Informative but pure spin from Google. The bundling of services (including Google Search) has created a lot of Android devices. However - it has all been more of the same.
1. Number of mobile platforms is down to two. Android hasn't created more choice. That however is not what EU complains about but look at the market.
2. Other areas have reduced competition Forcing phone manufactures to add Google apps - and even pay them to keep other vendors out. Those policies by Google have made it difficult to create competition in mapping services, browsers, search engines, and more. Some mention DuckDuckGo as an alternative. That service is getting paid by Yahoo Search which in turn is getting paid by Google to show results and ads from Google. DuckDuckGo and Yahoo are variants of Google Search.
I'm pretty sure Vestager (known as The Tax Lady to Trump) and her team would have done this no matter what. She did the same during her years in domestic politics. Countries outside EU might decide to do the same and Google could end up being used as global cash cow / hostage in the current trade war.
Next from EU seems to be a GAFA tax (named after Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon) to make sure digital services from companies "outside Europe" (translation: US) are taxed at the same level as for European companies. All the major countries already support this.
EU consumers will be the ones getting screwed by this, not Google.
Google has already said if the EU continues pushing this, they'll make the manufactures pay for licensing Google's app store. Those licensing fees will then be passed onto EU consumers.
The EU doesn't care as long as it can penalize US tech companies because EU tech companies are non-competitive without being protectionist.
"Google isn't controlling it nor mandating what services are installed in order to use it."
was there not a story about a year ago about google trying to get samsung to stop adding to their os (i was just looking for it and cannot find it)?
Are you talking about AOSP, Tizen, or "official" licensed Google Android? AFAIK there are few restrictions on the Google-supplied and regularly updated AOSP, but the story you might be remembering is a tiff with Samsung over installed services, and perhaps something to do with Tizen too, and a subsequent agreement to cross-license their various patents worldwide, work more closely together, and avoid any potential legal issues. Is that the story you might be thinking of?
Hilarious.
Convenient that you left out the most important part. Google hasn't been adding new APIs (and all their "good stuff") to AOSP for years now. It's all going into Google Play Services instead, which is 100% closed source. Which means anyone wanting to use Android (and get all the latest & greatest features) is pretty much forced into installing Google Play Services, since vanilla Android (AOSP) is outdated and no longer being improved (outside of bug/security fixes or specific things that need to be in AOSP to function).
Doesn't seem to be hurting the Chinese much.
And as much as I'm not a Google fan...it's their OS and its free. If the Euro tech companies don't like it they can build their own and compete in the international markets.
But they can't and so they have "anti-monopoly" fines instead. They can't even be bothered to do what Amazon did with the Fire.
Hey, that’s a better deal than the $15 billion Apple will have to cough up eventually. Pay it, Google, and count your blessings.
Apple would have paid that money to the US government anyway. Now it’ll be claimed as foreign taxes paid and 1:1 reduce Apple’s US taxes on repatriated profits. It’s the US Treasury that will take the hit on the EU’s grab in that case.
EU consumers will be the ones getting screwed by this, not Google.
Google has already said if the EU continues pushing this, they'll make the manufactures pay for licensing Google's app store. Those licensing fees will then be passed onto EU consumers.
The EU doesn't care as long as it can penalize US tech companies because EU tech companies are non-competitive without being protectionist.
It probably would be easier to compete if: a) The taxation was the same - and with Apple paying 0.00005% in tax vs. 12.5% for European companies... it is difficult to compete. b) US companies like Microsoft and Google use their monopoly in one area to win markets in other areas (which is what EU is now trying to stop).
But then again - Europe shouldn't compete 1:1 against all US sectors. The basic concept of trade is to produce what you're good at.
If they do this to Google, what prevents them from making -- rightly or wrongly -- a similar argument for iOS, where Safari and other Apple offerings, such as iTunes, FaceTime, AppleMusic, ApplePay, TV, etc. are the only default apps?
Some here might want to take a look in the mirror before reveling in schadenfreude.
EU consumers will be the ones getting screwed by this, not Google.
Google has already said if the EU continues pushing this, they'll make the manufactures pay for licensing Google's app store. Those licensing fees will then be passed onto EU consumers.
The EU doesn't care as long as it can penalize US tech companies because EU tech companies are non-competitive without being protectionist.
It probably would be easier to compete if: a) The taxation was the same - and with Apple paying 0.00005% in tax vs. 12.5% for European companies... it is difficult to compete. b) US companies like Microsoft and Google use their monopoly in one area to win markets in other areas (which is what EU is now trying to stop).
But then again - Europe shouldn't compete 1:1 against all US sectors. The basic concept of trade is to produce what you're good at.
Nope. The fact is that EU tech companies have not been competitive and it has nothing to do with taxes or monopolies. There simply are no European companies that move the needle like Apple, Google, Microsoft, etc. Or for that matter companies like Alibaba, Baidu, or Didi Chuxing. The EU has companies like Spotify and Supercell (now owned by the Chinese) but these aren't innovative companies on the large scale.
BTW, does anyone know what the EU Commission does with that fine money? Somehow find a way to return it to the aggrieved parties? Use it for private Commission parties? Put it in some special fund? I couldn't find a ready reference to it.
BTW, does anyone know what the EU Commission does with that fine money? Somehow find a way to return it to the aggrieved parties? Use it for private Commission parties? Put it in some special fund? I couldn't find a ready reference to it.
It is given to the member states
it goes to brussells who make sure their 'fair share' stays and then it doles it out to other EU member states.
BTW, does anyone know what the EU Commission does with that fine money? Somehow find a way to return it to the aggrieved parties? Use it for private Commission parties? Put it in some special fund? I couldn't find a ready reference to it.
It is given to the member states
it goes to brussells who make sure their 'fair share' stays and then it doles it out to other EU member states.
And what do the member states do with it? Do they give it to the companies damaged by Google’s actions?
BTW, does anyone know what the EU Commission does with that fine money? Somehow find a way to return it to the aggrieved parties? Use it for private Commission parties? Put it in some special fund? I couldn't find a ready reference to it.
It is given to the member states
it goes to brussells who make sure their 'fair share' stays and then it doles it out to other EU member states.
And what do the member states do with it? Do they give it to the companies damaged by Google’s actions?
i am sure there is an answer to that. but i do not know it.
EU consumers will be the ones getting screwed by this, not Google.
Google has already said if the EU continues pushing this, they'll make the manufactures pay for licensing Google's app store. Those licensing fees will then be passed onto EU consumers.
The EU doesn't care as long as it can penalize US tech companies because EU tech companies are non-competitive without being protectionist.
Plenty of EU companies have been and are penalised for anti-competitive companies that you hear nothing about on a tech website.
This is not some anti-US vendetta just because two out of hundreds of cases happen to hit Google and Microsoft (actually, Google is a repeat offender). Japanese Auto supplier Denso got hit in February, after getting hit BY THE US earlier.
Personally I think the the EU is overstepping on this one but I'm certainly not claiming to understand the finer points of the EU's methodology of determining it to be an antitrust violation. No surprise tho as a fine has been signaled for months now.
With that out of the way I think the horses are already out of the barn so I don't see the EU's action making much if any difference at this point. Google Search and Chrome are widely preferred by EU users on the desktop where it's always up to the seller to decide what gets pre-installed, not Google forcing it going on. I would think that serves as evidence that the same preferences would exist on mobile even if there were no automatic default.
Also not sure why Oracle felt they suffered any negative impact from Google services preinstalled either. Microsoft I get.
Still $5B is a hefty fine, grabbing much or most of Google's Play Store profits for this year if it stands. I still don't get how the EU can claim rights to worldwide revenues for an EU specific violation (and Google being a separate subsidiary of overall Alphabet operations in the first place) but as I said in another thread there's obviously legal support for it.
What a beautiful Google apology from its chief apologist.
I wonder this Google entity writes on other blogs (Apple or Android) and if so other name or different ones, I'd love to know.
I assume by "Google entity" you mean me. Hey never miss a chance to get in a personal dig right? Why are you always making everything into some personal vendetta when you reply, yet never actually finding anything factual to disagree with in anything I write?
Anyway I always post under Gatorguy, and yes I comment lots of places and on lots of topics. If you'd like to read more from me send a PM and I'll point you to some since you'd "love to know".
If the cap fits ... I am pretty sure if your entire post history were read in context it would be pretty obvious you have been (if in a subtle and polite way) an anti-Apple poster from day one. Apple have been my business life since 1978, so you will have to forgive me not appreciating your constant deflection from anything pro Apple.
Please post here for everyone, links to your other Apple blogs and Android / Google blogs.
Personally I think the the EU is overstepping on this one but I'm certainly not claiming to understand the finer points of the EU's methodology of determining it to be an antitrust violation. No surprise tho as a fine has been signaled for months now.
With that out of the way I think the horses are already out of the barn so I don't see the EU's action making much if any difference at this point. Google Search and Chrome are widely preferred by EU users on the desktop where it's always up to the seller to decide what gets pre-installed, not Google forcing it going on. I would think that serves as evidence that the same preferences would exist on mobile even if there were no automatic default.
Also not sure why Oracle felt they suffered any negative impact from Google services preinstalled either. Microsoft I get.
Still $5B is a hefty fine, grabbing much or most of Google's Play Store profits for this year if it stands. I still don't get how the EU can claim rights to worldwide revenues for an EU specific violation (and Google being a separate subsidiary of overall Alphabet operations in the first place) but as I said in another thread there's obviously legal support for it.
What a beautiful Google apology from its chief apologist.
I wonder this Google entity writes on other blogs (Apple or Android) and if so other name or different ones, I'd love to know.
I assume by "Google entity" you mean me. Hey never miss a chance to get in a personal dig right? Why are you always making everything into some personal vendetta when you reply, yet never actually finding anything factual to disagree with in anything I write?
Anyway I always post under Gatorguy, and yes I comment lots of places and on lots of topics. If you'd like to read more from me send a PM and I'll point you to some since you'd "love to know".
If the cap fits ... I am pretty sure if your entire post history were read in context it would be pretty obvious you have been (if in a subtle and polite way) an anti-Apple poster from day one. Apple have been my business life since 1978, so you will have to forgive me not appreciating your constant deflection from anything pro Apple.
Please post here for everyone, links to your other Apple blogs and Android / Google blogs.
Continuing with the personal stuff still? This thread isn't about "Gatorguy". You don't follow instruction well, I asked that you PM. You continuing to derail this into something it's not supposed to be is not at all helpful. PM's are intended for dealing with off-topic stuff, particularly between two posters when one has a personal ax to grind, and let the threads remain open for discussion of readers came for.
We've all used PM's here for years to settle differences and clear up misunderstandings. The public threads are not meant for this.
Interesting solution from Google to meet the requirements set by the EU Commission: If other search providers wish to profit from being the default then bid for the privilege.
Google will be accepting the top three bids submitted by competitors on a per country basis. Users in those countries will then be offered those three along with Google as search providers and the choice will have the appropriate search app automatically downloaded to the users device. This bid will be done annually. and will be sealed first-price auctions where bids will not be disclosed.
"In each country auction, search providers will state the price that they are willing to pay each time a user selects them from the choice screen in the given country. Each country will have a minimum bid threshold. The three highest bidders that meet or exceed the bid threshold for a given country will appear in the choice screen for that country...
An auction is a fair and objective method to determine which search providers are included in the choice screen. It allows search providers to decide what value they place on appearing in the choice screen and to bid accordingly."
Comments
1. Number of mobile platforms is down to two.
Android hasn't created more choice. That however is not what EU complains about but look at the market.
2. Other areas have reduced competition
Forcing phone manufactures to add Google apps - and even pay them to keep other vendors out. Those policies by Google have made it difficult to create competition in mapping services, browsers, search engines, and more. Some mention DuckDuckGo as an alternative. That service is getting paid by Yahoo Search which in turn is getting paid by Google to show results and ads from Google. DuckDuckGo and Yahoo are variants of Google Search.
I'm pretty sure Vestager (known as The Tax Lady to Trump) and her team would have done this no matter what. She did the same during her years in domestic politics. Countries outside EU might decide to do the same and Google could end up being used as global cash cow / hostage in the current trade war.
Next from EU seems to be a GAFA tax (named after Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon) to make sure digital services from companies "outside Europe" (translation: US) are taxed at the same level as for European companies. All the major countries already support this.
And as much as I'm not a Google fan...it's their OS and its free. If the Euro tech companies don't like it they can build their own and compete in the international markets.
But they can't and so they have "anti-monopoly" fines instead. They can't even be bothered to do what Amazon did with the Fire.
It probably would be easier to compete if:
a) The taxation was the same - and with Apple paying 0.00005% in tax vs. 12.5% for European companies... it is difficult to compete.
b) US companies like Microsoft and Google use their monopoly in one area to win markets in other areas (which is what EU is now trying to stop).
But then again - Europe shouldn't compete 1:1 against all US sectors. The basic concept of trade is to produce what you're good at.
Some here might want to take a look in the mirror before reveling in schadenfreude.
This is not some anti-US vendetta just because two out of hundreds of cases happen to hit Google and Microsoft (actually, Google is a repeat offender). Japanese Auto supplier Denso got hit in February, after getting hit BY THE US earlier.
Please post here for everyone, links to your other Apple blogs and Android / Google blogs.
We've all used PM's here for years to settle differences and clear up misunderstandings. The public threads are not meant for this.
Google will be accepting the top three bids submitted by competitors on a per country basis. Users in those countries will then be offered those three along with Google as search providers and the choice will have the appropriate search app automatically downloaded to the users device. This bid will be done annually. and will be sealed first-price auctions where bids will not be disclosed.