Slashdot Mirror
EU Regulators Fine Google Record $5 Billion in Android Case (reuters.com)
The European Union hit Alphabet's Google with a record antitrust fine of $5.06 billion on Monday, a decision that could loosen the company's grip on its biggest growth engine: mobile phones. From a report:The European Commission ordered Google to end the illegal conduct within 90 days or face additional penalties of up to 5 percent of parent Alphabet's average daily worldwide turnover. The EU enforcer also dismissed Google's arguments citing Apple as a competitor to Android devices, saying the iPhone maker does not sufficiently constrain Google because of its higher prices and switching costs for users. The European Commission finding is the most consequential decision made in its eight-year antitrust battle with Google. The fine significantly outstrips the $2.8B charge Brussels imposed on the company last year for favoring its own site in comparison shopping searches. The decision takes aim at a core part of Google's business strategy over the past decade, outlawing restrictions on its Android operating system that allegedly entrenched Google's dominance in online search at a time when consumers were moving from desktop to mobile devices. Android is the operating system used in more than 80 per cent of the world's smartphones and is vital to the group's future revenues as more users rely on mobile gadgets for search services. Google has denied wrongdoing.
The European Commission took issues with the following practices: In particular, Google:
1. has required manufacturers to pre-install the Google Search app and browser app (Chrome), as a condition for licensing Google's app store (the Play Store);
2. made payments to certain large manufacturers and mobile network operators on condition that they exclusively pre-installed the Google Search app on their devices;
and 3. has prevented manufacturers wishing to pre-install Google apps from selling even a single smart mobile device running on alternative versions of Android that were not approved by Google (so-called "Android forks"). Update: Google has announced that it would be appealing against the record fine. In a statement, the company said, "Android has created more choice for everyone, not less. A vibrant ecosystem, rapid innovation and lower prices are classic hallmarks of robust competition. We will appeal the Commission's decision."
Update 2: In a blog post, Sundar Pichai, CEO of Google, said, the European Commission's decision ignores and misses several facts. He wrote: Today, the European Commission issued a competition decision against Android, and its business model. The decision ignores the fact that Android phones compete with iOS phones, something that 89 percent of respondents to the Commission's own market survey confirmed. It also misses just how much choice Android provides to thousands of phone makers and mobile network operators who build and sell Android devices; to millions of app developers around the world who have built their businesses with Android; and billions of consumers who can now afford and use cutting-edge Android smartphones. Today, because of Android, there are more than 24,000 devices, at every price point, from more than 1,300 different brands, including Dutch, Finnish, French, German, Hungarian, Italian, Latvian, Polish, Romanian, Spanish and Swedish phone makers.
[...] The free distribution of the Android platform, and of Google's suite of applications, is not only efficient for phone makers and operators -- it's of huge benefit for developers and consumers. If phone makers and mobile network operators couldn't include our apps on their wide range of devices, it would upset the balance of the Android ecosystem. So far, the Android business model has meant that we haven't had to charge phone makers for our technology, or depend on a tightly controlled distribution model. [...] Rapid innovation, wide choice, and falling prices are classic hallmarks of robust competition and Android has enabled all of them. Today's decision rejects the business model that supports Android, which has created more choice for everyone, not less. We intend to appeal. Update 3: The French government said on Wednesday that it welcomes the record fine imposed on Google by European Union regulators, with a government spokesman describing it as an "excellent decision."
A number of companies, and startups that compete with Google have weighed in on the development. Open Markets Institute Executive Director Barry Lynn, said, "We hope U.S. enforcers of competition law will learn from and follow this example in both of these cases." Consumer Watchdog Director John Simpson, said, "The U.S. Federal Trade Commission or Department of Justice should also act to end Google's monopolistic abuses, instead of letting the Europeans be the only cop on the antitrust beat." Yelp SVP Public Policy Luther Lowe, said, "The European Commission's ruling of additional illegal conduct by Google on smartphones is another important step in restoring competition, innovation and consumer welfare in the digital economy; the EU must ensure complete compliance from a recalcitrant Google and the U.S. must take action to provide American consumers with similar protections."
Elevation Partners' Roger McNamee, said, Commissioner Vestager's ruling today not only enhances competition and investment opportunities in Europe, but it will have a cascading effect into U.S. markets, where antitrust enforcers have so far failed to take meaningful action." Privacy startup Disconnect CEO Casey Oppenheim, said, "Other players in the digital ecosystem may finally be able to fairly compete with Google, giving meaningful choice to consumers."
The European Commission took issues with the following practices: In particular, Google:
1. has required manufacturers to pre-install the Google Search app and browser app (Chrome), as a condition for licensing Google's app store (the Play Store);
2. made payments to certain large manufacturers and mobile network operators on condition that they exclusively pre-installed the Google Search app on their devices;
and 3. has prevented manufacturers wishing to pre-install Google apps from selling even a single smart mobile device running on alternative versions of Android that were not approved by Google (so-called "Android forks"). Update: Google has announced that it would be appealing against the record fine. In a statement, the company said, "Android has created more choice for everyone, not less. A vibrant ecosystem, rapid innovation and lower prices are classic hallmarks of robust competition. We will appeal the Commission's decision."
Update 2: In a blog post, Sundar Pichai, CEO of Google, said, the European Commission's decision ignores and misses several facts. He wrote: Today, the European Commission issued a competition decision against Android, and its business model. The decision ignores the fact that Android phones compete with iOS phones, something that 89 percent of respondents to the Commission's own market survey confirmed. It also misses just how much choice Android provides to thousands of phone makers and mobile network operators who build and sell Android devices; to millions of app developers around the world who have built their businesses with Android; and billions of consumers who can now afford and use cutting-edge Android smartphones. Today, because of Android, there are more than 24,000 devices, at every price point, from more than 1,300 different brands, including Dutch, Finnish, French, German, Hungarian, Italian, Latvian, Polish, Romanian, Spanish and Swedish phone makers.
[...] The free distribution of the Android platform, and of Google's suite of applications, is not only efficient for phone makers and operators -- it's of huge benefit for developers and consumers. If phone makers and mobile network operators couldn't include our apps on their wide range of devices, it would upset the balance of the Android ecosystem. So far, the Android business model has meant that we haven't had to charge phone makers for our technology, or depend on a tightly controlled distribution model. [...] Rapid innovation, wide choice, and falling prices are classic hallmarks of robust competition and Android has enabled all of them. Today's decision rejects the business model that supports Android, which has created more choice for everyone, not less. We intend to appeal. Update 3: The French government said on Wednesday that it welcomes the record fine imposed on Google by European Union regulators, with a government spokesman describing it as an "excellent decision."
A number of companies, and startups that compete with Google have weighed in on the development. Open Markets Institute Executive Director Barry Lynn, said, "We hope U.S. enforcers of competition law will learn from and follow this example in both of these cases." Consumer Watchdog Director John Simpson, said, "The U.S. Federal Trade Commission or Department of Justice should also act to end Google's monopolistic abuses, instead of letting the Europeans be the only cop on the antitrust beat." Yelp SVP Public Policy Luther Lowe, said, "The European Commission's ruling of additional illegal conduct by Google on smartphones is another important step in restoring competition, innovation and consumer welfare in the digital economy; the EU must ensure complete compliance from a recalcitrant Google and the U.S. must take action to provide American consumers with similar protections."
Elevation Partners' Roger McNamee, said, Commissioner Vestager's ruling today not only enhances competition and investment opportunities in Europe, but it will have a cascading effect into U.S. markets, where antitrust enforcers have so far failed to take meaningful action." Privacy startup Disconnect CEO Casey Oppenheim, said, "Other players in the digital ecosystem may finally be able to fairly compete with Google, giving meaningful choice to consumers."
in the court room.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Most of Google's cash is in Ireland. The repoman will simply force the bank to hand over the money.
google is an EU based company, I imagine they could just freeze their finances and shut them down.
Just 8 years! Anyway itâ(TM)s more of monopoly tax, i.e. âoeGoogle, you can screw EU citizens further, hereâ(TM)s the price.â
Given that would wipe out Irelands position as european tech darling ireland probably wouldn't allow it or would procrastinate long enough for google to withdraw the funds.
I'm normally all for fining the crap out of mega-corps which show nothing but contempt for the rules, but I don't get this.
The truth is that people are choosing Google because their competitors are shit, or in the case of Apple even worse. What's the point here, Google are supposed to provide shit services that nobody wants to use so their competitors can prosper?
There is literally nothing that prevents anyone from setting up competing services other than the facts that it would be an insane amount of work and incredibly expensive, but that's not Google's problem. Android is even mostly open source, any would be competitors are free to just blatantly copy it. All they have to do is provide their own store, which one would imagine wouldn't be too hard. The hard part is to get people to use it in any significant number, but again, that's not Google's problem as long as they don't blatantly try to prevent it - which they aren't. Saying "you can't use our apps if you do that" doesn't cut it, you're still free to provide your own, or use someone else's. Making your alternatives competitive and getting people to use them are your problems, not Google's.
Google are where they are because they've built a solid reputation with consumers, not because they did something shady.
*bureaucrats
"Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
I'm so tired of this anti-EU bullshit. You really need to find a new scapegoat for the failure of your local politicians.
In order for the EU to remove power from any national government, besaid national government would first have to agree with this or, second, there needs to be an unanimous vote by all member states to remove that power.
Any power that is currently not in the hands of national governments and can be overruled by directives is not in their hands because all governments of all member states previously voted to take away that power and give it to the EU to the mutual benefit of all member states. What's even worse about posts like yours is that the people who criticize the EU now for not being democratic enough are exactly the same people who in the past ensured that the EU has this structure, most notably the UK, whose main goal has always been to make the European Parliament as weak as possible, prevent a EU wide defence structure, not having a EU president, etc. The European Parliament is relatively powerless and commissioners appointed by the governments of member states (and voted for by European Parliament, which directly represents all EU citizens) have a relatively high amount of power because member countries wanted to make sure that the European Parliament has less to say than national parliaments.
And what's bizarre about complaining about the monopoly of search engines so late? By design, the commissions mostly become active in such matters after the complaints have reached national level and the whole process takes time.
In a nutshell, quit those silly complaints about the EU. Rather complain about the local politicians like Margaret Thatcher who designed it that way and opt for local politicians that want to give the EU Parliament more power. Remember, the EU parliament is directly voted for by the citizens of the member states.
France uses the winning to restart its Thomson TO 2019 production line. AZERTY keyboard with a new light pen.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
This is not a question of technology, and the EU has a long history of protecting consumers. The last sentence shows you don't understand how the EU works, which makes your desire to criticise it baffling.
Yes - people misunderstanding what the EU is and what it is doing.
Like you seem to be doing.
Fired? More like basement dude who's never had a job.
Perhaps you didn't manage to read even the summary? The $5 billion is just the start; [...] end the illegal conduct within 90 days or face additional penalties of up to 5 percent of parent Alphabetâ(TM)s average daily worldwide turnover. Note that that's turnover, not profit, and moreover it's worldwide turnover, not EU turnover. Even Google would feel that.
Here's a clearer summary of what Google have been up to as reported by The Guardian.
EU Competition commissioner Margrethe Vestager says:
Google required manufacturers to pre-install the Google search and browser apps on Android phones, otherwise they wouldnâ(TM)t be allowed to use Google Play (its app service).
Google paid manufacturers and network operators to make sure that only the Google search app was installed on devices.
Google has restricted the development of competing mobile phone operating systems, which could have provided a platform for rival search engines.
Google has used Android as a vehicle to cement its dominance as a search engine.
These practices have denied rivals a chance to innovate and to compete on the merits.
They have denied European consumers the benefit of effective competition in the very important mobile sphere.
And this is illegal under EU antitrust rules.
Todayâ(TM)s ruling states:
Google has prevented device manufacturers from using any alternative version of Android that was not approved by Google (Android forks).
In order to be able to pre-install on their devices Googleâ(TM)s proprietary apps, including the Play Store and Google Search, manufacturers had to commit not to develop or sell even a single device running on an Android fork.
The Commission found that this conduct was abusive as of 2011, which is the date Google became dominant in the market for app stores for the Android mobile operating system.
That would be a law for the people, by the people. The US population would never allow that to happen.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
If google withdraws their funds they would be hit with tax bills that would make that fine look like pocket change. They are in Ireland for a reason!
3. has prevented manufacturers wishing to pre-install Google apps from selling even a single smart mobile device running on alternative versions of Android that were not approved by Google (so-called "Android forks").
I'll be interested to see how this affects Google's newest decision to "disallow" google apps from being installed on custom ROMs without jumping through hoops, or, more boradly, the blocks which have been in place for ages preventing certain apps (like Netflix) being installed on unapproved devices.
Obviously, if they refuse, the EU will just let this slide and give them a slap on the wrist and tell Google to never ever do something like that again... ...the same that happens with people that refuse to pay fines or taxes.
Apple will not be next because all the middle aged politicians have iPhones, and they buy it to their wives and kids, and they see it as the next best thing after sliced bread.
Because Apple, as all the Android fans on /. are quick to point out, is non-dominant also-ran in the phone market. Just going by sales numbers alone, there is no anti-trust case to be made against Apple.
Weird. Slashdot ate my link tag. That's never happened before. Here's my [citation needed]: https://www.statista.com/stati...
THAT in turn would make Ireland an accomplice and the EU would squeeze the Irish dry. I kinda doubt they love Google enough to foot their bill.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Sucks to be on the receiving end, no?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Failing? The rest of the planet wishes they'd fail like us.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I have such a Deja Vu with respects to this case and the Microsoft anti-trust case. There it was browser, here it is search, but the methods are so similar.
Until today I thought Google might be of a different breed than Microsoft. I stand corrected.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
So what happens if google just refuses to pay?
Nice business you have here. Pity if something happened to it.
Google has money. The EU wants money and has guns. The EU will find whatever excuse needed to keep the money coming in.
Not sure why this was modded as trolling.
Because when you get down to it, it's government monopoly on legalized violence (guns) that ultimately is the power behind all government decisions, regulations, and laws.
Period.
Don't think so?
Stop paying your taxes - under any government.
Completely ignore all notices, subpoenas, court summons. Whatever.
Someone shows up without guns to try to convince you nicely to pay your taxes? Ignore them, too.
Eventually, all governments will send out the guys with guns and haul you away in chains, or shoot you if you resist.
Because if they didn't, the government they represent would have no power at all.
More like a troll with no agenda, who is out to get reactions like yours 'for teh lulz'.
Apple won't be next because they're a small player with their 20% market share compared to Android.
A reason could be that Apple has a market share of about 20% and Android one of about 80%.
In other words, I doubt the EU would go after Google if Android didn't represent 4/5 of the total market. You might have noticed that Microsoft was under fire for its position in the Desktop OS and Browser market, but nobody talked about their (not in any way different) practices in the mobile branch.
You might see a pattern.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I have this hypothesis that whenever someone feels the urge to declare what he has to say as "facts", it's anything but facts.
Thanks for supporting my hypothesis.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
It doesn't matter Google's supposed intentions, intentionally extending one monopoly to try to gain or maintain another monopoly is almost universally illegal. Trying to bring up China piracy stores as some sort of proof of competition is patently absurd. Simply put, nothing that Google has done with their pushing of terms of including the Google Play Store has meaningfully reduced fragmentation of Android version fragmentation or vendor modification. More generally, paying manufacturers to only install your search app is incredibly scummy and precisely the same kind of bullshit that Microsoft got busted over with Internet Explorer--in Microsoft's case it was a threat of not offering OEMs discounts on Windows.
Get back to me when Google meaningfully actually fixes the mess that is Android on smartphones, tablets, and tv boxes. They've literally had over five years with at least that long where it's been a known problem of Android fragmentation. Meanwhile, all Android One phones (which started in 2014) have different generations with different max supported OSs. People used to condemn MS for dropping support on x86 CPUs with Windows. There was the whole fuss about Windows 7 getting updates require SSE2. The comparative situation with Android OS is absolutely insane.
No, this is a way to force American companies who do business in EU to follow EU law. Unlike USA, where companies get a slap on the wrist for any wrongdoings and happily continue breaking the law, EU can actually apply leverage that works.
They don't have to pay, and they don't have to comply. They can just pack up and leave the EU market forever.
It's about Google's requirements that support their search dominance, not about the choice of the market. If they permitted due competition and still was the overwhelming free market choice, they'd be in no trouble whatsoever.
Oh yeah, could it be (drumroll) having OEM computer manufacturers install Internet Explorer by default without a way to effectively remove it? It's ironic what's happened to IE/Edge these days though. :)
We'll make great pets
I hope they do leave the EU market, you can have your choice of "not a monopoly iPhone" or some 3rd rate piece of shit. At least until the EU fines Apple for being a US Company next time they need some fast cash.
The voters of the EU wouldn't give a shit about it and would just use Bing, Yandex, or whatever instead. Just because people are using free adware product X, this doesn't mean that they give a shit about X. That's a lesson that those adware companies really need to learn unless they want to end up like Myspace and Geocities in the long run.
https://restoreprivacy.com/goo...
I've always felt it unethical to use the products of a company that makes money from advertising https://www.youtube.com/watch?... but this finding has really woken me up - this kind of behavior is why I started to boycott Microsoft decades ago
Replacing GMail is gonna be a hassle and take a long time because I'm not using an independent domain. Weaning myself off YouTube is gonna super difficult.
The EU has no tech industry ... because EU businesses have to follow EU laws. I don't think this is a good thing. But.
US companies can't just side-step local laws by claiming they are based outside the EU. They have got away with it for several years, and the EU is only now finally responsing.
Follow the law, or stop doing business with the EU. Your choice.
Because most countries use representative democracy. And if you cannot be bothered to understand that, you shouldn't even be allowed to vote.
--
The world is divided in two categories:
those with a loaded gun and those who dig. You dig.
Your democratically elected government at the time made this choice, as was the choice of your democratically elected government whether to leave the EU and/or whether there should have been a referendum about it or not.
In your case the choice to join the Maastricht Treaty without a referendum was made by the conservative government of Sir John Major, which also negotiated important aspects of the treaty for the UK.
You know, it's not as if this information is kind of secret, you can look it up yourself next time.
Wow. Now I understand Brexit. EU member countries are not sovereign.
The issue is not having the best, most popular product. It's forced bundling and cross-promotion.
With Android you need to agree to make Google the default and only search engine on the phone if you want the Play Store. Since consumers want the play store manufacturers can't supply any other search engines. Amazon tried its own app store but outside its own devices it mostly failed, as did most Amazon devices except their cheap tablets.
Chinese manufacturers can't ship Play or Google search anyway because they are blocked in China. Their international models have them though.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Google has subsidies in most (all?) EU countries so legal measures can be taken against them, up to and including sending the bailiffs in.
Google makes enough money in the EU to make paying the fine preferable to withdrawing from the market.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
As the UK is discovering the idea of being "free" at all costs is pretty dumb. If you want to be prosperous, if you want to trade, you are going to have to agree common rules. Some you might not like.
No county is an economic island, even the ones that are physical islands. And the UK isn't even that.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
I regularly try other search engines and none has come close to Google's breadth and coverage by a very long shot.
In short, this fine is just absurd and I'm not sure what is that the EU really wants from Google. Money?
They want to fix your first assertion. This is similar to the anti-trust case against Microsoft bundling internet explorer in Windows. It's not about Android OS competition. It's about search.
I've been developing Android devices for many years and can tell you from first hand experience, Google has been getting away with a lot of anti-competitive practices and favoritism. Unless you are one of the top 5 brands in the world, they simply will not talk to you. No matter how hard you try or show willingness to pay, they will not "certify" Android devices from anyone but their close circle of suppliers, with whom they have very complex agreements. This is why a very high percentage of devices are sold without the Play store pre-installed. It also blocks other things from working, such as full support for the DRM used by Netflix, HBO, and many other VOD apps. You are given the freedom of choice to choose any brand, as long as it is the ones they allow you to choose from.
Because Apple, as all the Android fans on /. are quick to point out, is non-dominant also-ran in the phone market. Just going by sales numbers alone, there is no anti-trust case to be made against Apple.
Kinda weird then, that the Android fans spend their time freaking out and going crazy about that also-ran company.
To add insult to injury for those poor iPhone users, Androoid has the best malware, both pre-installed and from the Google play store.
But seriously, I envision that Android fans also drive Toyota Corollas, after all they are the most popular car in the world. Just like their Android phones.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
More than the average US state, they are. But you can't have your cake and eat it, too, either you're a union or you go solo. Or you can of course do what Poland, Hungary and some others try now, leech off the EU when there's grants to be had but when it's time to stand together during a problem, it's everyone for himself.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Actually Android follows the Philosophy of Palm Treo, open source OS with free customization and without voiding the warranty. Seems like since the past 5 years this is less and less apparent. What Google says is different from what we use. None of the Android OS is Customizable, cant move apps from device storage to External storage. Cant free up space easily with low storage devices. All one thing is that Users are forced to Use what Google is offering.
Except you prize clown - signing maastricht was NOT in the conservative party manifesto so the people had no idea this was going to happen if they voted for them.
Gotta keep those lush social programs going while minimizing the threat of a taxpayer revolt.
I have a quite similar hypothesis concerning the use of the word "proof"...
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
So what happens if google just refuses to pay?
Then the EU will sortie its massive military forces to...
Oops - those forces that happen to be largely American.
I just want a phone I can use, not one that uses me.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
They do permit competition. Just without the Play store. Amazon is fine with that. Multiple phone vendors are fine with that. Damn near any smartphone company that avoids having to write an entire OS from scratch because they get Android for free is fine with that.
I think you haven't understood the summary:
The objection is about forcing the install of Google Search in Android phones as a condition for being able to use Google Play (the app store) NOT about Google Search being available or installed by default in Android phones or Google being dominant in the search market.
The objections about the forks thing is that Google forbids brands who want to sell official (with Play store and other Google apps and services) Android devices to also sell devices with an Android fork. I don't know how strongly that is enforced but Google requires your company to sign that if it wants to release any Android devices with Google services/apps.
Anyway, I'm not sure the EU decision is the right one. I was just pointing out things aren't as you said.
Trump just complains about the pipeline because he wants to sell American gas in Europe. With that pipeline the price is too low for that.
And this pipeline is an old project, from a time where the US was also in good terms with Russia. And I am not aware of Russia meddling much with German affairs.
Also Russian has was already exported to Germany during the cold war, it's nothing new. That income is also something that Russia needs, stopping it from too much aggression. Trade relations to ensure peace were also a US strategy until short ago.
I guess most countries would prefer a trading system where their concerns and goals actually matter.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
No one has any rights, natural or not under any regime, Any such rights are simply an agreement protected by violence. Private property? Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? All just protected by implied violence (at least until some religions god(s) comes down and takes matters into their own hands.)
And, these agreements are also the reason human society can function at all. Now, which of these agreements are the best? Unclear - what we go with is usually the one that one can convince most people to go with.
I think the following things are being confused mainly:
- the play store
- google search
- android
A blog I run for the wealth
When Apple gets 80% market share in, well, anything, this might actually matter.
Moreover, I'll use all faith I have left in humanity.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Google and Microsoft need to insist that they aren't monopolies.
A 20% market share of 100% Apple manufactured phones vs 80% market share for Android spread across dozens of manufacturers, none of which can claim 20% of the market or anything close to Apple's profits. You're comparing Apples to Oreos and coming up with D'oh.
Apple is the sole provider of the operating system for Apple phones. Apple does not allow other people to manufacture iPhones, does not allow other App stores, does not allow other web browsers (They still have to use Safari's engine, so they're mostly skins). Apple conspired with book publishers to fix prices on ebooks. Apple is a monopoly, by every definition, and abuses it.
So allowing a democratic referendum on returning national powers is equivalent to signing away national power without consulting the people is it? Exactly what is it you're smoking?
There are no alternatives because Googles abused its power.
And just because there are alternatives does not mean that Google is not abusing its power.
If you look up the discussions that where already done about the subject, you just need to replace Microsoft with Google and you will have the same excuses that there are alternatives, so it isn't a monopoly.
And making it less competiative? As in "It will have more competition? Well, that is the point of it.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
Amazon Fire is an example of a fork that is following Google's rules and has been at least somewhat successful.
Actually, the 5B is also a way to make Google pay for the taxes they didn't.
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
France uses the winning to restart its Thomson TO 2019 production line
I head the new name is actually Minitel 2019.
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
If you look at europa.eu, the EU definitely goes after US companies with a vengence. Chinese and European companies are rarely dragged into the kangaroo courts. It would be good if they cleaned their own house first, and toned down the xenophobic jingoism a tad.
Indeed. And GDPR is another good example at that.
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
What happens to any company that refuses to pay government fines after losing an appeal or not appealing it in the first place, i.e they start seizing Google's european assets and preventing them from doing business in the region. They've got a bunch of big datacenters and loads of money in particularly Ireland so it's obvious they can seize the fine's worth in assets and then some.
"Why should I want to make anything up? Life's bad enough as it is without wanting to invent any more of it."
I live in Belgiu. Azerty is the standard. It is terrible if you do anything in IT. Only when I started using qwerty did I understand WHY a '/' was searching down and '?' was searching up.
The thging is that the Belgian Azerty keyboard is not the same as the French one. So when I still used an azert keyboard, I would have at the office a Belgiun one, but the portable would not be produced in high enough numbers, so that would be a French one.
Now I use qwerty since 20 years. No more people who are able to use my work PC when I am not in. One company had such a stupid IT person that asked me to type in the admin pasword to their server as he was unable to do it. WHAT YOU NEED TO TYPE IS INDICATED ON THE KEYS!!! Pebkac.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
LOL you've just proved you don't understand the EU
"The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
and whats wrong with that? if you don't want to sign up to the rules, then you don't get to play.
"The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
god, so much bollox spoken about the EU - get treatment for your attachment to conspiracy theories
"The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
They would never do that, 1) that open doors do alternatives solutions 2) that shows other countries how to get rid of Google
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
"You don't understand that so go fuck yourself." - pot kettle black
"The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
all these treaties are compiled with representatives from each country in the EU so UK had input to them as well. You really want the public to vote on a treaty when at least 17m don't understand the basics of the EU, trade and economics as shown by brexit?
"The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
oh jeez, that old misunderstanding of reality and sovereignty is still going around your head?
"The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
I don't think its my grasp of reality that is faulty. Perhaps look in the mirror.
but I might be lying.
There is no XUL, only WebExtensions...
You bring up a bunch of alternative app stores in China, but you do know that the Play Store and most of the bundled services (search, maps, etc.) are actually banned in China due to foreign hosted content? Obviously they're going to have local alternatives when the dominant player is not available. Not only that, all the companies you mentioned are all Chinese and the Asian region encompasses way more than just China and in the rest of Asia things are pretty similar in this regard to both Europe and the U.S.
As for search alternatives, it's kind of hard to get one into a profitable state when the dominant player is preventing hardware vendors including your service in their devices and instead having to include all the dominant player's services if they want to use any of them. In other words; If you want to use any of Google's services, you're not allowed to use any of their competitors' services, even in devices other than the ones using Google services. It couldn't a better example of abusing a dominant market position if tried to.
"Why should I want to make anything up? Life's bad enough as it is without wanting to invent any more of it."
What cheek, to actually want to enforce a law. Against a corporation, no less.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Tell that your annoying orange, he started it.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
If only the problem had anything to do with Hungary, Poland or another East European country...
One EU leader took action that created the problem for all and then asks to stand united? A leader of the richest EU country no less...
Not only East Europe does not have the money to accomodate economy emigrants but they don't want to stay in our country cause noone gets money for not working, including the natives.
And finally, east Europe is much wiser when it comes to Marxist bullshit masquerading as 'compassion' and 'equity'.
We remember the Gulags my friend...and the 'class enemy' and the '5 minutes of hate' and so much more...
Western political discourse in the last decade is taken from 'the manual of the agitprop party worker'. It's scary as hell!
Yes, if you're in the UK and don't like the EU and think there should have been a referendum before signing the Maastricht Treaty, then it would have made sense to you never vote for the conservative party again.
Your sense of reality definitely at fault if you blame the EU for the fact that your government decided to join the EU without holding a referendum first.
What they demand Google to do is simply remove the contract language that forces device makers to use their search and a whole bunch of their other services by default if they want to have the Play Store installed out-of-the-box. All this really does is give consumers and device makers more freedom and a level the playing field for competitors in fields like search and maps.
After this a device maker can for example start shipping devices running Android forks with the Play Store and other Google services. In other words they can, once Google complies, just plain chose whatever Google services they want or don't want to use in their devices rather than the current all-or-nothing type deal. The current deal even goes as far as banning device makers from selling devices with and without Google services (the only exception being markets where Google services are banned).
In other words all this does is stops Google from being anti-competitive assholes.
"Why should I want to make anything up? Life's bad enough as it is without wanting to invent any more of it."
Content free, mindless anti-EU fanboyism
"The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
Err, Microsoft actually propped up Apple just so they could point to them and claim not to have a desktop monopoly. And it was true, if you didn't want to use Windows, you could pay lots more and use a Mac.
Personally, paying 10x ($60cdn vs $600 cdn) as much for an Apple as I paid for my phone is a non-starter.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
But you had no problem taking the money, did you?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The idea that Google has a monopoly on anything is patently ridiculous. This is government overreach at its worst.
Because it's not about protecting the consumer (after all, we don't say that extortion is bad only if you extort more than X number of people), but about maximizing revenue to the State.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
So what happens if google just refuses to pay?
Then the EU will sortie its massive military forces to...
Oops - those forces that happen to be largely American.
Hate to break it to you buddy, but collectively EU states have approximately 100,000 more active duty military personnel than the USA. If you include reserve troops, that rises to about 1.8 million more in the EU than the USA.
Hate to break it to you, most of those active duty and reservists would scatter like roaches if any major confrontation took place. Weak unity, weak centralized command, weak standards, different goals and ideals. Any country can decide not to contribute (or at least delay contributing for a long time), talking about contributing militarily or financially for that matter. By the time any internal argument would be resolved it'd be too late. That's why nobody takes EU military without NATO seriously.
Good. Humanity can live without tracking bugs in their pockets. If Apple and Google both went toes up, Europe and the world would be a better place for it.
So - if you can't have a tech industry, then NO ONE can have a tech industry?
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
*european tax haven
There, fixed it for you.
You remember a fictional invention from 1984?
The irony to me is that Google's applications are what caused the Play Store to be dominant, not the other way around. #2 does seem like an issue to me, #3 is also an issue with possible caveats around confusion e.g. Samsung might confuse sell a Galaxy S10X which doesn't include Google services..
That is not how this works.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Yes because funding terrorists and holocaust deniers is equivalent to locking your search engine setting on your phone.
Which interests would Europe be protecting?
Brussel's wallet.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
The EU has no tech industry
Eh? There are probably more technology companies in the EU than anywhere else.
Sorry ass-hole but you did not respond to the issues the European Commission raised:
In particular, Google:
1. has required manufacturers to pre-install the Google Search app and browser app (Chrome), as a condition for licensing Google's app store (the Play Store);
2. made payments to certain large manufacturers and mobile network operators on condition that they exclusively pre-installed the Google Search app on their devices; and
3. has prevented manufacturers wishing to pre-install Google apps from selling even a single smart mobile device running on alternative versions of Android that were not approved by Google (so-called "Android forks").
All you said was "but but we've created choice (by limiting choice)"
Fuck off an die Google.
What ass-hat factory are you from....
EU Law....you assume that any laws were actually broken, rather than just throwing a fine out there to bring in money to the EU when no companies have been hurt. Have they thrown fines at Apple for not allowing other browsers to be put on iPhones sold in the EU market? How about email apps? Nope, they don't go after Apple, which is even worse about the rules about what goes on the iPhone.
Basic concept, third party phone makers might put malware in the custom apps they provide with the phone. You want to worry about spyware, yea, how about that weird browser that is only on a certain brand of phone? Google can easily call it protecting users by saying that all Android phones come with the official Google apps without modification. Having a search widget is such a minor thing, are companies complaining that THEIR search widget isn't being used because a Google version is on the phone?
If they are concerned about competition, then where are the complaints that say that phone makers can't catch a break due to the rules that Google puts out there for re-distributing Android with potential modifications by phone makers? They don't want to include the "base apps" that come with Android, they can always make their own operating system.
Absolutely nothing, lol. Maybe Google / Alphabet has to close a few pointless offices in Yurop.
Other than that, people in Yurop will import the phones.
has no sense of how to work in a free market
For those of you who failed economics please remember that no country has a free market. All markets have competition regulations. The only difference is that the USA is too busy licking the balls of corporations to actually apply their own laws.
They can't even fund their NATO obligations.
There's a big difference between "can't" and refusing to play the stupid MIC game.
Of course, if what you want is to eliminate tracking from phones in the EU, you could pass laws that, y'know, eliminate tracking. I imagine Google - and others - could still make bundles without tracking individual users, but if they can make more with tracking, they're gonna do it.
Meanwhile, nobody seemed to care about Google search and gmail being included in Android phones till they got too popular - and presumably, competitors started bribing politicians. That doesn't mean the behavior shouldn't be stopped, but imposing a huge fine over past behavior that only crossed the line at some undetermined point in the past seems draconian. If you can't act soon enough to prevent the harm, you can't (well, I guess maybe you can), punish past legal behavior for retroactively becoming illegal. That's not quite fair.
When they went after Microsoft, they first got a consent decree ("we won't do that any more") and then fined them for violating it. Was such an agreement made - and violated - in Google's case with Android?
And in Microsoft's case, the remedy was to force them to allow a choice of browsers. Android already does that. And a choice of launchers (with or without the Google search widget). What's missing here? Only the option for OEM's to accept payments from Microsoft to build phones with Bing instead of Google?
Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
Which mobile OS in the EU has a higher market share than iOS and/or Android? I'm curious, if you don't use either of those, which one do you use, and why isn't it popular outside of the EU?
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
Yes. It is completely bizarre that a partially open platform, albeit with rules and constraints, gets hit with anti-trust penalties whereas Apple's completely closed and inherently monopolistic platform does not. What's up with that?
Buying then panic-developing Android was Google's response to Apple iPhone after all. Android was a successful attempt to thwart a monopoly in the smartphone and smartphone software market. Still, Android certainly doesn't dominate the smartphone and smartphone apps market. It's a duopoly with Apple, in a knock-down cage match wit each other, if anything.
The irony is strong with this one.
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
This raises a question for me - who gets the payment, and what do they do with it? Would the fine actually be paid to the collective EU government, and what would they use it for?
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
For a while I actually had the Bing search thing on my phone (and yeah, searches in that big search box on the home screen went via Bing) because various flaws in Google had made me temporarily want to try alternatives. It worked, and unlike, say, Microsoft's "It's done when Lotus won't run" philosophy, it was fully integrated and there were no obvious downsides of running a non-Google system beyond, well, the fact Bing sucks.
There is absolutely nothing stopping someone from downloading and using a rival search service on an Android phone that has the Play Store.
Also worth noting is that this applies only to search. Google has a range of other products, and has never placed any restrictions on rival products being bundled on phones. Google is even happy for rivals to the Play Store to be pre-installed - look at Amazon's Prime Exclusive phones for example.
Everything seem to be more than a little overblown by the EU here.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
For discussion-sake, let's flip that around: EU companies are already free to fork Android all they want, they just have to abide by Google's rules if they want to use Google's apps. Why don't they do that? Because having Google's apps provides more value to their customers than providing their own marketplace, maps, etc. They basically want the benefit of a free OS provided to them while eating their cake too.
Gotta fund those mutha-fuckin' social programs somehow!
Stats from Play Store, world-wide:
Yahoo 1,000,000+
Bing 5,000,000+
Google 1,000,000,000+
Even given how vague the Play stats are that's a difference of 200:1 between Google and the nearest competitor, and Microsoft is a big company that has been pushing Bing hard.
Having Bing as default on, say, HTC phones would certainly help.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
There is no law that says that a company with 20% of the marketshare of one product (physical phone hardware), even if that's the biggest one by far, has to allow it to pair with some other product -- alternative OSes. iPhone hardware isn't even all that special. If iPhone hardware was 75% of some market, then you might have a point. As it stands, it's ridiculous.
Samsung owns 100% of the market of phones that have the Samsung logo printed on it, so now it's got a monopoly because you can't put an iPhone into a Samsung branded case and sell it? That's clearly absurd, because it doesn't matter if you have 100% of the market on an intermediate product where the final product itself has only a small fraction of the market.
You're comparing Apples and Oreos to Salt Mines. What a weird stretch.
Yes, Apples is doing all the same things as Google. And if they had sufficient marketshare for that to matter, they would no doubt get crushed.
Apple is a monopoly, by every definition, and abuses it.
Ridiculous. There is no way you can define Apple to be a monopoly. Your attempt earlier is that Apple has a monopoly on putting together Apple products. Absurd.
I'm not convinced Google has done anything wrong. But there's no reasonable way to say that iOS has anything close to the market power of Android.
They can just pack up and leave the EU market forever.
And as a consumer, you should be really excited about that. You'll be able to buy Apple products, that are much worse than Google on these counts (just not yet a monopoly), or buy chinese non-Google Android phones infested with malware with no app store or Google apps. Or maybe Samsung will pull one of its mobile OSes out from under the bed and start selling that into the EU.
The ECB hasn't printed money to deal with the banking crisis. That's misunderstanding how QE works. The EU is also not an entity that can ask the ECB to act like that, as the EU is a trading block, with a commission and a parliament and a council of ministers. The council of ministers might be able to ask, but that's not the same as the EU asking.
squeezing the Irish dry.. what would come out? Guinness or Whiskey?
Eastern Europe's stance against forced diversity and migration is infinitely more sane than putting up with what Germany, Sweden, France, and the UK are inflicting upon themselves.
Like ensuring people follow laws? How horrible of them. Imagine what would happen in a world where corporations are held to the same legal standard as people. It would be madness!
This just an example of why the UK voted Brexit
Because they are afraid of laws being actually applied with a meaningful punishment to large corporations? Don't worry man, less than a year and you can go back to your peaceful life of being stomped on and screwed like the capitalists intended.
Not quite. There was militant extremist Islam hundreds of years before the United States even existed. Read some history. Our first conflict with Islam was barely over two hundred years ago.
Islam spreads by the sword or, in the case of Europe now, by coming in and out-reproducing the native population. If things continue the way they're going, Europe WILL be Muslim-dominated in a few short decades. No, you can't come over here to escape it. We don't want you.
Yes, it's actually worse than that I think. They want the benefit of the free OS, AND most of the free Google apps... just not the ones like search which actually make Google money. They want to take all the free stuff then bundle say Bing search and make money from deals with MSFT (or whoever) on the side.
That's the sad part... The SJW crowd thinks they are "better", but I've come to the conclusion that the left is actually the racist group... and far more racist than anyone on the right that I have any sort of contact with.
The left has decided to break everyone down by race, gender, sexual orientation, and a host of other things. Everyone (to them) is just a member of some "oppressed" group. Well, unless you are white in which case you are pure, distilled, evil....
In fact, the left has taken it upon themselves to be outraged ON BEHALF of minorities... Talk about being fucking patronizing......
I know people who, for example, don't like blacks... (Because they are fucking racist...) But I've never seen one of those mouth-breathers stand up and pretend to speak on behalf of blacks.. Yet, I see this coming from the left ALL THE FUCKING TIME.
We had such an incident in my area not so long ago, where a bunch of snowflake liberals ran around acting all outraged over a school mascot that is done in the likeness of a certain Native American (Indian) chief.
They were just freaking out about it... However, when the local news went out and did a bunch of interviews, they couldn't find anyone, of that tribe, who was offended. Most said they were quite happy that the mascot depicted the Chief in a positive, strong, and dignified way. Not all were "pro mascot", but the worst opposition they could find was.. indifference.. i.e. some members of the tribe basically said they didn't give a crap one way or the other, but they weren't offended...
You'd think the outrage would have died down at that point.. I mean if the members of the tribe aren't upset....
But NO! The SJW's know better.. A couple of them, who were suspected of being the leaders of the protesters, were recorded on hidden camera saying (and I'm paraphrasing because I don't remember the exact wording) that the tribe had been oppressed for so long that they couldn't be trusted to know what was offensive to them.
They basically accused this tribe (which has a HUGE casino and is very prosperous) of having Stockholm Syndrome. This tribe has had a casino for about 30 years.. i.e. they are all upper middle class at this point, and the members that make up the bulk of the tribe have never been oppressed. Nobody in that tribe that is 35 or less has ever eaten government cheese or been dependent on the white man for anything.. i.e. they don't need you holier-than-thou cunts speaking for them. They don't have Stockholm Syndrome.... But, you see, to an SJW it's just a bunch of dumb Indians who need protection, from whites, by whites who know better and are more virtuous...
The level of hubris and irony is beyond......
So my dear SJW, please continue to be outraged on behalf of groups you have no connection with. Please continue to speak on their behalf and continue your own self-hatred of your own race. If you signal hard enough somebody, somewhere, might think you are a good person... Well, until they realize that you are just as racist as those on the extreme right...
At least the racists on the right just declare their racism.. They don't hide it like the left... They don't pretend to care about minorities and at the same time think said minorities are too stupid, weak, or unsophisticated to handle their own lives.
I haven't heard of real problems from 3rd party iOS handset makers. Sounds like that's the way to go - they don't "play favorites" like Google.
Geez, again just sorry, man - sorry that you had to go through this, and you weren't able to put all of their software on your phone. That's awful. But at least you know for next time, stick with Apple.
Let's not stir that bag of worms...
Google's _FREE_ Android implementation that can be used in any form
Yes in any form allowed by the very long contract you need to sign in order to make that _FREE_ implementation look anything like the one you see on a normal Android handset.
You clearly have never seen a raw build of the AOSP. I don't blame you. No one has. Every aftermarket ROM is in breach of the terms and conditions of the modifications they make in order to make it functional as a smartphone because AOSP is effectively useless without the very much not at all free strings attached.
ITYM subsidiaries, you gomer.
Subsidies are what Tesla runs on.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I agree, forced diversity will only work if all parties in the exchange actually want it, and they rarely do, from both sides. One side has been forced to relocate to find a better life, but they want to maintain their own culture and values, the other side feels they are losing value to another who is trying to change their own culture and values. The result is evident in the conflict happening in the EU today.
There are three kinds of falsehood: the first is a 'fib,' the second is a downright lie, and the third is statistics.
But you can just download it anyway so that you can get your phone to start working properly. The point is you HAVE to install it to get your phone working the way you would expect it to.
There are three kinds of falsehood: the first is a 'fib,' the second is a downright lie, and the third is statistics.
When I got into the game, 'bout 1980, IBM was having legal troubles because of "bundling".
Some time later, it was Microsoft with legal troubles because of "bundling".
Now it's Google. And bundling.
My, how things have changed!
"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro" -- HST
Why doesn't Google/Alphabet say, "Fine. You don't like what we have to offe? We will shut it down for a week. The citizens of your various EU countries will provide some feedback about that.
"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro" -- HST
The $60cdn stuff is so underpowered, it is not worth discussing. It is also subsidized — by the same things EU fines Google for insisting on.
You are demanding, a $60 thing be comparable to a $600 one — dream on.
It wasn't subsidized, was on sale. It's a Moto E and does everything I expect it to do. I don't need an Apple phone or an expensive Android for how little I use a phone. The only thing I'm demanding is the choice for an inexpensive phone, along with some freedom about what I run, something that Apple does not deliver.
The valid measure is competition. Unless Google is caught sabotaging competitors, such as by producing inferior search-results when "Safari" is found in User-Agent, there is nothing for the governments to do.
I'm inclined to agree. I switched to Google way back because it was superiour. But I'm not a phone manufacturer, which is the people that seem to be having problems with Googles behaviour.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
is it says:
You can't control the quality of your product any more, because you've been too successful with it.
Fact of the matter is, in something like a smartphone OS and app platform, quality control and simplicity and uniformity (my next phone will be familiar to me because of my last phone) are very important features.
There's a reason why a lot of people like iPhone. They are giving up freedom for quality control, willingly.
I want the same ability as a consumer to choose a quality controlled version of android, and to not have to worry that my next XYZ brand phone will behave totally differently to my previous Samsung or Pixel or whatever phone. Uniformity and lack of "gratuitous" choice is actually a valuble service to consumers, in this age of rampant complexity and crapware.
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
Given that would wipe out Irelands position as european tech darling ireland probably wouldn't allow it or would procrastinate long enough for google to withdraw the funds.
Because that totally happened when the EU made Apple repay 3x the quantity involved in the Google fine to Ireland to negate Ireland's illegal tax subsidy.
Try again?
It always cracks me up when people characterise government like this but are also violently opposed to socialism.
The American way of brainwashing citizens into thinking they understand freedom better than everyone else is astonishing to behold.
It's OK Bender, there's no such thing as 2.
Ahhh yes, the "my army is better than yours because I say so" argument. Well, I'm convinced!
It's OK Bender, there's no such thing as 2.
With the billions taken by EU courts French artisans can hand craft each CRT.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
...which is somewhat undermined by the fact you can download any search engine you want... from the Play Store.
No, it's not. Defaults matter. Google are using dominance in the phone OS market to drive people to their other products.
The fact you *can* get around it doesn't not make it monopoly abuse. All sorts of perfectly reasonable things are not reasonable any more if you have a position of market dominance.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
I never said that. Either thats some feeble straw man or you can't comprehend simple english.
Meanwhile, nobody seemed to care about Google search and gmail being included in Android phones till they got too popular
Android was released 10 years ago. This anti-trust battle has been progressing for 8 years. I suspect your assumption is highly flawed.
It has everything to do with East Europe.
You are perfectly happy to take our money, but when we ask for help you just tell us to fuck off, the ungrateful bastards you are. The whole EU expansion to the Eastern Europe has been a big mistake.
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
Apple exists because OOH SHINY SHINY
Human gullibility is a safe bet.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
There are dozens of Android forks. In Asia all major OEMs (Xiaomi, Huawei, Oppo, Lenovo, etc.) have their own Android forks with their own app stores.
Play is banned in China, which is why that stuff exists. China is its own market. None of those OEMs are allowed to distribute non-Google app stores or search outside of China, or China-controlled markets. You can't use China as an example of anything else, because they are deliberately different.
In short, this fine is just absurd and I'm not sure what is that the EU really wants from Google. Money?
It's actually very simple, and they were very clear about their goals of changing Google's behavior. They want to stop them from force-bundling search, and to stop them from preventing handset makers from distributing Android forks. Remember when they busted Microsoft for bundling search and Aieeee!? Remember when Microsoft was found to be guilty of abusing its monopoly position by the USDoJ, in large part because they tied Windows' pricing for OEMs to whether they distributed any other operating systems? Google is up to exactly the same thing.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Having Bing as default on, say, HTC phones would certainly help.
Who would that help? People who want shitty search results?
I hear there's a few new search engines to try, but there is really no competition for Google in search. Nobody else is even in the same fuckin' sport. For that reason, I'm actually pretty meh about the search bundling. Refusing to let handset makers ship alternate versions of Android, however, has got me steamed.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Do they?
If a device-maker wants to claim their offering is "Android", then they have to satisfy Google's requirements. They don't have to do it — the OS itself is available (open source, unlike Microsoft's Windows) and they can sell devices with their own version. Amazon, for example, are doing just that.
It seems, EU bureaucrats wanted to control, what Google is allowed to require from those, who wish to market their devices as "Android". No government should be allowed to do this.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Yes, I agree on the part of what you said. I'm very pro FOSS and I know Google enough to know it doesn't abide by the spirit of most (any?) FOSS license. My problem is that Google is still doing more than most companies and this ruling will just lock stuff down even more ultimately. People don't understand that it's not greener on the other side from government regulation. It's usually just a roadblock that companies work around by even worse trade offs.
But has Android been a 'monopoly' for 10 years? Apple had a head start, and Nokia was still going strong for a while there. And even feature phones supported web browsing, so Chrome didn't have any kind of monopoly for quite a while. In fact Chrome on Android wasn't even viable for the first few years. I'm just saying that "Android was released 10 years ago" doesn't provide much of a counterargument to what I said.
Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
Apple install its proprietary software while ignoring competitive products too. When will the EU bring Apple to court?
A 20% market share of 100% Apple manufactured phones vs 80% market share for Android spread across dozens of manufacturers, none of which can claim 20% of the market or anything close to Apple's profits.
First it's not 20%, it's less than 15% worldwide. And then, Samsung alone regularly sells more phones than Apple, although it can vary by quarters. I think yearly Samsung sells more phones overall, so Samsung along has more market share than Apple.