Apparently nobody in the previous posts understands the real issue here. The EU considers that Google has a near monopoly in search and related ads (Google has 95% of the search market in Europe) As such Google is not allowed to sell products/services to OEMs forcing the latter to use the Google search services, because this is seen as abusing its monopoly. If Google did not have the search monopoly, it would be perfectly legal for Google to force OEMs to bundle all Google apps if the OEM wants access to the Play Store. Comparing Apple with Google here does not make sense, Apple has no monopoly.
Apple owns the hardware and the software; it's sold as a complete unit by Apple, so they can put what they want on it. Google can do what they want with their Nexus phones, but they can't tell other manufacturers what to install – according to the EU anyway.
No great fan of Google, but this sounds like another case of the EU trying to line its coffers at the expense of a non-EU company.
I don't see how the EU is "lining its coffers" here (for the avoidance of doubt, Samsung and other major Android phone makers are not European). What money flows to Europe?
Some may disagree with the EU in intervening on Google's rules for using Android. It may be a case of what Google said: Android is open-source software that you can use freely except that you have to use the version that we say and include this closed-source stuff too. The EU may think that this doesn't quite add up to the usual understanding of open-source. Personally I would liken it to the browser position on Windows: intended to increase consumer choice, it actually forces a rather complex decision onto ordinary users (before they're able to browse the web for recommendations!).
So I'd be happy for Google to demand whatever they like of Android licensees. They'd need to stop claiming it's open and modifiable and so on though (you know, all those things that Apple gets beaten up for not being).
The EU is lining its coffers by coming up with another bogus reason to extract money from a non-EU company. Pretty much like their attempts to prove that Apple's deal with the Irish government is different to the same deals that other companies have with the same Irish government.
The EU was also overstepping the mark when it forced Microsoft to include links to competing browsers on its machines. There was nothing stopping anyone from going out and downloading any browser they wanted, and as far as I can tell, no one seemed to be having any trouble finding alternatives. Now let's see the reaction around here when the EU forces Apple to preload Gmail and Google Maps in order to 'increase consumer choice.'
One other small point: Amazon has used Android as a basis for a number of products (I'm not saying they're any good) that seemed to prove that it is open and modifiable. And while Google might insist that manufacturers include their own apps, they certainly do not prevent or discourage others from installing their own apps alongside them. That's why Samsung phones are usually weighed down with shite when you unpack them.
Folk need to try to think a step ahead. If the EU wins this then don't think they won't start trying to force the same crap on Apple. Do you want Apple to be in a position where they can't prevent the likes of Vodafone and EE (God forbid!) to install their own tracking apps on your device?
Apparently nobody in the previous posts understands the real issue here. The EU considers that Google has a near monopoly in search and related ads (Google has 95% of the search market in Europe) As such Google is not allowed to sell products/services to OEMs forcing the latter to use the Google search services, because this is seen as abusing its monopoly. If Google did not have the search monopoly, it would be perfectly legal for Google to force OEMs to bundle all Google apps if the OEM wants access to the Play Store. Comparing Apple with Google here does not make sense, Apple has no monopoly.
The EU should not be allowed to penalise Google or any company based on what it thinks it may do. Google does not force anyone to use their search engine. They do not prevent anyone from using an alternative search on Android.
Here's a scenario. In ten years time, Apple's massive cash base and advertising nonce wins them a 95% share in the streaming market. Everyone else is in real trouble because the freemium model is unsustainable and they can't match Apple's clout with the artists and record companies. The EU steps in and says to encourage competition Apple has to include apps for alternative freemium wastelands in all its installations, and point the user to them every time iOS is upgraded.
I don't see why any company should be forced to do this simply because they beat the competition, but that's just me.
OEMs don't PAY to use Android. The bundled apps are the payment.
Its simply a different model.
Amazing how how governments can't use their brains.
Reminds me of Apples ebook strategy that all of a sudden became illegal simply because some government stooge decided they didn't like it.
But can't you see how that's wrong? It passes the "cost" from the manufacturer in paying for an OS onto the consumer who is forced to use Google apps and into the google ecosystem whether they want it or not.
Android is suppose to be open sourced and Google must not have power to require phone manufacturers to load Google crap apps as default and cannot be deleted. Apple, on other hand is not open source or claim as such.But, about this article, Google wants to make money on others work should be stopped/penalized.
Why not? Is it not their own software?
It IS their own software, just as Window is Microsoft's. But when they offer that software to outside manufacturers to sell their own devices, they cannot then dictate what apps/programs are installed by default as this is abusing their dominant market position. Maybe americans are ok with this but as someone from Europe (Scotland to be precise), this is blatantly wrong to me.
Pretty sure Samsung has shipped "Google Android" phones with their own version of the typical Google apps pre-installed. Some carriers have also pre-installed Bing Search on Google Android phones (even Motorola phones). Some companies use open-sourced Android to produce their own Android devices perhaps devoid of pre-installed Google apps for the most part, ie certain Chinese OEM's, more Western-oriented companies like Amazon and OnePlus, and a few others. As far back as 2014 it was estimated that 20% or more of the Android phones being shipped were not Google Android, those with pre-installed Google services. My guess is it's a significantly higher percentage now. As far as I know there was never an "open-source" Windows to fork as any company not wanting to use Microsoft might wish so comparing the two when it comes to competition issues is certainly not directly comparable. Any company who wishes to bypass Google and their services but isn't capable either technically or financially of developing their own OS from scratch can take Android for themselves.
Methinks Microsoft may still up to their tricks.
That's an awful lot of talking without actually saying anything.
Tell me, can you do the following with Android?
- Sell a high-end Galaxy S7 with Android and all Google Apps/Services installed AND also sell a low-end Galaxy device (say for India or China) with a customized forked version of AOSP and no Google Apps/Services? - Sell an Android device with SOME Google Apps/Services installed while removing others to be replaced by your own versions instead?
Samsung is a member of the OHA so they wouldn't be able to sell a low end Galaxy phone with no Google apps/services because they agreed not to.
Now another manufacturer that's not a member of the OHA can build a high end, and/or a low end phone with a forked version of Android and completely leave Google out.
“Our concern is that, by requiring phone makers and operators to pre-load a set of Google apps, rather than letting them decide for themselves which apps to load, Google might have cut off one of the main ways that new apps can reach customers,”
So what does Apple do that's different?
Apple doesn't impose their policy on other phone manufacturers. I'm fairly certain this is the reason for concern over how Google's policies are stifling competition. It's good to spend a bit of time thinking about things rather than knee-jerk reacting.
Google doesn't either. When I purchased my unlocked Note 5 last year, it had very little in the way of stock Google Apps - the stock was pretty much all Samsung. The wife's HTC One M8 was the same way. At least it was simple to install and default the apps I wanted. Unlike my iPhone 6S+. This is just another case of the EU agency looking to both justify its existence and another potential payday.
Wrong. The Microsoft issue was first that they would not allow Netscape to be pre-installed. So most users would just use the default app that was installed as opposed to downloading and installing Netscape - if they were even aware of it. That's what the DOJ stopped. With the ruling, Netscape was also allowed to be pre-bundled in.
The ruling forced Microsoft to remove Internet Explorer. This is obviously a subject you know nothing about. But regardless of your opinion, the EU is about to hand down some serious pain to Google
Wrong. The Microsoft issue was first that they would not allow Netscape to be pre-installed. So most users would just use the default app that was installed as opposed to downloading and installing Netscape - if they were even aware of it. That's what the DOJ stopped. With the ruling, Netscape was also allowed to be pre-bundled in.
The ruling forced Microsoft to remove Internet Explorer. This is obviously a subject you know nothing about. But regardless of your opinion, the EU is about to hand down some serious pain to Google
As I recall the EU didn't force MS to remove Explorer. Microsoft did so on their own to avoid further antitrust actions didn't they?
Note that even tho MS removed Explorer from pre-loaded Windows 7 the OEM's selling Windows & computers in europe generally chose to install Explorer themselves pre-loaded. The EU did not say they couldn't and it was at the time the obvious browser choice for most users. Google Search would remain the obvious choice for most EU users too IMHO if Google were to chose to remove it from the pre-installed package. OEM's would as a rule install it.
specifically, whether requiring that certain Google apps be preloaded is hampering the market for upcoming apps, according to Bloomberg.
Not even going to mention the Microsoft case, AI? I know that it wasn’t Europe, but those guys did manage to cut out IE. Wouldn’t that count as partial precedent?
EDIT: Right-click lets you see the images in a readable size.
Apple preloads its own apps too and they cannot be deleted. What's the difference here? The same thing could apply to desktop PCs and Tablets that have preinstalled software through marketing agreements. That being said I think it's incredibly stupid of the EU to essentially require devices to be shipped bare of all apps. That's about as consumer unfriendly as it gets.
Google scrapes news headlines via its own search business giving themselves an unfair advantage. Apple's apps aren't connected to some search scraper thingy
Comments
If Google did not have the search monopoly, it would be perfectly legal for Google to force OEMs to bundle all Google apps if the OEM wants access to the Play Store. Comparing Apple with Google here does not make sense, Apple has no monopoly.
The EU is lining its coffers by coming up with another bogus reason to extract money from a non-EU company. Pretty much like their attempts to prove that Apple's deal with the Irish government is different to the same deals that other companies have with the same Irish government.
The EU was also overstepping the mark when it forced Microsoft to include links to competing browsers on its machines. There was nothing stopping anyone from going out and downloading any browser they wanted, and as far as I can tell, no one seemed to be having any trouble finding alternatives. Now let's see the reaction around here when the EU forces Apple to preload Gmail and Google Maps in order to 'increase consumer choice.'
One other small point: Amazon has used Android as a basis for a number of products (I'm not saying they're any good) that seemed to prove that it is open and modifiable. And while Google might insist that manufacturers include their own apps, they certainly do not prevent or discourage others from installing their own apps alongside them. That's why Samsung phones are usually weighed down with shite when you unpack them.
Folk need to try to think a step ahead. If the EU wins this then don't think they won't start trying to force the same crap on Apple. Do you want Apple to be in a position where they can't prevent the likes of Vodafone and EE (God forbid!) to install their own tracking apps on your device?
The EU should not be allowed to penalise Google or any company based on what it thinks it may do. Google does not force anyone to use their search engine. They do not prevent anyone from using an alternative search on Android.
Here's a scenario. In ten years time, Apple's massive cash base and advertising nonce wins them a 95% share in the streaming market. Everyone else is in real trouble because the freemium model is unsustainable and they can't match Apple's clout with the artists and record companies. The EU steps in and says to encourage competition Apple has to include apps for alternative freemium wastelands in all its installations, and point the user to them every time iOS is upgraded.
I don't see why any company should be forced to do this simply because they beat the competition, but that's just me.
It IS their own software, just as Window is Microsoft's. But when they offer that software to outside manufacturers to sell their own devices, they cannot then dictate what apps/programs are installed by default as this is abusing their dominant market position. Maybe americans are ok with this but as someone from Europe (Scotland to be precise), this is blatantly wrong to me.
Now another manufacturer that's not a member of the OHA can build a high end, and/or a low end phone with a forked version of Android and completely leave Google out.
This is just another case of the EU agency looking to both justify its existence and another potential payday.
EDIT:
I think this page is accurate, but if not someone will chime in.
http://www.sitepoint.com/ie-windows-7-europe/
Note that even tho MS removed Explorer from pre-loaded Windows 7 the OEM's selling Windows & computers in europe generally chose to install Explorer themselves pre-loaded. The EU did not say they couldn't and it was at the time the obvious browser choice for most users. Google Search would remain the obvious choice for most EU users too IMHO if Google were to chose to remove it from the pre-installed package. OEM's would as a rule install it.
EDIT: Right-click lets you see the images in a readable size.