're gonna get.

Any Android phone that gets so much as RUMORED to not have access to the Play Store is not going to get sold at all.

Re: So how much

[FaxeTheCat]

More people more interested in demonstrating their abusive vocabulary than discussing the subject.

Oh well.

Re:So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

Quite frankly it's too time consuming to figure that all out, especially which one to pick.

Are the apps I want on there? Are they being kept up to date? Are they trustworthy or do they inject ads/malware/etc? Can I buy full apps or is it only free stuff and trials? Are they just automated mirrors of the Google play store?

All questions I ran into when I considered an Android phone, that is until I said "fuck that noise" and stayed with my prehistoric feature phone and a proper computer.

Re:So how much

[LynnwoodRooster]

Was it good that Microsoft ruled the PC platform for 20 years?

Yes, and it's a good thing they continue to do so. IT/web/PC market expansion was slow until the mid 1990s when Microsoft really started to dominate things. Turns out a common platform really helps industries grow by leaps and bounds. Otherwise you end up with a situation where you have to port your code to 7 different platforms, build 6 different adapter cards for different buses, etc. A common platform is a good thing for nearly any market. You can argue if Microsoft was "good or bad", but the concept of a common OS for 95% of all the world was most definitely a good thing.

Re:So how much

[LynnwoodRooster]

In case you haven't noticed, iOS has alternative browsers

False. They have alternative UIs for the pre-installed WebKit browser engine. Good luck using ANY web browser engine other than the one provided by Apple. Sure, you can put a pretty frame and UI around that engine - but you only get to use one engine - Apple's engine.

Re: So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

Fuck no.

There's one just one Windows which is developed solely by Microsoft.

Then, there's Android which you can perfectly use without Google services and which is free to download, modify and compile.

Something is really messed up in your head.

With this reasoning, 90s Microsoft could have evaded anti trust actions by licensing Windows to Acer, Gateway, Dell, HP, etc., each bolting on their own UI, services, bundled software etc. To get a Microsoft Certified sticker they only have to comply with certain demands... Any one of them could have bundled NetScape, hid the IE shortcut, and disaster averted right?

Re:So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple is selling their product directly to consumers. Customers don't like the product, they don't have to buy it. Plenty of competition out there.

Google is selling their product to (what used to be called) OEMs, then tying the hands of the OEMs.

Really, it's identical to "Apple vs Microsoft" in the 1990s. You can buy an Apple product from Apple, and live exclusively in your little Apple world; or you can buy a Microgoogle product from OEM X, and live in a world that's dressed up to look open and competitive - but is in fact tied down in non-intuitive and highly anti-competitive ways.

Re: So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

And so why isn't there a lawsuit over Windows and the Windows default apps and search engine built in when you buy a computer from a manufacturer.

This is due to manufacturers wanting to use Google's work but monetize the phone their way. How is it anti competitive for Google to say if you want to use our ecosystem then you have to use all of it?
None

Amazon has been very successful with replacing Google's ecosystem with their own and other manufacturers can as well if they want to invest in it

Re: So how much

[BoogieChile]

I'm guessing that battle took place long before you were born.

Re: So how much

[AC-x]

Then, there's Android which you can perfectly use without Google services and which is free to download, modify and compile.

However if, as a manufacturer, you want to sell a phone with the Play Store preinstalled you have to also bundle all of Google's other apps and make them the default.

The fact that Android is based on open source is irrelevant as 99.9% of people who buy Android are only interested in the content on the proprietary Play Store.

Re: So how much

[RhettLivingston]

??? Android has the biggest share in gross dollars and quantity but Apple has the profit because more than half of their sales price per unit is profit.

Android does not come close to dominating the smartphone market in the way that Windows dominates the PC market.

Re: So how much

[just another AC]

"I have a 32GB Android phone and Google apps consume less than 500MB of space"

You lying sack of shit.

Fact #1: GOOGLE PLAY SERVICES ALONE is 538 MB.
Fact #2: Chrome is 203 MB.
Fact #3: "Google" itself is 214 MB.
Fact #4: Google Maps is 181 MB.

With 4 facts we're more than double your '500MB' bullshit claim. All that took was sorting by fucking size in the app manager.

Fact #5: You have no fucking clue what you're talking about.

Actually you assumed something. He could be right.
He never said what version of Android.
The entire Android OS and Apps would fit in 500Mb if you take an early enough version, the question is what is the earliest version a 32Gb phone gets shipped with (assuming some cheap chinese no name brand).

Never assume you have all the facts.

Re:So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

Android does not rule the smartphone platform. In fact, it fights to hang on. Much of what is being complained about here is exactly what has been required to go head to head with iOS. It seems like Apple has been doing some behind the scenes lobbying here.

Re: So how much

[novakyu]

How much of that is actual Google app and how much of that is actually Samsung or HTC crap? Unless you have one of Google's phones, chances are, most of that space is not taken up by vanilla Android apps but by the crap your phone wanted installed to spy on you (or push their stuff).

Re:So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

That is a ridiculous measure. They should look at total profit. The only reason Android higher numbers is because Apple is the dominant platform and Android has been forced to pick up the crumbs in the low-end market. Only by pushing for more standardization of the platform have they started making inroads into the higher-end market.

Google should just withdraw all of their applications from other makers and move full-scale into the phone market themselves instead of just using the Pixel series as a development platform. We'd quickly end up with an Apple vs. Google market at the high end because Samsung's, LG's and the others apps suck.

Re: So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

Yup, stop whining and build a better product and give it away for free. Til then stfu

Re:So how much

[religionofpeas]

That would only work if Google builds its own hardware.

Re: So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

If I make a argument then add an insult to the end, it doesn't invalidate the argument I made, you moron.

You failing to refute his argument and resorting to calling out a fallacy shows that you lost, shithead.

Re:So how much

[religionofpeas]

To have Google stop providing an entire operating system for free? To have them start charging you $ to use *any* of the apps?

Sounds good to me. I'd gladly pay for the one app that I use, and free up a few GB of useless crap. And if Google wants to charge a reasonable price for the OS, that's fine too.

Re: So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you stupid? You went off the subject first.

Re: So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

Magrethe is cool and I am proud to live in the same country as her. She is my hero!

Re:So how much

[sysstemlord]

>Try asking your parents or grandparents how they'll install a new app, and when they say they'll use the Play Store (I'm assuming they're not saying they'll call you), say "Other than that." Make sure to snap a picture of the deer-in-headlights look you're gonna get. That's because Play Store is pre-installed and it's the default. If a manufacturer pre-installs another store, and calls it "Store of Apps", make the icon similar, and the interface as simple, i promise you that his parents and 99.9 of parents wouldn't notice that this isn't Google's. >Any Android phone that gets so much as RUMORED to not have access to the Play Store is not going to get sold at all. This I agree with this.

Re:So how much

[Anne Thwacks]

What the EU COULD do, is force manufacturers to:

• enable unlocking of boot loaders
• provide security updates for a minimum of 7 years
• require the datasheets for all components sold (including as components of complete assemblies) to be released to the public domain whenever the device goes EOL

This would massively reduce the number of devices going to landfill*, and would provide a market for 3rd party OSes.

However, it is clear that Google's behaviour (as in "yer cant have our playstore unless you kiss our butt") is illegal in Europe, and the only question over the potential fine is "does Europe have a big enough bank to hold the loot".

* and by implication, make the phone market follow the PC market where people don't keep replacing perfectly good devices with "new" but worse machines. (2015 PCs had similar specs to 2010 machines, except the screens and keyboards were mostly worse, and the DVD drive was removed - and people wonder why the PC market is in decline?).

Re:So how much

[Anne Thwacks]

Android does not rule the smartphone platform. maybe not in Seattle.

Here in Europe, Android has at least 70% of the market. Most of the iPhones I see have broken screens and flat batteries. You can buy 3 perfectly good Android phones (eg Samsung A* and J* models) for the price of an iPhone. Or 6 rather less appealing models.

And non-iPhone phones are often dual SIM, so you can have different lines for business and pleasure, or use different networks for domestic and overseas calls - given the difference between 3p per minute and 130p per minute, a lot of people find this an attractive feature.

Re:So how much

[Anne Thwacks]

I expect it to have the Play store. From there I can go and do whatever I want to

That is precisely what the EU is asking for.

As it is, if you have the Playstore, you MUST have a load of bloatware too, and Google places a load of other restrictions on the supplier - because "nice phone company you have there, shame if anything should happen to it".

Presumably Google is run by a close relative of Tony Soprano.

Re:So how much

[Anne Thwacks]

MIcrosoft was falsely accused of 'monopoly' because at the time if you sold PCs, you had to pay for a Windows licence for all of them, even if shipped with no OS at all.

MS original "virus protection" was worthless. In any case, if Windows had anything resembling security, there would not be such a massive problem with malware.

There were a lot of OSes. MS used the reverse "its not done till Lotus won't run" strategies to ensure their own applications would not run on third party OSes (still do), and massive advertising spend to keep competitors out. For years, about half the market thought Windows and MS Office were the same thing - many still do (ask hospital staff or factory floor workers).

Windows still has a majority of users, but nobody cares any more because MS is arm wrestling certain big providers of specialist business software not to release Linux versions, and astroturfing numerous blogs with stories about how people won't pay for Linux software, or can easily hack it because Linux is so "open" that bits of software fall out the bottom of it.

Re: So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

https://opengapps.org/
140MB to get play store working, surely that means google play services alone is not 538MB

Re:So how much

[TheFakeTimCook]

What the EU COULD do, is force manufacturers to:

• enable unlocking of boot loaders
• provide security updates for a minimum of 7 years
• require the datasheets for all components sold (including as components of complete assemblies) to be released to the public domain whenever the device goes EOL

This would massively reduce the number of devices going to landfill*, and would provide a market for 3rd party OSes.

However, it is clear that Google's behaviour (as in "yer cant have our playstore unless you kiss our butt") is illegal in Europe, and the only question over the potential fine is "does Europe have a big enough bank to hold the loot".

* and by implication, make the phone market follow the PC market where people don't keep replacing perfectly good devices with "new" but worse machines. (2015 PCs had similar specs to 2010 machines, except the screens and keyboards were mostly worse, and the DVD drive was removed - and people wonder why the PC market is in decline?).

IMHO, your proposals would likely result in a .00001% reduction in landfilled devices. The vast majority of the populace, even those enlightened souls posting on this site, discard/trade in their old smartphones because they WANT to upgrade. That is the nature of MOST people, sorry.

You cannot force a company to give up IP such as datasheets for baseband and proprietary ICs. And when you are talking about something without ANY real distribution, like Apple's SoCs, there honestly likely isn't even a "Datashert", per se, even for INTERNAL use. There are block diagrams and lists of Registers necessary for the low-level software Devs. to use, but nothing so formal or complete as a true Datasheet. If I were a betting-droid, I would wager a fair amount of Credits on that being the case.

Landfill reduction is FAR better served by programs such as Apple's recycling robots, which can recover a significant percentage (IIRC, around 80-90%) of the materials used in discarded/traded-in iPhones and other Apple devices. In fact, Apple stated that they have a goal by 2025 that their devices will be made almost exclusively with recycled materials.

As for people writing their own OSes: Yeah, that ain't gonna happen. You may think it would; but it won't, sorry.

Re: So how much

[tehcyder]

there's Android which you can perfectly use without Google services and which is free to download, modify and compile.

Which is as about as relevant to the average consumer as saying 'well you can always study Computer Science for a couple of years and program your own Mobile OS...'

Re: So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

Let them implement an AppStore ballot box. Thatâ(TM)s what they did to Microsoft. Nobody here asked if Google or itâ(TM)s cronies weâ(TM)re behind any of that action.

Re:So how much

[tehcyder]

Was it good that Microsoft ruled the PC platform for 20 years?

Yes, and it's a good thing they continue to do so. IT/web/PC market expansion was slow until the mid 1990s when Microsoft really started to dominate things. Turns out a common platform really helps industries grow by leaps and bounds. Otherwise you end up with a situation where you have to port your code to 7 different platforms, build 6 different adapter cards for different buses, etc. A common platform is a good thing for nearly any market. You can argue if Microsoft was "good or bad", but the concept of a common OS for 95% of all the world was most definitely a good thing.

Bravest thing I've ever seen anyone post on Slashdot.

Re: So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

You donâ(TM)t even understand the problem much less why the probable action makes sense. Google has two monopoly products and one is being used to create leverage for the other.

Re:So how much

[thegarbz]

But Apple is 10 times worse.

For whom and how? Apple are a small player in the Smartphone business with 20% of the market share compared to closer to 80% of Google. So they don't have a monopoly. Apple don't sell iOS to third parties and don't use their market power to contractually oblige anyone to do anything with iOS so there's no antitrust misuse.

This is not about *you*. This is about Samsung, HTC, et al and their dealings with Google. Not all monopoly / anti-trust rulings are about consumers. In fact, most of them are not, and as far as Samsung is concerned Apple bundling doesn't affect them in the slightest.

Re: So how much

[thegarbz]

Don't use Android then. Also, Google doesn't lock anyone from providing their own software.

Sounds good. What's all those alternatives that have similar kinds of market success? Tell me about all those alternative app stores that make non Google supported Android so functional since we all know its about the apps.

You may realise that these decisions have a very very serious impact on your profitability and the reason they do so is because of the market power of the dominant player. Welcome to the world of antitrust laws.

Re: So how much

[thegarbz]

Then, there's Android which you can perfectly use without Google services and which is free to download, modify and compile.

No one cares about Android. The smartphone market isn't about the operating system, it's about the ecosystem. The monopoly here isn't about Android as much as it is about the Appstore.

Something is really messed up in your head.

There's an app for that. But it's only available if you have official Google supported Android.

Re:So how much

[thegarbz]

Enlighten me please.

The existence of obligations aren't a problem providing they don't lead directly to vendor lockout. My laptop has a brand new Windows 10 sticker on it, conforms to all the requirements of the Windows 10 hardware certification program, and ... I run Linux on it. Not some major workaround, or jumping through hoops, I just installed Linux. There are even models available from the vendor with Linux pre-installed.

See the difference?

Re: So how much

[jwdb]

Nope, I have the same problem as GP on a Nexus 5. Google maps alone (before I downgraded it) took almost 500 MB. It's also become incredibly slow, requiring on the order of a minute between launching the app and it starting to show directions.

Re:So how much

[Alioth]

Because Apple isn't in a monopolistic position. Apple has quite a small marketshare, but Google have an effective monopoly (and an actual monopoly for non-premium devices). It's not about whether Apple is doing anything better or worse, it's about whether Google has an effective monopoly or not. If the situation were reversed (iOS being on 90% of devices), then the EU would be going after Apple.

Re: So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

And yet Google tracks everything you do online.

Re: So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

While the average user will be using Google play it's entirely possible to use an Android phone without it. There are also 3rd party solutions that mimic the Google play services.

Re: So how much

[tbannist]

Do you know what the Fallacy fallacy is? Basically, people don't lose a debate when they use a fallacy. Correctly pointing out a fallacy merely renders that particular statement meaningless, it doesn't even prove that the statement is wrong because fallacious arguments can have true conclusions.

For example:

My opponent says the sky the White House has been painted green by Ted Nugent, however, we all know that my opponent is moron and thus everything he says is wrong.

That's an ad hominem fallacy in an argument, however the conclusion of the argument is true. Ted Nugent has not painted the White House green. That's because citing a fallacy doesn't prove someone or soemthing is wrong, it only shows that the fallacious argument is invalid.

Re:So how much

[houghi]

Yeds, and the EU also told them what to do with their browser monopoly.

Re: So how much

[tbannist]

Apple is completely closed and controlled by Apple and won't even let other companies use their software or create hardware for their platform and somehow you think Google is locking other companies out?

No, Google isn't locking other companies out, however, it is using the dominance of Android to give advantages to the Play Store, Google Maps and Chrome.

Would you rather Google become a closed ecosystem and ban other manufacturers from using their software?

No.

Your argument makes no sense. You are basically saying that because Google is more open it has to be even more open while Apple is completely closed so that's ok.

Yes, that's the way the law looks at it. See the legal issue isn't who is more or less open, it's about using market power to compel the behaviour of other companies. Because Google made Android available to other phone companies, and it is now pretty much the only phone operating system for most of the world's smart phones, they now have a duty to provide a level playing field for applications that run on Android. They can't use their market power in Android to give themselves advantages in other markets (such as application stores, mapping software, and browser software). Ironically, this is a problem caused by Android's success, which is actually likely partially tied to Google's policy of favouring those very same applications.

Apple isn't subject to the same issues because it's all Apple. They aren't forcing any other phone vendors to use the Apple store, Apple map software, or Safari because the don't let anyone else make iPhones. Also iPhones don't have market power because they represent about 15% of the smart phone market. Pretty much the rest is Android giving them close to 85% of the all smart phones and giving Android close to 100% domination of the smart phone OS marketplace (where Apple doesn't compete at all because no one can buy iOS for their non-Apple smart phone at any price)

I have an Android phone and I like Google as a company, but they are misusing their power here, and they should stop doing that. I think Google Play, the Play Store, and Google Maps are all good enough to compete without needing any advantages built into Android, and if competitors rise to challenge them that should actually end up being good for all of us, as competition tends to drive innovation.

Re:So how much

[farble1670]

reasonable

What do you think is reasonable for the continued development and maintenance of an entire operating system plus the most complex Android apps and services that run on Android? $20 a month?

Regardless of what you think you want, the answer is almost no one prefers this over an advertising supported model, which is why we have we have a majority ad supported online world. One thing I'm sure of is that Google likes money. If they could make more money by charging outright for Android and Google apps, they'd do it.

Re: So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

I really do not believe that Google is in the wrong here, no matter how much I want to be able to uninstall some unwanted system apps. Google licenses a package that they make, that package is called google apps. you can install it on the android device that you manufacture, or you can use alternatives. exactly HOW is google using their Android monopoly here? they never said you are not allowed to use android without the full gapps package.

Re:So how much

[Shirley Marquez]

Except in China. Phones with no Google Play access are common there because most Google services are blocked from most of the population by the Great Firewall, making a non-Google phone a viable product. The Chinese phones made for export have Google services but there are many domestic-only models that do not.

Re:So how much

[Shirley Marquez]

There is also no meaningful way to replace the web browser. Sure, you can install Chrome or Firefox... but they are bastard versions that use Apple's HTML rendering and Javascript engines. They are really just a reskinning of an old version of Safari - not even the current version, since the services that come with the OS are usually behind. Apple has rigged the game by guaranteeing that any alternative browser will be inferior to their own in the most important ways.

S mode in Windows 10 has a similar restriction that forces developers to use components of Edge. But there aren't enough people using S mode to matter. Chromebooks don't have any way to install an alternative browser at all, aside from using the subsystems for running Android apps or Linux applications.

Re: So how much

[ath1901]

No, you lying sack of shit. On my phone the facts are:

Fact #1: Google Play Services 73.67 MB + 6.09 MB cache.
Fact #2: I don't have chrome installed but when I had, it was about 150MB including cache (from memory, could be wrong).
Fact #3: "Google" is 30.37 MB. Don't know what it is really...
Fact #4: Google Maps is 92.11 with 3.10 Data and Cache 732 kB. No offline maps since I use OsmAnd for that.

I'm running Lineage OS 14.1 so Android 7.1.2 with some GApps.

Fact #5: You are jumping to conclusions. Are you sure you're not confusing bits with bytes?

Re:So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

The point of antitrust law is that if you have a (near) monopoly in one area, you are not allowed to (ab)use that to also gain a monopoly in another area. Antitrust law always removes freedom of enterprise for the (assumed) benefits of consumers. The justification for this is that free markets work well iff there is healthy competition; and that if left alone companies tend to concentrate by merger or natural growth and then get monopoly pricing power (see e.g. the history of US railways). If there is only two companies left, they have a very strong incentive to merge because as monopolists they can make much more profit than when they are in competition with each other. So, in reaction to the abuses of (especially) 19th century capitalism the government stepped in to break up companies, prevent mergers, and restrict the freedom of (near) monopolists if break up is not sensible or not needed.

In practice, antitrust law primarily exists to create income for lawyers and jobs for bureaucrats.

It's a useful tool for companies that can't compete effectively to hinder their opponents, forcing them to spend huge amounts of money for years and years of pointless litigation.

We need to get rid of it, and have simpler rules.

Don't allow any company based in or operating in a given country to have over 20k employees (counting contractors and part time employees as fractions of full time for hours worked, add up the fractions).

Don't allow copyright to be controlled by contract for more than 10 years (make it a straight percentage of the gross after that, anybody can copy anything including software by paying some amount set by statute, some third party automatically issues license keys when paid).

Keep the complete set of rules to 10 pages or less, easily understandable by the average educated adult.

Re: So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

Because Apple manufactures ite own phone.

In case of Android, Google gives OS with restrictions to manufacturers leading to unfair practices.

Re:So how much

[Bert64]

And you can run your own version of android with your own app store (eg like amazon do)...
Google bundle their apps separately from android, if you want to bundle google's apps you have to follow their rules - the fact that these apps are for android is incidental, google could make a suite of apps for windows or ios and impose the same demands on anyone wanting to bundle them with devices.

Re:So how much

[Bert64]

You *could* create your own mobile os relatively easily...
But you'd be fighting an uphill battle to displace an entrenched platform, as the existing platform has all the mindshare, marketing and third party support.

Microsoft with their billions couldn't make a dent in the mobile market with windows phone...
Linux can't make a dent in the desktop market despite being free and having many technical advantages.

Users are locked in, and breaking that lock is extremely difficult.

Re:So how much

[Bert64]

Common standards are a good thing, providing those standards are open. Being locked in is never a good thing.

We have common standards for most things where there are many suppliers competing to offer compatible products. Televisions, cars etc. Allowing a single for-profit entity to have control over a market is never a good thing.

Re:So how much

[Bert64]

Apple only exist at the high end of the market competing with flagship phones from samsung and the like, they don't offer any products to compete with the cheap lowend android phones.

Re:So how much

[Bert64]

While it's reasonable to expect a working browser (and other such apps) out of the box, you should also be able to fully remove and replace the default one, or choose a distribution which doesn't have it. You shouldn't be forced to keep 2 browsers (or anything else) installed because you don't like the supplied one.

But this problem is not with android...
OEMs are free to provide android on their devices, they can remove any of the default apps or replace them with apps of their own choosing.

Separately from android, google make a bundle of their own applications which can be installed on android. If you want to distribute these applications then you must distribute them all, and comply with various other restrictions.

This case is about application software, not about the android os itself.

Re:So how much

[TheFakeTimCook]

You *could* create your own mobile os relatively easily...
But you'd be fighting an uphill battle to displace an entrenched platform, as the existing platform has all the mindshare, marketing and third party support.

Microsoft with their billions couldn't make a dent in the mobile market with windows phone...
Linux can't make a dent in the desktop market despite being free and having many technical advantages.

Users are locked in, and breaking that lock is extremely difficult.

Nonsense.

People switch heir Mobile platforms in BOTH directions ALL the time.

Re: So how much

[Khyber]

I didn't go off subject - as you can see, that was my first post in this particular thread, so, uh, yea, try again when you have actual reading comprehension.

Re: So how much

[Khyber]

Not a version that would currently be operating anywhere except a 3rd world country. Even my old single-core 512MB RAM Gingerbread, on a base refresh, the installed/updated set of Google-included crap is over 2GB on the 4GB internal flash.

Don't need to assume shit when I already checked that. Sorry, try again!

Re: So how much

[Khyber]

Ah, Lineage, the piece of junk that doesn't work on half the hardware I've tried flashing it to.

Meanwhile, I can still drop CyanogenMod on my fucking NOOK COLOR and it runs faster than an iPhone 4S.

Come back when you use a real Droid distro.

Re: So how much

[Wycliffe]

Because Apple manufactures ite own phone.

In case of Android, Google gives OS with restrictions to manufacturers leading to unfair practices.

What is it with all this faulty reason? Google gives OS with restrictions to manufacturers. Apple restricts manufacturers from even using their OS.
How exactly is Google's less restrictive model somehow more unfair? Would you rather they also not allow third party manufacturers?

Re:So how much

[Wycliffe]

Users are locked in, and breaking that lock is extremely difficult.

Nonsense.

People switch heir Mobile platforms in BOTH directions ALL the time.

Both as in only two. The lock is all the apps on the 2 major app stores. That being said, there is really a third one. Amazon is doing pretty well. Amazon did it by being sourcecode/binary compatible with android. It is much easier to get developers on your platform if they don't have to write a whole new app to support it. You need to either go the route of Microsoft and create a cross platform development system or make your new OS really really easy for developers to port their existing apps to. Most developers are not going to have a problem supporting a third OS even with very few users as long as it is still cost effective.

Re:So how much

[Wycliffe]

and as far as Samsung is concerned Apple bundling doesn't affect them in the slightest.

Of course it does. Apple commands huge profit margins because it is the only alternative to Android. Samsung can't get near those profit margins because it has to compete with all the other manufacturers. If samsung could license and build an IOS phone then not only would samsung have an expanded market but Apple would no longer have a monopoly on IOS and would lose their huge profit margins. Apple's market share suffers a little because it can't offer the huge selection of hardware that Android's large number of manufacturers do but it makes up for it by being the only other shop in town. It's like a town with 25 motel 6s and 1 holiday inn. The holiday inn is going to get a certain number of people almost regardless of price because there are going to be people who don't like motel 6. As long a the town is restricted to only 2 chains, the owner of the holiday inn would be stupid to let someone else build a holiday inn and compete with them.

Re:So how much

[Wycliffe]

Because Apple isn't in a monopolistic position. Apple has quite a small marketshare, but Google have an effective monopoly (and an actual monopoly for non-premium devices). It's not about whether Apple is doing anything better or worse, it's about whether Google has an effective monopoly or not. If the situation were reversed (iOS being on 90% of devices), then the EU would be going after Apple.

The correct term is duopoly. Apple could double their market share tomorrow if they opened IOS to third party manufacturers but it would hurt their profit margins. Apple is doing just fine. As an article posted a few days ago, Apple has managed to make the iphone a luxury item and can command a premium. Just like any other luxury brand, it has no desire to flood the market with cheap versions of itself even if doing so could give it 50% market share.

Re:So how much

[thegarbz]

Of course it does. Apple commands huge profit margins because it is the only alternative to Android. Samsung can't get near those profit margins because it has to compete with all the other manufacturers.

A cool story which has nothing to do with antitrust. Anti-trust is based on market dominance being used for unfair advantage. Apple doesn't have that dominance.

Apple doesn't have a monopoly on iOS. You don't have a monopoly on a product, you have a monopoly in a market of which Apple has neither one in Smarphones, nor in App stores. Don't missuse the word and it all becomes clear.

Re:So how much

[Hognoxious]

Today's logical fallacy was brought to you by the letters w, h, a (twice), t (twice), b, o, u, i, s, and m.

Re: So how much

[squiggleslash]

Really interesting post to read! However, allow me to disagree *slightly*. I dont believe the issue lies in Lineage itself (as your wording seemingly suggest). I believe the issue lies in the media you used to burn the Lineage image to. Unless you use high quality DVD-R/+R discs, you're likely to get a corrupted image. Perhaps you'd find your install would work more reliably with better media. Nonetheless, I appreciate the insightful comment!

Re: So how much

[Anonymous Coward]

Google wants their software to be included by default and they have the right to.

Google demands:
1) their stuff be included by default AND
2) their stuff be unremovable (on my android tablet I can deactivate the google stuff, but I can't remove it from the device in the same way I can every other app)

Re:So how much

[TheFakeTimCook]

Users are locked in, and breaking that lock is extremely difficult.

Nonsense.

People switch heir Mobile platforms in BOTH directions ALL the time.

Both as in only two. The lock is all the apps on the 2 major app stores. That being said, there is really a third one. Amazon is doing pretty well. Amazon did it by being sourcecode/binary compatible with android. It is much easier to get developers on your platform if they don't have to write a whole new app to support it. You need to either go the route of Microsoft and create a cross platform development system or make your new OS really really easy for developers to port their existing apps to. Most developers are not going to have a problem supporting a third OS even with very few users as long as it is still cost effective.

There WERE at LEAST FOUR simultaneous platforms even a year or so ago. Two of them just blew it.

But you are conflating Platforms with App Stores. So, your post is meaningless.

Try again.

Re:So how much

[Wycliffe]

But you are conflating Platforms with App Stores. So, your post is meaningless.

Try again.

That's because the number of supported apps is what creates all the lock in.
People don't even care that much about backwards compatibility as can be see the huge number of people jumping back and forth between Apple and Android.
What they do care about is if the apps they use or something similar is available on the new phone.
If you created a completely new OS and launched it day one with the same number of apps as android and ios then plenty of people would be willing to try it.
But it doesn't matter how good the phone is if it doesn't support angry birds, facebook, fortnite, and all the other apps people want.

Re:Just pay your taxes Google and...

[VeryFluffyBunny]

"Posted from my Samsung-Android smartphone."

Do not want

[Anonymous Coward]

Nobody wants to be locked into a telecom's app store, thanks.

Ugh, just what i wanted

[Anonymous Coward]

Manufacturer's own shovelware. Thanks, EUSSR.

Re:Ugh, just what i wanted

[Anonymous Coward]

Guess whose president is in league with the russians...more like USSRA?

Re:Ugh, just what i wanted

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you paid to post these kind of messages? You are awfully quick to respond to new articles here.

Walled garden

[Anonymous Coward]

Damned if you do and damned if you do and dont call it as such.

If this was a stipulation with the appstore then change to Amazonâ(TM)s app store. I dont see how this was locked to Android.

Apple

[Artem S. Tashkinov]

Why isn't there an antitrust lawsuit against Apple whose App Store is 100^100 more closed/restricted than the Android ecosystem? I really don't understand why Google isn't allowed to dictate its own rules in regard to Android - if you don't like them, you're free to use the Android core sans Google Play and associated services. What the hell is going on?

Re:Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

Because Apple doesn't own the vast majority of the market? It has 1/3 the market share of Android in Europe.

Re: Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

Why isn't there an antitrust lawsuit against Apple whose App Store is 100^100 more closed/restricted than the Android ecosystem?

Because Apple doesn't license its OS to third parties under coercive terms? As far as I can tell, Google is welcome to do whatever they like with something like Pixel or Nexus.

Re:Apple

[gettin2old]

bureaucrat: wow we could really use a cash infusion. who has money?? Google has money!!! Let's fine them! We just need to create a reason and we'll be cash rich in a few months!!
if this succeeds in making them money don't worry, they will get around to apple.

Re:Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple doesn't strong arm manufacturers into using their apps as they are the only manufacturer of phones running iOS. They'd likely go after Apple too IF Apple allowed iOS to be installed on non-Apple devices and Apple acted to limit iOS on those devices where their apps and search weren't the default.

Re: Apple

[Artem S. Tashkinov]

Because Apple doesn't license its OS to third parties under coercive terms?

Android is given out to OEMs more or less for free yet Android's development costs quite a lot of money. In its turn, you're right, Google demands that you use/prominently feature some of their services. Again, you may freely use core Android OS sans Google Play and associated services.

Tell me again about the "coercion" and how it relates to the fact that no one forces any OEM to use Android at all.

Re:Apple

[Artem S. Tashkinov]

If I read you correctly, Apple doesn't provide any choice and Europe is OK with them, Google indeed provides choice with the only exception of mandating that their own apps must be installed, and Google is suddenly a monopoly? Also, who or what forces OEMs to install Android in the first place?

If Europe wants a third major OS/player in the mobile market then why don't they create one?

Re: Apple

[bobbied]

Why isn't there an antitrust lawsuit against Apple whose App Store is 100^100 more closed/restricted than the Android ecosystem?

Because Apple doesn't license its OS to third parties under coercive terms? As far as I can tell, Google is welcome to do whatever they like with something like Pixel or Nexus.

You mean the Apache license 2.0 is coercive now? The majority of the code is released under Apache 2.0 with a handful of the Linux Kernel things being GPL.

As I understand Android licenses, you are free to use and modify the baseline code while keeping your hardware designs closed. Doesn't sound too coercive to me.

Re:Apple

[ceoyoyo]

Because Apple isn't using their app store to force anyone (corporate) to do anything. They sell a phone, that allows you to download apps from their store.

Google is in trouble because they leverage one product to force other businesses to use their other products.

Re:Apple

[Desler]

If that were solely the reason then why wouldn't they have gone after Apple instead? Apple's cash reserves are something like $270 billion vs Alphabet at something like $70 billion.

Re:Apple

[Desler]

and Google is suddenly a monopoly?

At 75% market share vs Apple at around 24%? Yes, much more of a monopoly.

Re: Apple

[Desler]

But the Android trademark is not free to use. To be able to call what you ship "Android" you have to agree to additional terms beyond the Apache license.

Re:Apple

[msauve]

BS. "Lacking that portal, owners of Android smartphones or tablets can't easily download games or other apps -- or services from Google's competitors offered by third-party developers."

Entirely untrue. Enable "allow unknown sources" (or grant "install unknown apps" on Oreo), and you can easily download apps from non-Google source. Amazon is a competitor, and there are others.

Re: Apple

[andersenep]

More or less free is not exactly free...

"Google demands that you use/prominently feature some of their services. Again, you may free use core Android OS sans Google Play and associated services. Tell me again about the coercion."

I think you are incorrect here and that is the crux of the problem. Device manufacturers that want to sell even ONE device that includes Google Play et al are seemingly forbidden from offering other devices that compete with those services.

"Notably, it seems that the AFA is a company-wide document, binding a manufacturer for all of its present
and even future devices. Thus, AFA obligations apply to the entire operations of the companies that sign."

-source: https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pu...

Re:Apple

[TheFakeTimCook]

Why isn't there an antitrust lawsuit against Apple whose App Store is 100^100 more closed/restricted than the Android ecosystem? I really don't understand why Google isn't allowed to dictate its own rules in regard to Android - if you don't like them, you're free to use the Android core sans Google Play and associated services. What the hell is going on?

And yet you would no doubt Champion if Apple was having this handed to them, even though they are not the dominant mobile Platform, wouldn't you?

Re: Apple

[TheFakeTimCook]

Because Apple doesn't license its OS to third parties under coercive terms?

Android is given out to OEMs more or less for free yet Android's development costs quite a lot of money. In its turn, you're right, Google demands that you use/prominently feature some of their services. Again, you may freely use core Android OS sans Google Play and associated services.

Tell me again about the "coercion" and how it relates to the fact that no one forces any OEM to use Android at all.

On this, we both agree.

Re: Apple

[TheFakeTimCook]

But the Android trademark is not free to use. To be able to call what you ship "Android" you have to agree to additional terms beyond the Apache license.

So, the fuck WHAT?

In case you haven't noticed, EVERY time you see a Logo on something; you can BET a License (a/k/a $$$) and other stipulations, was involved.

Look at the average BD/DVD Player. Mine has like 10 Logos silk-screened across the top front. Do you think those Logos didn't come with "Strings"? If so, you are naive beyond belief.

Re:Apple

[TheFakeTimCook]

If I read you correctly, Apple doesn't provide any choice and Europe is OK with them, Google indeed provides choice with the only exception of mandating that their own apps must be installed, and Google is suddenly a monopoly? Also, who or what forces OEMs to install Android in the first place?

If Europe wants a third major OS/player in the mobile market then why don't they create one?

What you say is true; but it doesn't involve Apple. But I DO agree that Google isn't forcing Android on these OEMs, and IMHO, the EU should FOAD when it comes to a PRIVATE contract negotiated between two PRIVATE parties. If $OEM and Google are both happy, then the EU should just BUTT-OUT!

There is ABSOLUTELY no "Public Policy" issue here, either. The EU's citizenry is not being forced to buy an Android phone, no more than they are forced to buy an iOS phone.

The EU is the most HORRIBLE example of the "Nanny State" mentality on the planet. They aren't EXACTLY "Totalitarian"; but they are EXTREMELY Regulation-Happy and Litigious. And once they have spoken, there is very little that a Corporation, or even a GROUP of Companies, can do about it but whine.

Re: Apple

[bobbied]

Again, you are not being forced to call it "android" if you use the android code base for your device. I fail to see how this is coercive, especially given the other major competitors don't share *anything* close to their source code.

Didn't Amazon pretty much make a business out of marketing their own essentially android devices w/o having to pony up the fees for the trademark? Heck, I ran a number of android apps from the "play store" on mine....

Re:Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

What's going on here is that you're just yet another SlashFag who doesn't understand the law but make up shit as you go along to make you feel better about your choices. Why don't you fucks do more reading and less posting and maybe you'll get a fucking clue?

Re:Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple's walled garden is a bucket of warm puke some AIDS patient defecated in. Their app-store is pig feces.

Re:Apple

[religionofpeas]

And once they have spoken, there is very little that a Corporation, or even a GROUP of Companies, can do about it but whine.

As a consumer, I appreciate their efforts to keep the playing field level. Also, as a consumer, I have no need for Google to grow even bigger.

Re:Apple

[TheFakeTimCook]

And once they have spoken, there is very little that a Corporation, or even a GROUP of Companies, can do about it but whine.

As a consumer, I appreciate their efforts to keep the playing field level. Also, as a consumer, I have no need for Google to grow even bigger.

When they are truly working to protect the public, then that level of activism is admirable. But too often, they, get caught up in some cause du jour, often at the behest of an overzealous or overambitious small group. And, like the U.S. Congress when it gets like that, then that same zealous mindset can wreak havoc in world markets, and end up actually harming the populace.

Special Crappy EU Edition?

[foxalopex]

Well I imagine Google might have to Fork android in EU then. That's probably the best solution as I don't think anyone else in the world wants to use an Android phone without the Android store.

Re: Special Crappy EU Edition?

[Anonymous Coward]

???? What??? People do that everyday without thinking twice, there are options. Fdroid, amazon store, etc. not everyone uses googles play store.

Re: Special Crappy EU Edition?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hence crappy edition.

Re: Special Crappy EU Edition?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is it? Windows with all programs 'side loaded' is superior to Windows using the store.

Wait..What?

[ArhcAngel]

So let me get this straight. Google provides a free as in beer OS (some of it is OSS but not all) for mobile and strong-arms OEM's to included ALL of Google services or else no app store and THAT is bad because even though there are competing app stores they suck. While Apple doesn't even allow competing app stores, browsers (a wrapper called chrome on Apples engine is not a competing browser), or scripting languages and that is OK? I welcome the scrutiny on Google but lets get real.

Re: Wait..What?

[Anonymous Coward]

Couple of questions.

Does Apple have majority share in the smart phone market in EU? No? They don't, they have about 1/3 market share.

Question 2: is Apple liscencing its software tech to other companies? No? They don't, they make the hardware and software. Nobody else is allowed in the ecosystem.

Apple isn't locking companies out after letting them in, they were never allowed in to begin with unless your name was Apple. Google is basically saying "nice product you have there, be a shame if we cut you off from making it useable without our input, wouldn't want that would we?"

You see the difference now?

Re: Wait..What?

[bobbied]

I see the difference...

Apple -> You may not play in our garden with your device, nor may you alter our device to play in another garden, no way, no how.. And by the way, we have strict rules for what you can do IN our garden.

Google -> You MAY play in our garden or any other garden you choose with your device, but if you wish to play in our garden, you must follow our rules.

One has high stone walls and NO door or gate. You either start inside the wall or you don't get in.. The other has a nice fence and a door with a list of regulations on it.

Re: Wait..What?

[ceoyoyo]

Google is in trouble because their policies interfere with competition. You wanna use our app store, you gotta use our search. They leverage one product to force third parties to include their other products.

Apple doesn't do that. You buy a phone from apple. Apple provides a service where you can download apps for that phone.

Apple could get in trouble for anti-competitive practices, but since they're a minority player, that would be tough to sell. Google isn't a monopoly, but they are engaging in the types of business practices that have historically been used to stifle competitors.

Re: Wait..What?

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't see how apple could be in trouble for anti-competitive practices.
They sell their own phone, they don't licence IOS out to companies, and thus, there is no expectation that a company they licence their software to can amend the software (as there is none).

Re: Wait..What?

[Anonymous Coward]

Try again.

Google does not interfere with competition - OEM's can provide whatever OS or app store they want and Google will do nothing.

Don't believe me? Then check out Amazon, who have their own version of Android and their own app store.

You want someone interferring with competition then you do need to look at Apple.

Who, not just dominates, but owns the tablet market? Apple.

Who is taking actions to actively discourage developers from making their apps available on multiple devices? Apple, with their return to proprietary standards like Metal instead of OpenGL/Vulkan.

Apple is the bigger threat, because the iOS app store is where the money is.

Re: Wait..What?

[Obfuscant]

You wanna use our app store, you gotta use our search.

No, "you wanna use our app store, you must include our base apps". Nobody is forced to use Google for searches. Nobody is forced to use Google Maps or Google Drive or any of the other google apps.

Now, I had a Chinese tablet with a version of Notdroid and no access to the Google Play store, and I can tell you it was a REAL PAIN getting it to do anything productive. Amazon is a poor second-class app source. The only nice thing about Amazon is they had the "free app of the day", but that eventually became a problem. Having to keep the huge Amazon app on the device, with whatever monitoring services it wanted to run, became a killer -- without that app no "free" app could get authorization and they wouldn't run.

Re: Wait..What?

[ArhcAngel]

They aren't preventing anybody from installing the play store. They are saying if you want to put Google anywhere on the device you've got to include ALL of our services. I can buy any Android device that comes without the play store and install the play store if I want to. What Google is "licensing" is their name on the product. If a product doesn't have the Google name somewhere on it some people will assume it isn't a quality product. It's entirely a perception issue. Samsung actually sells identical hardware where one has the Google Services and the other does not. Which can be installed by the phone's owner if they so choose.

Re: Wait..What?

[ceoyoyo]

Same difference, as far as the law is concerned.

Re:Wait..What?

[swillden]

Google provides a free as in beer OS (some of it is OSS but not all)

AFAIK, everything Google provides is OSS (mostly Apache 2 licensed). What Google provides isn't enough to make a functional phone, though. There's a whole vendor layer which has to be provided by the device maker.

Re: Wait..What?

[TheFakeTimCook]

I see the difference...

Apple -> You may not play in our garden with your device, nor may you alter our device to play in another garden, no way, no how.. And by the way, we have strict rules for what you can do IN our garden.

Google -> You MAY play in our garden or any other garden you choose with your device, but if you wish to play in our garden, you must follow our rules.

One has high stone walls and NO door or gate. You either start inside the wall or you don't get in.. The other has a nice fence and a door with a list of regulations on it.

So, pray tell, what's to stop YOU, or ANYBODY, from writing their OWN iOS Software and loading it onto THEIR iOS device(s)?

How do you think all that App Store software gets written in the FIRST PLACE? What a MAROON!!!

There are even avenues for Distribution of said Software. There are several F/OSS and .ipa Repositories; plus you are ABSOLUTELY free to start your OWN iOS App Store. Yes, you heard that right.

You Slashtard Apple-Haters are fucking STUPID.

Re: Wait..What?

[bobbied]

Who said I hate Apple? I'm just pointing out the differences in how they do business.

They have their business model and make money so do makers of Android devices. I have no ax to grind or chop down Apple's tree with and I have no dog hunting in the Android world. If they are making money with their business model, power to them.

Some folks enjoy the security of the walled garden where strict controls protect you, others like the flexibility of being able to move beyond the walls and accept the risks of doing so. I make no moral judgments about what garden you play in or if you choose no garden at all.

You play in their garden, or you don't play in any meaningful way. If you want folks to connect to YOUR store, they will have to jail break their phones (and voiding their Apple warranty).

Re: Wait..What?

[LynnwoodRooster]

So, pray tell, what's to stop YOU, or ANYBODY, from writing their OWN iOS Software and loading it onto THEIR iOS device(s)?

$99 per year for developer registration and purchase of a Mac, for starters... For Android I can use pretty much any computer I already have (including my phone that will run the app).

Re:Wait..What?

[ArhcAngel]

The Google services in question are not OSS. Which wouldn't be a problem if so many popular 3rd party apps didn't depend on those services to work. The thing is the end user is still free to install the Google services but OEM's know for most users that's too complicated. What they could do is provide an app that's sole purpose is to install the Google packages directly from Google.

Re:Wait..What?

[swillden]

The Google services in question are not OSS.

The OP spoke of the OS, not add-on services or apps, so that's what I was referring to. Granted that I said "everything Google provides". Sorry, I should have been clearer.

You're right, of course, that the Google apps and Google Play services are closed source.

Re: Wait..What?

[TheFakeTimCook]

So, pray tell, what's to stop YOU, or ANYBODY, from writing their OWN iOS Software and loading it onto THEIR iOS device(s)?

$99 per year for developer registration and purchase of a Mac, for starters... For Android I can use pretty much any computer I already have (including my phone that will run the app).

Only need the $99 license to post to the App Store.

So what if you need a Mac.

Re:Wait..What?

[Anonymous Coward]

Let it die. Apple is irrelevant in Europe. Only pretentious cocksuckers are using Apple over here. That 1/3 market share is grossly inflated -- they're probably only counting high-end Samsung, HTC, etc garbage as android and completely ignoring the thousands of no-name cheap chinese clones everybody is using because they don't appear on their radar.

Kind of like firefox on android being supposedly inexistent 0.0000% while everybody I know is using it despite its flaws (because the stock chrome browser isn't able to block ads and so it's completely unusable).

To resume, android is the new windows, and google the new microsoft Libertarians of course will howl about what a great injustice it is to break monopolies and not let those great "innovators" capture 100% of the market and fuck everybody over like they please.

Re: Wait..What?

[Anonymous Coward]

You asked for requirement, GP responded, then you said "So what..."

You apple shill is a fucking moron!

Re: Wait..What?

[Anonymous Coward]

> Amazon is a poor second-class app source.

https://f-droid.org/. No, it doesn't have anywhere near as much software as the google or amazon repositories, but it ain't going to spy on you and neither will the stuff it hosts. Depends on what your priorities are, really.

Re:Wait..What?

[GNious]

So let me get this straight.

Still waiting for you to catch up....

Re:Wait..What?

[AmiMoJo]

It's because Apple does not licence its OS to other companies. Google does, and Google benefits from Android being licensed (they don't sell many of their own phones, 99% of Android devices are made by other companies). So their business models are fundamentally quite different.

Because Google licences its OS as its primary business model, similar to how Microsoft does to PC manufacturers, there are certain legal requirements to prevent them abusing that to suppress competition. Apple doesn't stifle competition in that way, so they are not being investigated (at least not for this, their tax affairs are another matter).

Re:Wait..What?

[Anonymous Coward]

While Apple doesn't even allow competing app stores, browsers (a wrapper called chrome on Apples engine is not a competing browser), or scripting languages and that is OK? I welcome the scrutiny on Google but lets get real.

You're literally comparing apples to oranges here.

At the heart of the E.U.'s looming decision are Google's policies that pressure smartphone and tablet manufacturers that use Google's Android operating system to pre-install the tech giant's own apps. In the E.U.'s eyes, device makers such as HTC and Samsung face an anti-competitive choice: Set Google Search as the default search service and offer Google's Chrome browser, or lose access to Android's popular app store.

Google tells OEM companies who make devices which use Android they must put the Google stuff on there, or their device gets no access to the Google Store.

Apple doesn't make such demands to external companies, because they aren't letting other companies make iOS devices.

I suspect if Google made and sold their own devices, they'd be completely free to push their own stuff.

But in this case, that isn't what is happening. Other companies make and sell the devices, Google just wants to remain prominent on the devices to push revenue to them, and hopefully to provide some consistency.

But, quite honestly, Android without the requirement for the Google Store, or without the mandatory Google apps, Android is going to continue its decline into an irrelevant and shitty operating system which is fragmented and pointless. Every Android device will be different.

This is already the biggest issue I have with Android, is the degree to which it is fragmented. Everybody makes a slightly different version of it, skins it, monetizes it, and the fails to support it.

Google has made an operating system, but doesn't really sell the product. And now the EU is telling them they can't force companies to put the Google stuff on the devices.

At which point you will have Android being very different on many platforms, with no core set of software, but those device manufacturers will still benefit from the Google app store and updates to the core OS ... Android to me would become an utterly useless operating system, and Google is then effectively maintaining an app store and OS to benefit other companies who aren't putting their stuff on phones.

I fail to see why Google is going to do that, and I fail to see as a consumer why I have any interest in Android if it effectively becomes "whatever the fuck the OEM decided you could have that they may or may not support". And you know that would become a steaming pile of shit really fast.

Kvetching about Apple here is fundamentally failing to grasp what this is all about.

Google opened up the door for other companies to make money off their OS, and now they're being told those other companies can't be forced to make Google's stuff prominent.

This would effectively turn Android into nothing more than the underlying OS, with all of the user stuff being OEM garbage. At that point, Android is effectively dead, because it's going to become a useless pile of shit.

It has already felt broken and fragmented, this would just make that permanent.

Re:Wait..What?

[thegarbz]

So let me get this straight. Google provides a free as in beer OS (some of it is OSS but not all) for mobile and strong-arms OEM's to included ALL of Google services or else no app store and THAT is bad because even though there are competing app stores they suck. While Apple doesn't even allow competing app stores

Apple isn't using a monopoly of one product to force push another to consumers. Apple also don't have even remotely the market share for this to be considered an antitrust case even if they did.

You have the choice of not buying Apple.
Samsung does not have that choice when it comes to working with any other vendor.

Re:Wait..What?

[ArhcAngel]

Google does NOT license the OS. It is OSS. What they license is the Google name. If you want to have Google emblazoned anywhere on your phone you must include the full suite of Google Services. You cannot just install the Play Store. If you decide to forego the licensing you cannot put the Google name or logo anywhere on your device except in attribution documents. But you are free to install Android and any app store you so choose other than the Play Store. That doesn't prevent the end use from downloading and installing the Google services themselves. Which is common for those who choose to install custom ROMs.

No one is forcing you to use Chrome!

[Comboman]

Go on Google Play and download Firefox or Opera. Problem solved. Why should Google be punished for wanting users to have a consistent UX rather than whatever crapware manufacturers and/or carrier want to load up your phone with?

Re:No one is forcing you to use Chrome!

[Piata]

Because Android keeps forcing you to use Chrome despite installing Firefox and making it the default browser. Even if you do get Firefox to be the default browser everywhere on every app, Google intentionally makes certain aspects Chrome only. Locked in experiences in general need to be curtailed.

Re:No one is forcing you to use Chrome!

[Anonymous Coward]

Right, we all forgot that the web browser is the only app that uses networking services. Thanks for correcting us CombOverMan.

Re:No one is forcing you to use Chrome!

[Anonymous Coward]

Why can I delete the shit from my phone?

Whatever the EU is considering as a fee they should double it. Then go after Samsung next. But only after a quick stop at facebook.

Re:No one is forcing you to use Chrome!

[swillden]

Google intentionally makes certain aspects Chrome only.

For example?

Re:No one is forcing you to use Chrome!

[Anonymous Coward]

Because Android keeps forcing you to use Chrome despite installing Firefox and making it the default browser.

No, it does not.

Tell Android the system default is now firefox, and it'll fuck off and use firefox. Tell it to use "shit browser X" and the intents will go to that browser - it does it here, and on every other android phone.

Oh, and I've been using firefox by default on android for quite the while.

You're probably referring to internal OS components like webviews (which are basically chrome) which you can't replace with an app as it's a system component, therefore you can instead, roll your own version of the OS if you want to replace it (now, do that on IOS or Windows).

Re:No one is forcing you to use Chrome!

[Anonymous Coward]

Android WebView (aka in-app browser).

Re:No one is forcing you to use Chrome!

[Anonymous Coward]

Bullshit. I've disabled chrome and am typing this from Firefox on an android tablet right now. I have never needed to re-enable chrome to access functionality. I did not need to root the device to accomplish any of this. It took at most three minutes.

If you're having problems,mthey are idiosyncratic to your manufacturer, not android.

Incidentally, I think Google being made to allow users to choose a default browser of their own preference is a good thing, but don't accuse them of being more evil than they are. It discredits real critique by association.

Re:No one is forcing you to use Chrome!

[Anne Thwacks]

But only after dancing on Facebook's grave

FTFY

Re:No one is forcing you to use Chrome!

[Anonymous Coward]

That is not and never should be viewed as a bad thing. For the app maker it means they dont have to pay or maintain a web browser when they choose to integrate one into the app. For the end user it means that google can push a update for that browser and it will protect all users of apps that use that browser. If it didnt use webview can you imagine how risky it would be to use an app because you never know if the app maker has patched out some flaw? And what if you have a really useful app but the app maker no longer maintains the app or that app maker has retired? How do you know hes done the patch right? You would have a security nightmare on your hands because you never know which one of your 1000 apps on your phone is open to some flaw.

Re:No one is forcing you to use Chrome!

[thegarbz]

Go on Google Play

I think you have fundamentally just missed the point.

Re:No one is forcing you to use Chrome!

[thegarbz]

Ever clicked on something from the Google Now search? Every asked Google to open something for you? It doesn't obey the default browsers as determined by the OS. Better still you're given the option after the page loads, ads and all to open it in a different browser.

Re:No one is forcing you to use Chrome!

[swillden]

Ever clicked on something from the Google Now search?

I just installed Firefox, searched for something in Now (whatever it's called these days), and the system prompted me to pick whether I wanted to use Firefox or Chrome. I am running P, so it's possible that this is something that was broken in older releases. Another possibility is that your device maker has broken this behavior (I'm using a Pixel).

Every asked Google to open something for you?

Just tried it, same story.

Re:No one is forcing you to use Chrome!

[thegarbz]

Every older release back to the one that introduced Now? Or maybe you specifically changed the default behaviour. Given that Google Now uses a specific feature of Google Chrome called Custom Tabs which was designed specifically for this integration I'm going to congratulate you on finding the setting under "Settings > Accounts > Privacy > Open web pages in app" option which is completely non-intuitive and well hidden to most casual users.

You're clever. That doesn't mean Google's actions aren't intentionally devious. They created a specific mode in their App specifically designed to not obey Android defaults. That isn't a bug. Likewise Facebook shipping a full browser in the Facebook app isn't a bug either, and just another reason to use the 10MB Facebook lite app rather than the 280MB Facebook app with identical user facing functionality.

Re:No one is forcing you to use Chrome!

[swillden]

Every older release back to the one that introduced Now?

I don't know about older releases, sorry. I could flash older ones and test, but I'm not *that* interested :-)

Or maybe you specifically changed the default behaviour.

Definitely not. I just factory reset my device this morning, so it's a very stock configuration.

You're clever. That doesn't mean Google's actions aren't intentionally devious. They created a specific mode in their App specifically designed to not obey Android defaults.

If so, it's apparently been changed in P.

Re:No one is forcing you to use Chrome!

[Anonymous Coward]

Logging in to WiFi networks.

Re: No one is forcing you to use Chrome!

[Anonymous Coward]

Dont know what hes talking about. Im on oreo and i just tested it. It opened firefox for me.

Re: Just pay your taxes Google and...

[Anonymous Coward]

Last updated in 2015.

Re:Just pay your taxes Google and...

[Anonymous Coward]

Nope. It was posted from my BSD System.
I would not have a Samsung device in the house and almost all Google IP's are blocked at my firewall.

It's OPEN SOURCE

[Crashmarik]

It's freaking Open Source. you can get what you need to build your own here https://source.android.com/

If a manufacturer wants something else they can damn well build it themselves.

Re:It's OPEN SOURCE

[bobbied]

It's freaking Open Source. you can get what you need to build your own here https://source.android.com/

If a manufacturer wants something else they can damn well build it themselves.

What's more, the Apache 2.0 license doesn't require you release your source for your branch... So hardware developers are free to port Android to their hardware and not be required to release their source code or resort to delivering binary blobs of independently developed drivers..

Calm down!

[Hognoxious]

a fine raging into the billions of dollars

This time it's not MsMash's fault - it's like that in the original!

Re:Calm down!

[Anonymous Coward]

i would be raging too if i were fined billions of dollars.

I have an idea

[slashmydots]

They should fine then $1 for every GB they wasted on people's phones with this garbage. Google photos is using 150MB on my phone and I've never opened the app. I've never even used that service in a browser. I don't use it at all. WHAT COULD IT POSSIBLY BE STORING?!

Re:I have an idea

[Anonymous Coward]

It's probably all the internationalization of the app, different icons for older versions of the OS (which the app has to support as well),etc, etc, which takes a significant amount of space (different images for locales, right to left, left to right text, etc, etc - it all adds up)

You can always disable the app if you want in the android settings (basically uninstall, then once on the factory version, hit the 'disable' button and voila, app no longer runs).

And you're complaining about 150MB on a how many GB phone? Or are you complaining because you bought a 5$ android phone and expected it to work like a 500$ android phone?

Re:I have an idea

[MobyDisk]

I have a Samsung flagship phone from a few years ago, and after a factory reset with the default apps installed the 16GB memory card has 500MB free. It can't even download updates if I install a single small app. So yes, 150MB wasted is a big deal.

Re:I have an idea

[LynnwoodRooster]

So your phone only has a removable card for storage? No on-board storage?

Re:I have an idea

[MobyDisk]

Sorry, I should have said "16GB internal storage." On a related note, it's annoying that Android doesn't install apps to the SD card very well. It is similar to how Windows was back around '95, when apps put much of their files on the C: drive even if you installed them on D. At some point I'll break down and root the dang thing, delete all the Samsung garbage, and probably double my available internal storage space.

Re:I have an idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Google photos is using 150MB on my phone and I've never opened the app. I've never even used that service in a browser. I don't use it at all. WHAT COULD IT POSSIBLY BE STORING?!

150MB? That's barely enough for a modern Java "hello world" app!

Re:I have an idea

[Anonymous Coward]

That's weird, my old crappy samsung tablet (android Jelly Bean) has 8GB internal storage. Default apps+some ebooks reader apps+some utility apps+retroarch leaves me with ~3.5GB free.

Re:I have an idea

[AmiMoJo]

You may have used it for selecting photos from another app. In any case, it's easy to fix.

Open settings and go into Apps. Find Photos and disable it, then optionally uninstall updates.

Re:I have an idea

[borl]

I too have a 16GB Samsung flagship phone from a few years ago, which was unmodified and permanently full. I did a factory reset and had almost the same situation you describe, a few measly GB of free space.

I got annoyed, wiped and installed LineageOS.

I now have 12GB free, and that's after starting to reinstall most of the apps I use.

What the actual fuck, Samsung?!

Re:I have an idea

[Anonymous Coward]

They should fine then $1 for every GB they wasted on people's phones with this garbage. Google photos is using 150MB on my phone and I've never opened the app. I've never even used that service in a browser. I don't use it at all. WHAT COULD IT POSSIBLY BE STORING?!

While I agree with you Google is better than most here. The manufacturers and carriers put more unneeded bloatware than anyone. There are at least a dozen completely worthless Samsung apps and their entire pointless app store that you can't get rid of unless you root. Then, of course, several things will stop working. Then all the carriers have to add their garbage, which also can't be removed without rooting. This entire situation of no longer actually owning the expensive hardware we buy is getting worse every cycle.

History repeats itself.

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like exactly what happened in the mid-late 90s, when MS did the same thing with Internet Explorer on Windows. I didn't agree with the bundling then, and I don't now either.

Google hasn't yet gotten to the level of skulduggery that Microsoft approached in the 90s/early 2000s with it's legendary abuse of monopoly power. I'm not really sure it's even possible to get to that level for Google, but I'm also not opposed to some Google smack-down either.

The bigger threat is likely Facebook. Google could be replaced tomorrow with something else, and it wouldn't much matter. There's little tying anyone to Google that couldn't just be walked away from relatively easily. Facebook on the other hand has most of the population hooked on FB like a junkie on heroin.

Re: Just pay your taxes Google and...

[Artem S. Tashkinov]

That's not Google's fault.

I am APK the great

[Anonymous Coward]

I am APK the great "LORD OF HOSTS", a.k.a. AlecStaar or Alexander Peter Kowalski.

I am the godlike creator of various GUI front-ends for other people's configuration files.

Calling people ne'er-do-wells or Jealous JOWIES is how I think I win every argument

When people state the truth about me I get really mad and accuse them of projecting which is something I do all the time.

Don't call me out on anything unless you are willing to prove you too can write some strings to a file programmatically

Spamming and being a general pain in the ass is what I do

Listen as I relive my glory days of being a college athlete in the early 80s

Bask in my greatness as I can do a ping as a non root user.

Watch as I whine about my work being flagged as malware by anti-virus software.

Witness my descent into madness

APK

Must be a slow day at the EU again

[Anonymous Coward]

As usual, they are making shit up - some perceived wrong. As someone has pointed out, don't like Google Stack of apps, download other ones. This does not affect any other phone manufacturers.

Lest we get to a Windows-N type scenario - "Yay! I have just installed Windows, now I will open a web browser, to download a web browser... bollocks."

Merit to have or not to have

[shuz]

The primary issue the EU is arguing is that Google uses a monopoly position to encourage or force hardware vendors to include as default certain features in Android OS. Other software monopolies have tried to solve this anti-competitive issue by giving a selection of competitive options, even if a preferred option is listed first or has advertising to suggest choosing the preferred option.

The Microsoft Windows anti-competitive EU (2009) and US(1998) case was this issue but also the fact that IE was baked into the operating system. That fundamentally the Internet Explorer browser was not an uninstallable core part of the operating system. It was found that it is somewhat OK to have software that was not uninstallable and included as long as choice was presented and the product was not default. The same ideas are being extended to any competitive service such as a search engine. It is worth noting that Microsoft didn't exactly play nice after the ruling and in 2013 was fined $732 Million. In all Microsoft paid about 3.4 billion in fines between 1998 and 2009.

The google search engine API might be baked into Android and not uninstallable. However competitive search engine and browser choices would be to need to be presented. My guess is that like Microsoft, Google won't be forced to change the google search bar functionality as it is baked into the Google search suite. However folks may in the future be presented with competitive search bar options such as Amazon or Microsoft. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out as surely Apple, Microsoft, Amazon and others have a key interest in the rulings only harming Google. But not harming so much that they are not able to continue using and gaining from the Android platform.

As others have said, the primary competition in the mobile smartphone market is far less open. Their market share and owning the hardware potentially being their only excuse.

The EU is working very hard to ruin its good will

[Anonymous Coward]

The perceived global win that the EU experienced with GDPR has clearly been a power grab for bending the world to their will. Good will is earned over time. It's a form of currency too. If you spend it, it takes time to recover the loss in the good will bank, so to speak. What the EU doesn't realize is that GDPR depleted the bank of good will to a point where it will take a decade to recover those losses. The EU is currently operating on a debt of good will, so the question is: How many fines will it take for Google (or another major company) to simply decide to say "no, we're not paying that fine the way you want us to" and then block all Internet traffic coming from the EU for the duration of time equal to the fine (i.e. they "pay" the EU in the form of an Internet block instead of cash)? The backlash against the EU leadership from EU citizens and businesses would be so swift, immediate, and massively overwhelming that the EU would have no choice but to backpedal on their decision within hours or face riots in their cities and streets.

Misunderstanding here...

[Anonymous Coward]

I have previously worked as a lawyer dealing with the compliance of IT systems (I now work in another area). So I might be coming at this from a different angle to some other people, but nevertheless, let me explain:
1. The issue with Google is that whilst their product is nominally opensource, for use they effectively force companies selling hardware which runs their "platform" to provide a monitization route for them, and requires end users to enter into an agreement with them, in order to allow then to use the device.
2. By refusing to allow hardware vendors to modify the stack in any way (and remove specific google products and services whilst retaining others) they are restricting the hardware vendors from selling platforms to customers to customer specification.
3. If a customer buys hardware from a specific vendor, then it is reasonable for that specific vendor to do whatever they like to tie the product to their other products (say Samsung insisting on using samsung software, or Apple insisting you use Apple software) because the principle contract is effectively with Samsung or Apple, via the reseller.
4. Thus what you have is a non-involved party, requiring that hardware vendors require users to enter a contract with the uninvolved party them via alternative (coercive) means with the hardware vendor. That is the nub of the anti-competitive behaviour.
5. Apple cannot be "anti-competitive" in selling their own product set up how they want, because it's inherently their own product. If they were to begin licensing IOS to other hardware manufacturers, then behaviour limiting the licensee from amending IOS would (arguably) be anti competitive.

Perhaps a nitpick, but yes they do, and much more

[raymorris]

> You wanna use our app store, you gotta install our search.
> Apple doesn't do that.

Actually if you want to use Apple's app store, you DO have to have their search. Also their voice assistant, their messaging app, their camera app, their email app, their news app, their hardware ...

You can't get a phone with Apple's app store installed unless it also has 36 other Apple apps bundled too.

Google says "our app store is part of our bundle of five or six apps". Apple bundles 37 apps with its app store. So Apple does the same thing, times six.

European Commission Shills...

[Anonymous Coward]

Margrethe Vestager is a shill acting for Apple and Microsoft.

I remember that in France, when Chirac was still president, that Microsoft lobbied to make a "French Google", so France would be independent from the US, with the help of... Microsoft.

Some companies are lobbying in Europe for a long time. I don't know if I should consider Google naive in this regard, but they seems to have well organized enemies.

For some eurocrats, it is also a mean to recover what they consider lost taxes.. though nobody want to harmonize taxation in the EU, which would solve this very problem..

No more Google

[Anonymous Coward]

Ditched my Android for Iphone yesterday. I use gmail and don't want google to have access to my phone related data. Want to keep both seperate.

Socialism at its finest.

[Anonymous Coward]

Google works for decades to creat innovations.

E.U. do nothing leaders pass laws to confiscate BILLIONS $$$ from actual producers.

Wealth Transfer, no masks, no guns...

Just pour your money into these sacks, and hand it all over.

Before they allow themselves to be robbed, they should close dpwn everything they do in E.U., block EU searches, and abandon the E.U. to it's regrettable fate with the collapse of NATO.

USA can not afford to be the world police force any longer.

EU ain't getting SQUAT.

$$$$ Google will transfer all wealth away from government grabbers.

Some tiny off shore bank is about to get huge deposts ! $$

Re:Socialism at its finest.

[Anne Thwacks]

We, the EU citizens, have laws for our protection, in the same way you Americans have guns for yours.

We are quite happy to have our governments fine Google for raping our privacy and stuffing our phones with bloatware, thanks very much. You can have your school massacres.

Re:Socialism at its finest.

[yuvcifjt]

lol, superb reply!
Wish I had mod points!

I'm personally shocked people aren't happy about this anti-trust lawsuit against Google - it's a long time coming, so about bloody time!

Google is the biggest spyware in the world, and people are happy to be raped and used by them... but if Facebook do it, they're beaten down by governments, the media, and even nerds?!

Re:Socialism at its finest.

[DaFallus]

On what facts are you basing your assumption that the person you're replying to is American? Was it their complete lack of understanding of what socialism is, or the general disconnect from reality?

Re:Socialism at its finest.

[tbannist]

Google is the biggest spyware in the world, and people are happy to be raped and used by them...

Careful there big boy, it's not rape when it's consensual. Many people are happy to trade usage information and view ads for free services. You are free to try and convince them that the trade is inequitable, but you can't decide that for them.

Re:Socialism at its finest.

[Anonymous Coward]

You gladly cram all of your useless data into Google phones. Your disgusting and completely unconnected hyperbole doesn't ingratiate your warped opinion with anyone.

Re:Socialism at its finest.

[Anonymous Coward]

We, the EU citizens, have laws for our protection, in the same way you Americans have guns for yours.

So you're telling us that the EU laws don't work very well, and that crazy people routinely exploit the system? Is that what you mean by "in the same way"? Or are you using a different version of English than the rest of the world.

By the way, how well do those laws protect the Norwegians from Polar Bears? Or do you also allow guns for protection? Perhaps you simply fill the bear's mouth with so many pages of printed regulations that it can no longer eat you?

Unfortunately

[k2r]

we don’t do supernovae on Slashdot.

Unfair comparison with Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple is not forcing anything on third parties. They sell a complete product and don't license their software. Also, Android is a de facto monopoly whereas iOS isn't. Google is being targetted because they're taking advantage of their play store being the most widely used to strongarm OEMs into installing their rubbish apps.

EU regulators need to learn...

[Dracos]

What a walled garden is, how they're constructed, and why. Android and iOS are both walled gardens, and even Microsoft is attempting to make Windows a walled garden.

All garden walls crumble; just look at IBM and AOL.

Re:Perhaps a nitpick, but yes they do, and much mo

[ceoyoyo]

You as an individual have to, yes. Antitrust law doesn't care about you.

You as a company do not. If you build a phone you actually can use Darwin, but you can't use any of Apple's apps, their GUI, or their store. They won't force you to use any of them either.

Re:We withdrew from the Paris agreement

[Bradac_55]

You really need to look up what that actually means ...

Who is this for? Not the consumer.

[RhettLivingston]

I've had a Samsung during the S5 generation and hated that I couldn't get rid of their crap apps and put Google apps on. I now have a Pixel XL, and it is much nicer without the Samsung junk. I guess I could have rooted the Samsung and put Google on, but why should I have to do that?

Google started forcing the manufacturers to be more standard because Android is not a monopoly - competition with Apple forced it. In terms of what matters, profit, not gross, Apple is so far out in front that Android could be considered as always fighting for survival. Apple is always a threat. Android badly needed a more unified front and Google has been answering that need.

At this point, bringing back the fragmentation would either kill the gains that Android has made so that Apple never has a true competitor or force Google to just go heavy into the phone business themselves and encourage the other Android suppliers to just go their own way. Neither of those outcomes would be good for the consumer.

Re: Just pay your taxes Google and...

[bn-7bc]

You are righ, but that is of littele confort to you ore anyone else that gets hit by an exploit known since 2105,I admit Apple gas not been perfect n this respect eiter, but the generaly have a better track record when it comes to updates that many manufacturors using Android. Are apples app store polecies to restrictive? Frankly I fon’t know enugh about it to offer an opinion

Sorry if I went ot here, that was not my intent

Re:We withdrew from the Paris agreement

[FaxeTheCat]

I did. https://www.google.com/search?...

Re:Perhaps a nitpick, but yes they do, and much mo

[TheFakeTimCook]

> You wanna use our app store, you gotta install our search.
> Apple doesn't do that.

Actually if you want to use Apple's app store, you DO have to have their search. Also their voice assistant, their messaging app, their camera app, their email app, their news app, their hardware ...

You can't get a phone with Apple's app store installed unless it also has 36 other Apple apps bundled too.

Google says "our app store is part of our bundle of five or six apps". Apple bundles 37 apps with its app store. So Apple does the same thing, times six.

Another stupid Apple Hater.

You can divest your Apple iOS Device of ANY Unwanted Apple Apps. Have been able to do so for some time now.

Do try to keep up, Hater:

https://www.imore.com/how-dele...

Billion fine

[manu0601]

Given the current mindset in EU meetings, a billion could be better spent bargaining with member states to not enforce EU decisions.

Re:Perhaps a nitpick, but yes they do, and much mo

[LynnwoodRooster]

Can you use a browser engine other than WebKit? Can you use OK Google as the default voice assistant?

They need more regulation.

[Anonymous Coward]

They need more regulation.

The end-user can hide them on any platform

[raymorris]

Yes, the end user can hide the icon, on any platform.
That's not what this is about. It's about you can't buy or sell a new phone with the app store installed unless it also has other apps installed.

Google requires that any phones shipped with its app store also ship with several of Google's apps, and icons for a few more, which aren't actually installed.

Apple requires any phone using its app store to come with 37 Apple apps pre-installed.

Unlike microsoft

[fred6666]

Google is giving Android away for free. I guess google could offer two versions of Android. A paid one, and a free, search supported one.

Re:We withdrew from the Paris agreement

[LesFerg]

Yes... but were you forced to use Google for that?

Meanwhile, Apple dominates profits

[Anonymous Coward]

To say that Android has a monopoly on smartphones is ludicrous. They may have 3 times the units, but Apple has four times the profit because they control the market and leave the crumbs for Android.

Apple continues to dominate the smartphone profit pool - March 2018

New eula

[Anonymous Coward]

Do they still call it a eula? If so, amend it to ban the use of their OS in the EU.

No they don't have the right

[aepervius]

The practice of OS forced bundling and the practice of using one's OS to force lower competition in other non-OS market in favor of one's product is exactely what brought microsoft in hot water. If Android was not an OS sold/licensed/used by other carrier, but only by google like iphone they would be safe. But it isn't and as a monopoly on OS sold to phone carrier, they are not allowed to use that monopoly to enforce their own non-OS app like "maps", or use their OS to gain and force their "map" app over competitive "map" app. This is the SAME SHIT microsoft was stomped upon. And yes there was an apple equivalent at the time the OS Mac were using. Exact same situation god dammit. I am getting old and crotchety to see people of younger generation know-it-all falling into the same trap.

Re:Perhaps a nitpick, but yes they do, and much mo

[Anonymous Coward]

I can disable any app on my android phone too. If thats good enough for apple thats good enough for android. Obviously it isn't otherwise removing all shortcuts would have been good enough to excuse microshaft during the height of the internet exploder era.

Stupidty was never a valid argument.

[Anonymous Coward]

And never will be.
An 80 year old can install Gentoo stage 1 on a headless box at the other side of the country too, if he WANTS to.
If he had to... he would.
Lazy fucks that have the audacitymof callig themselves humans, have just learned, that they can live a walking daze, and have everyone around them serve them and adapt ALL the things to their wishes, simply by playing stupid and acting like that is not only somehow cool, but that they are entitled to it.

100% of the idiotic retarded Idiocracy-level bullshit we have to put up with in IT today, are because of your precise cancer of a non-argument

It needs to die. Right here. Right now.
You will people ... just do it ... anyway.

What do you have to do, that is so pressing?

[Anonymous Coward]

Scrolling through page 1001 of Reddit? Watching another cat video?
Bickering about politics?
Slaving away at an utterly pointless job to give some fatcst an utterly pointless stack of profit money?

Don't act like the average person even has a life anymore. They could just not exist, and it would mean absolutely nothing for humanity, and actually even improve the plante.

Lol, who even still uses Windows?

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously, we moved to Linux a decade ago.
Even the retards moved to macOS or stopped using real computers.
The only ones still bearing the insanity that os Windows 10, are actual, *literal* livestock. (Not thar Apple/Google/Facebook/Mozilla/Amazon/Gnome users aren't. And don't get your hopes up, KDE users, because KDE sucks just as much. Only differently so.)

EU have to reconsider being redacted...

[pubwvj]

The EU governments don't get it.
Google, Wiki and the Internet in general can just forget the EU.
EU citizens will tunnel out of the EU through VPN and other holes.
Meanwhile EU businesses will suffer and fail.
European countries have done this sort of thing before.
The result has always been a brain drain that hurt Europe.
Keep making stupid mistakes, EU. We don't mind.

OK Then---

[Anonymous Coward]

Samsung - Go write your own OS and create your own app store
HTC- Go write your own OS, create your own app store

At some point this EU anti-trust crap is just that. I do believe that as a consumer that I should be able to REMOVE all of the apps I want from my phone. I also believe I should be able to move on from the phones default apps. Google, for the most part, lets users do that with Android. Having default apps installed to make the device functional OOB and keep a form of a standard is NOT a bad thing. Having some sort of modestly regulated app store is NOT a bad thing. That said having the ability to have alternative app stores well...lets ask Apple....do you have those? Hey EU....let's stop shooting the company who is at least offering choice to its customers.

About Time

[Anonymous Coward]

Glad to hear that the EU is still a democracy and its government is willing to stand up to greedy sociopaths.

Wish we had some of that here in the US.