I’m on Googles side with this. If the EU doesn’t like it, they can spend the time and money making their own OS and do with it as they see fit.
Their fracked up licensing of Android didn't allow "other OS" (sic) to be split off cause they'd lose access to the play store on the other fracking devices, so you can put that into your Goo pipe and smoke it bud.
Get some real info before assenting.
I don’t understand what you’re saying. AOSP is Google’s forked version that doesn’t include, or allow, Google’s Services. Though now, with payments, they might.
Samsung could not fork Android and sell a phone with that fork and one with Android, that's the whole point.
AOSP is not a fork, it's basically the base layer of Android without any Google services.
Amazon is a case in point with Kindle, it's a fork and they;re not selling a device Android with Google services.
Considering that is supposedly "open source", it's a hell of a joke that hopefully the EU thing will crack.
It is a fork, because it taking a different route. Removing services that were considered to be essential, that are replaced with different services from others, is a fork.
i’ve said that a manufacturer running Android couldn’t make AOSP models too, and the other way around. And AOSP makers aren’t allowed to officially call it android.
There is one other key change happening here. In the past, Google required that companies building phones or tablets that included the Play Store only build phones and tablets that included the Play Store — they couldn’t make other devices with a forked version of Android. Now, that’ll be allowed. So if Samsung wants to ship both the regular Galaxy S9 with Google’s Play Store and some whackadoo Galaxy phone that runs, say, Amazon’s Fire OS, it can now do that in Europe.
Google prevented licensees from making phones the phones they wanted to make, if they used Google software.
That's ironic.
While the Android fans went on about how Apple prevented anyone from running other app stores on the hardware they owned, Google was forcing its partners into deals ensuring that no other app store would survive on the hardware they didn't own.
Google's version of 'open'.
Google needs to fire its lawyers. They only had to look at the Microsoft case to know this was illegal. Or did the management know and just think they could get away with it?
Basically the last. It the same situation they had with Java. While Google’s engineers sent emails back and forth stating that they needed to license it, and did management know, Google was saying that as an “innovator” they could take any IP they wanted.
But the other reason they’ll lose is because the EU is both the judge and jury, which in my layperson’s opinion, is bloody ridiculous.
This is of course incorrect. It is the European Commission in Brussels that detects if Google has violated he EU competition rules and decides for a penalty. It is the European Court in Luxembourg that decides on the appeal. It is bloody ridiculous that ignorant people always assume they know the absolute truth
The European Comission in Brussels and the European Court in Luxembourg. Both in the EU.
It’s blood ridiculous that some people are so gullible.
I think it was pretty clear you meant the EU Commission and not the EU government at large. Otherwise your comment would make no sense. Of course EU competition issues would be settled by EU government agencies and courts just as US issues are settled by US agencies and courts, and same with China. You can't appeal this to the US Supreme Court. Nothing wrong about that is there? The rulings only apply to business operations taking place in those countries/regions, not worldwide which is proper.
Now as for financial penalties being based on worldwide revenues and not EU-specific ones you might claim that to be "bloody ridiculous" and I might agree with you as would some others.
The controversy with this is that a lot of what the EU commission does does affect companies worldwide. Not this issue, particularly, but many others.
Makes the point that the EU could look like China's Android market; ASOP plus each company's own UI, and access to a lot of stores, and lots of services not necessarily Google.
Me, I'm happy for Apple's Walled Garden, thanks very much.
I’m on Googles side with this. If the EU doesn’t like it, they can spend the time and money making their own OS and do with it as they see fit.
Google is not forcing any company to use their OS. There are other OS's out there they can pick from and use. This is just trying to get things both ways. I think Google should just charge $50 for every copy of Android sold in the EU. Then you can keep and delete any part of the OS you want. You want a forked version, so be it. As part of that fee, you get free security updates. Any OS upgrades for that phone will cost a OS Upgrade fee.
I’m on Googles side with this. If the EU doesn’t like it, they can spend the time and money making their own OS and do with it as they see fit.
Their fracked up licensing of Android didn't allow "other OS" (sic) to be split off cause they'd lose access to the play store on the other fracking devices, so you can put that into your Goo pipe and smoke it bud.
Get some real info before assenting.
Wow you are a RUDE PILE OF CR*P!!!
You don't know what you're talking about. Yes Google Licence Android to use it. This in keeping from the same company being able to use FORKED versions of Android. I'm all for Google now just charging any phone sold in the EU that wants to use Android a $50 Licence fee. Maybe more!!! Then if you want to use a forked version of Android on your phone, you are free to do so and Google will still support you in the Play store and anything else and still get security updates. If you want a OS upgrade on that phone, that's another fee, a reduced Upgrade OS fee.
So long as these company's are getting the OS for free, they should have to follow the rules GOOGLE put forth. Google is the one spending the time and money in developing the OS. These company's just want Google to spend their money and time, and then they do anything they want with it. Well F the EU!!!!! You can't have it both ways.
Google is not forcing a single company to use Android. Company's in China managed to have nothing at all to do with Google. They do just fine. Amazon has nothing to do with Google . These company's can spend their own time and money writing their own OS and do anything they want with that. There are also other choices. It was really these dumb company's using that free Android OS, and now making it the dominate OS out there. I don't even like Android for a number of reasons, but I'm still on Google's side of this. This is really a load of B.S. Attacking yet another American Company for MONEY. Which is really just theft. Why bother doing anything in the EU. No American company is stopping anyone in the EU from creating their own OS or using something that's already out there.
I'm sure there's others out there that haven't been discontinued.
Instead these company's want Google to do all the work and spend all the money, and then they can come along, take it, and do anything they want. Well that is just flat out wrong. Sounds like Entitlement for a Business.
I know you’re just throwing a number out there, but wow, it better not be close to $50. The average Android phone sells for $230, worldwide, and I’d bet not much more in the EU, which has a large number of, shall we say, not rich members?
Google are trying to fulfill a directive, not transform their business model. The charge will be as low as they can make it while satisfying the ruling.
I’m on Googles side with this. If the EU doesn’t like it, they can spend the time and money making their own OS and do with it as they see fit.
Their fracked up licensing of Android didn't allow "other OS" (sic) to be split off cause they'd lose access to the play store on the other fracking devices, so you can put that into your Goo pipe and smoke it bud.
Get some real info before assenting.
Wow you are a RUDE PILE OF CR*P!!!
You don't know what you're talking about. Yes Google Licence Android to use it. This in keeping from the same company being able to use FORKED versions of Android. I'm all for Google now just charging any phone sold in the EU that wants to use Android a $50 Licence fee. Maybe more!!! Then if you want to use a forked version of Android on your phone, you are free to do so and Google will still support you in the Play store and anything else and still get security updates. If you want a OS upgrade on that phone, that's another fee, a reduced Upgrade OS fee.
So long as these company's are getting the OS for free, they should have to follow the rules GOOGLE put forth. Google is the one spending the time and money in developing the OS. These company's just want Google to spend their money and time, and then they do anything they want with it. Well F the EU!!!!! You can't have it both ways.
Google is not forcing a single company to use Android. Company's in China managed to have nothing at all to do with Google. They do just fine. Amazon has nothing to do with Google . These company's can spend their own time and money writing their own OS and do anything they want with that. There are also other choices. It was really these dumb company's using that free Android OS, and now making it the dominate OS out there. I don't even like Android for a number of reasons, but I'm still on Google's side of this. This is really a load of B.S. Attacking yet another American Company for MONEY. Which is really just theft. Why bother doing anything in the EU. No American company is stopping anyone in the EU from creating their own OS or using something that's already out there.
I'm sure there's others out there that haven't been discontinued.
Instead these company's want Google to do all the work and spend all the money, and then they can come along, take it, and do anything they want. Well that is just flat out wrong. Sounds like Entitlement for a Business.
I know you’re just throwing a number out there, but wow, it better not be close to $50. The average Android phone sells for $230, worldwide, and I’d bet not much more in the EU, which has a large number of, shall we say, not rich members?
Google are trying to fulfill a directive, not transform their business model. The charge will be as low as they can make it while satisfying the ruling.
From Google's perspective, it would want the fee to license the Play Store to reflect the value of no longer being able to bundle the Google search app and Chrome browser with it.
The European Commission didn't tell Google that it has to charge for a Play Store license. The Commission told Google that, among other things, it couldn't require device makers to pre-install the Google Search app and Chrome browser if they want to license the Play Store. The Commission believes the Play Store is a must-have app for device makers. Google was, in essence, monetizing that reality by requiring device makers to pre-install Google Search and Chrome as well. Because it can no longer do that, Google needs (or wants) to monetize the must-have nature of the Play Store by charging for it directly. So it is meaningfully changing its business model, at least when it comes to the European market.
I’m on Googles side with this. If the EU doesn’t like it, they can spend the time and money making their own OS and do with it as they see fit.
Their fracked up licensing of Android didn't allow "other OS" (sic) to be split off cause they'd lose access to the play store on the other fracking devices, so you can put that into your Goo pipe and smoke it bud.
Get some real info before assenting.
Wow you are a RUDE PILE OF CR*P!!!
You don't know what you're talking about. Yes Google Licence Android to use it. This in keeping from the same company being able to use FORKED versions of Android. I'm all for Google now just charging any phone sold in the EU that wants to use Android a $50 Licence fee. Maybe more!!! Then if you want to use a forked version of Android on your phone, you are free to do so and Google will still support you in the Play store and anything else and still get security updates. If you want a OS upgrade on that phone, that's another fee, a reduced Upgrade OS fee.
So long as these company's are getting the OS for free, they should have to follow the rules GOOGLE put forth. Google is the one spending the time and money in developing the OS. These company's just want Google to spend their money and time, and then they do anything they want with it. Well F the EU!!!!! You can't have it both ways.
Google is not forcing a single company to use Android. Company's in China managed to have nothing at all to do with Google. They do just fine. Amazon has nothing to do with Google . These company's can spend their own time and money writing their own OS and do anything they want with that. There are also other choices. It was really these dumb company's using that free Android OS, and now making it the dominate OS out there. I don't even like Android for a number of reasons, but I'm still on Google's side of this. This is really a load of B.S. Attacking yet another American Company for MONEY. Which is really just theft. Why bother doing anything in the EU. No American company is stopping anyone in the EU from creating their own OS or using something that's already out there.
I'm sure there's others out there that haven't been discontinued.
Instead these company's want Google to do all the work and spend all the money, and then they can come along, take it, and do anything they want. Well that is just flat out wrong. Sounds like Entitlement for a Business.
I know you’re just throwing a number out there, but wow, it better not be close to $50. The average Android phone sells for $230, worldwide, and I’d bet not much more in the EU, which has a large number of, shall we say, not rich members?
Google are trying to fulfill a directive, not transform their business model. The charge will be as low as they can make it while satisfying the ruling.
The point of the directive is to change Google’s business model in the EU.
I know you’re just throwing a number out there, but wow, it better not be close to $50. The average Android phone sells for $230, worldwide, and I’d bet not much more in the EU, which has a large number of, shall we say, not rich members?
Google are trying to fulfill a directive, not transform their business model. The charge will be as low as they can make it while satisfying the ruling.
I know you’re just throwing a number out there, but wow, it better not be close to $50. The average Android phone sells for $230, worldwide, and I’d bet not much more in the EU, which has a large number of, shall we say, not rich members?
I know you’re just throwing a number out there, but wow, it better not be close to $50. The average Android phone sells for $230, worldwide, and I’d bet not much more in the EU, which has a large number of, shall we say, not rich members?
Google are trying to fulfill a directive, not transform their business model. The charge will be as low as they can make it while satisfying the ruling.
I know you’re just throwing a number out there, but wow, it better not be close to $50. The average Android phone sells for $230, worldwide, and I’d bet not much more in the EU, which has a large number of, shall we say, not rich members?
I know you’re just throwing a number out there, but wow, it better not be close to $50. The average Android phone sells for $230, worldwide, and I’d bet not much more in the EU, which has a large number of, shall we say, not rich members?
Google are trying to fulfill a directive, not transform their business model. The charge will be as low as they can make it while satisfying the ruling.
I know you’re just throwing a number out there, but wow, it better not be close to $50. The average Android phone sells for $230, worldwide, and I’d bet not much more in the EU, which has a large number of, shall we say, not rich members?
What the heck Mel? You're saying Statista is wrong, but then Statista is right?? That came from the same dang source I used. See the name in the lower right corner? Geesh....
EDIT: Your "preferred" average price isn't even as good as I initially thought it was. The graph you chose for "proof" shows the actual average selling price for smartphones in 2012 and 2013. The numbers for 2014 thru 2018 that you thought were proof are showing forecasts rather than actual results. The chart I had posted for youand others (which I thought you'd find helpful, my mistake) was based off actual results, real point-of-sale data and not some projected guess.
Calling out others rudely really isn't the way to go Mel. Sometimes as in this case it turns out that you were the one relying on data that wasn't stating the facts you thought it was and so just makes you look silly by claiming someone else is "Sorry, wrong again".
I know you’re just throwing a number out there, but wow, it better not be close to $50. The average Android phone sells for $230, worldwide, and I’d bet not much more in the EU, which has a large number of, shall we say, not rich members?
Google are trying to fulfill a directive, not transform their business model. The charge will be as low as they can make it while satisfying the ruling.
I know you’re just throwing a number out there, but wow, it better not be close to $50. The average Android phone sells for $230, worldwide, and I’d bet not much more in the EU, which has a large number of, shall we say, not rich members?
What the heck Mel? You're saying Statista is wrong, but then Statista is right?? That came from the same dang source I used. See the name in the lower right corner? Geesh....
EDIT: Your "preferred" average price isn't even as good as I initially thought it was. The graph you chose for "proof" shows the actual average selling price for smartphones in 2012 and 2013. The numbers for 2014 thru 2018 that you thought were proof are showing forecasts rather than actual results. The chart I had posted for youand others (which I thought you'd find helpful, my mistake) was based off actual results, real point-of-sale data and not some projected guess.
Calling out others rudely really isn't the way to go Mel. Sometimes as in this case it turns out that you were the one relying on data that wasn't stating the facts you thought it was and so just makes you look silly by claiming someone else is "Sorry, wrong again".
Oh please. You’re saying that suddenly, prices for Android rose bu 100% over the chart? You know that’s ridiculous. If anything, with Samsung Galaxy Phone sales dropping year over year, and others not having much better luck at it, the numbers have dropped below the forecasts, not above.
I know you’re just throwing a number out there, but wow, it better not be close to $50. The average Android phone sells for $230, worldwide, and I’d bet not much more in the EU, which has a large number of, shall we say, not rich members?
Google are trying to fulfill a directive, not transform their business model. The charge will be as low as they can make it while satisfying the ruling.
I know you’re just throwing a number out there, but wow, it better not be close to $50. The average Android phone sells for $230, worldwide, and I’d bet not much more in the EU, which has a large number of, shall we say, not rich members?
What the heck Mel? You're saying Statista is wrong, but then Statista is right?? That came from the same dang source I used. See the name in the lower right corner? Geesh....
EDIT: Your "preferred" average price isn't even as good as I initially thought it was. The graph you chose for "proof" shows the actual average selling price for smartphones in 2012 and 2013. The numbers for 2014 thru 2018 that you thought were proof are showing forecasts rather than actual results. The chart I had posted for youand others (which I thought you'd find helpful, my mistake) was based off actual results, real point-of-sale data and not some projected guess.
Calling out others rudely really isn't the way to go Mel. Sometimes as in this case it turns out that you were the one relying on data that wasn't stating the facts you thought it was and so just makes you look silly by claiming someone else is "Sorry, wrong again".
Oh please. You’re saying that suddenly, prices for Android rose bu 100% over the chart? You know that’s ridiculous. If anything, with Samsung Galaxy Phone sales dropping year over year, and others not having much better luck at it, the numbers have dropped below the forecasts, not above.
and you are wrong again.
I'm not saying anything, simply quoting from a source that YOU decided was trustworthy, The "proof" you liked was predictions and guesses. They one I offered you was based on actual sales. Both came from the same site, but one based on actual sales results (mine) would obviously trump one based on guesses on what might happen in the future (yours).
Once again I think you'd be better off just dropping it. You aren't doing yourself any favors.
I know you’re just throwing a number out there, but wow, it better not be close to $50. The average Android phone sells for $230, worldwide, and I’d bet not much more in the EU, which has a large number of, shall we say, not rich members?
Google are trying to fulfill a directive, not transform their business model. The charge will be as low as they can make it while satisfying the ruling.
I know you’re just throwing a number out there, but wow, it better not be close to $50. The average Android phone sells for $230, worldwide, and I’d bet not much more in the EU, which has a large number of, shall we say, not rich members?
What the heck Mel? You're saying Statista is wrong, but then Statista is right?? That came from the same dang source I used. See the name in the lower right corner? Geesh....
EDIT: Your "preferred" average price isn't even as good as I initially thought it was. The graph you chose for "proof" shows the actual average selling price for smartphones in 2012 and 2013. The numbers for 2014 thru 2018 that you thought were proof are showing forecasts rather than actual results. The chart I had posted for youand others (which I thought you'd find helpful, my mistake) was based off actual results, real point-of-sale data and not some projected guess.
Calling out others rudely really isn't the way to go Mel. Sometimes as in this case it turns out that you were the one relying on data that wasn't stating the facts you thought it was and so just makes you look silly by claiming someone else is "Sorry, wrong again".
Oh please. You’re saying that suddenly, prices for Android rose bu 100% over the chart? You know that’s ridiculous. If anything, with Samsung Galaxy Phone sales dropping year over year, and others not having much better luck at it, the numbers have dropped below the forecasts, not above.
and you are wrong again.
I'm not saying anything, simply quoting from a source that YOU decided was trustworthy, The "proof" you liked was predictions and guesses. They one I offered you was based on actual sales. Both came from the same site, but one based on actual sales results (mine) would obviously trump one based on guesses on what might happen in the future (yours).
Once again I think you'd be better off just dropping it. You aren't doing yourself any favors.
You don’t understand the statistics you yourself presented. That’s pretty clear. You’re misconstruing the overall phone prices around the world, which include iPhone, and any other phone pricing, with the info I presented, which shows android phone pricing. Take out the average of about $740 per iPhone average, and the average of Android matches the numbers shown in the chart I provided. It’s really easy to understand.
I know you’re just throwing a number out there, but wow, it better not be close to $50. The average Android phone sells for $230, worldwide, and I’d bet not much more in the EU, which has a large number of, shall we say, not rich members?
Google are trying to fulfill a directive, not transform their business model. The charge will be as low as they can make it while satisfying the ruling.
I know you’re just throwing a number out there, but wow, it better not be close to $50. The average Android phone sells for $230, worldwide, and I’d bet not much more in the EU, which has a large number of, shall we say, not rich members?
What the heck Mel? You're saying Statista is wrong, but then Statista is right?? That came from the same dang source I used. See the name in the lower right corner? Geesh....
EDIT: Your "preferred" average price isn't even as good as I initially thought it was. The graph you chose for "proof" shows the actual average selling price for smartphones in 2012 and 2013. The numbers for 2014 thru 2018 that you thought were proof are showing forecasts rather than actual results. The chart I had posted for youand others (which I thought you'd find helpful, my mistake) was based off actual results, real point-of-sale data and not some projected guess.
Calling out others rudely really isn't the way to go Mel. Sometimes as in this case it turns out that you were the one relying on data that wasn't stating the facts you thought it was and so just makes you look silly by claiming someone else is "Sorry, wrong again".
Oh please. You’re saying that suddenly, prices for Android rose bu 100% over the chart? You know that’s ridiculous. If anything, with Samsung Galaxy Phone sales dropping year over year, and others not having much better luck at it, the numbers have dropped below the forecasts, not above.
and you are wrong again.
I'm not saying anything, simply quoting from a source that YOU decided was trustworthy, The "proof" you liked was predictions and guesses. They one I offered you was based on actual sales. Both came from the same site, but one based on actual sales results (mine) would obviously trump one based on guesses on what might happen in the future (yours).
Once again I think you'd be better off just dropping it. You aren't doing yourself any favors.
You don’t understand the statistics you yourself presented. That’s pretty clear. You’re misconstruing the overall phone prices around the world, which include iPhone, and any other phone pricing, with the info I presented, which shows android phone pricing. Take out the average of about $740 per iPhone average, and the average of Android matches the numbers shown in the chart I provided. It’s really easy to understand.
I know you’re just throwing a number out there, but wow, it better not be close to $50. The average Android phone sells for $230, worldwide, and I’d bet not much more in the EU, which has a large number of, shall we say, not rich members?
Google are trying to fulfill a directive, not transform their business model. The charge will be as low as they can make it while satisfying the ruling.
I know you’re just throwing a number out there, but wow, it better not be close to $50. The average Android phone sells for $230, worldwide, and I’d bet not much more in the EU, which has a large number of, shall we say, not rich members?
What the heck Mel? You're saying Statista is wrong, but then Statista is right?? That came from the same dang source I used. See the name in the lower right corner? Geesh....
EDIT: Your "preferred" average price isn't even as good as I initially thought it was. The graph you chose for "proof" shows the actual average selling price for smartphones in 2012 and 2013. The numbers for 2014 thru 2018 that you thought were proof are showing forecasts rather than actual results. The chart I had posted for youand others (which I thought you'd find helpful, my mistake) was based off actual results, real point-of-sale data and not some projected guess.
Calling out others rudely really isn't the way to go Mel. Sometimes as in this case it turns out that you were the one relying on data that wasn't stating the facts you thought it was and so just makes you look silly by claiming someone else is "Sorry, wrong again".
Oh please. You’re saying that suddenly, prices for Android rose bu 100% over the chart? You know that’s ridiculous. If anything, with Samsung Galaxy Phone sales dropping year over year, and others not having much better luck at it, the numbers have dropped below the forecasts, not above.
and you are wrong again.
I'm not saying anything, simply quoting from a source that YOU decided was trustworthy, The "proof" you liked was predictions and guesses. They one I offered you was based on actual sales. Both came from the same site, but one based on actual sales results (mine) would obviously trump one based on guesses on what might happen in the future (yours).
Once again I think you'd be better off just dropping it. You aren't doing yourself any favors.
You don’t understand the statistics you yourself presented. That’s pretty clear. You’re misconstruing the overall phone prices around the world, which include iPhone, and any other phone pricing, with the info I presented, which shows android phone pricing. Take out the average of about $740 per iPhone average, and the average of Android matches the numbers shown in the chart I provided. It’s really easy to understand.
Mel, you were specifically asking about European smartphone pricing, not worldwide. The chart I linked had those figures while yours (based on guesses) did not. I really was trying to be helpful with no attempt at showing anyone was "wrong", just offering a view into how prices differ across regions which was something you were taking a stab at guessing. "Sorry, you're wrong again" was both uncalled for and, well, wrong. But do carry on.
I know you’re just throwing a number out there, but wow, it better not be close to $50. The average Android phone sells for $230, worldwide, and I’d bet not much more in the EU, which has a large number of, shall we say, not rich members?
Google are trying to fulfill a directive, not transform their business model. The charge will be as low as they can make it while satisfying the ruling.
I know you’re just throwing a number out there, but wow, it better not be close to $50. The average Android phone sells for $230, worldwide, and I’d bet not much more in the EU, which has a large number of, shall we say, not rich members?
What the heck Mel? You're saying Statista is wrong, but then Statista is right?? That came from the same dang source I used. See the name in the lower right corner? Geesh....
EDIT: Your "preferred" average price isn't even as good as I initially thought it was. The graph you chose for "proof" shows the actual average selling price for smartphones in 2012 and 2013. The numbers for 2014 thru 2018 that you thought were proof are showing forecasts rather than actual results. The chart I had posted for youand others (which I thought you'd find helpful, my mistake) was based off actual results, real point-of-sale data and not some projected guess.
Calling out others rudely really isn't the way to go Mel. Sometimes as in this case it turns out that you were the one relying on data that wasn't stating the facts you thought it was and so just makes you look silly by claiming someone else is "Sorry, wrong again".
Oh please. You’re saying that suddenly, prices for Android rose bu 100% over the chart? You know that’s ridiculous. If anything, with Samsung Galaxy Phone sales dropping year over year, and others not having much better luck at it, the numbers have dropped below the forecasts, not above.
and you are wrong again.
I'm not saying anything, simply quoting from a source that YOU decided was trustworthy, The "proof" you liked was predictions and guesses. They one I offered you was based on actual sales. Both came from the same site, but one based on actual sales results (mine) would obviously trump one based on guesses on what might happen in the future (yours).
Once again I think you'd be better off just dropping it. You aren't doing yourself any favors.
You don’t understand the statistics you yourself presented. That’s pretty clear. You’re misconstruing the overall phone prices around the world, which include iPhone, and any other phone pricing, with the info I presented, which shows android phone pricing. Take out the average of about $740 per iPhone average, and the average of Android matches the numbers shown in the chart I provided. It’s really easy to understand.
Mel, you were specifically asking about European smartphone pricing, not worldwide. The chart I linked had those figures while yours (based on guesses) did not. I really was trying to be helpful with no attempt at showing anyone was "wrong", just offering a view into how prices differ across regions which was something you were taking a stab at guessing. "Sorry, you're wrong again" was both uncalled for and, well, wrong. But do carry on.
Again, you’re not Reid g your charts correctly. Those are not Android smartphone prices, they’re smartphone prices. Why are you ignoring what the chart is measuring, and crying as thought it’s measuring Android pricing, when it is not? The chart I provided shows Android pricing. That’s the relevant number, not the one you provided. Pay attention to what you show us.
I know you’re just throwing a number out there, but wow, it better not be close to $50. The average Android phone sells for $230, worldwide, and I’d bet not much more in the EU, which has a large number of, shall we say, not rich members?
Google are trying to fulfill a directive, not transform their business model. The charge will be as low as they can make it while satisfying the ruling.
I know you’re just throwing a number out there, but wow, it better not be close to $50. The average Android phone sells for $230, worldwide, and I’d bet not much more in the EU, which has a large number of, shall we say, not rich members?
What the heck Mel? You're saying Statista is wrong, but then Statista is right?? That came from the same dang source I used. See the name in the lower right corner? Geesh....
EDIT: Your "preferred" average price isn't even as good as I initially thought it was. The graph you chose for "proof" shows the actual average selling price for smartphones in 2012 and 2013. The numbers for 2014 thru 2018 that you thought were proof are showing forecasts rather than actual results. The chart I had posted for youand others (which I thought you'd find helpful, my mistake) was based off actual results, real point-of-sale data and not some projected guess.
Calling out others rudely really isn't the way to go Mel. Sometimes as in this case it turns out that you were the one relying on data that wasn't stating the facts you thought it was and so just makes you look silly by claiming someone else is "Sorry, wrong again".
Oh please. You’re saying that suddenly, prices for Android rose bu 100% over the chart? You know that’s ridiculous. If anything, with Samsung Galaxy Phone sales dropping year over year, and others not having much better luck at it, the numbers have dropped below the forecasts, not above.
and you are wrong again.
I'm not saying anything, simply quoting from a source that YOU decided was trustworthy, The "proof" you liked was predictions and guesses. They one I offered you was based on actual sales. Both came from the same site, but one based on actual sales results (mine) would obviously trump one based on guesses on what might happen in the future (yours).
Once again I think you'd be better off just dropping it. You aren't doing yourself any favors.
You don’t understand the statistics you yourself presented. That’s pretty clear. You’re misconstruing the overall phone prices around the world, which include iPhone, and any other phone pricing, with the info I presented, which shows android phone pricing. Take out the average of about $740 per iPhone average, and the average of Android matches the numbers shown in the chart I provided. It’s really easy to understand.
Mel, you were specifically asking about European smartphone pricing, not worldwide. The chart I linked had those figures while yours (based on guesses) did not. I really was trying to be helpful with no attempt at showing anyone was "wrong", just offering a view into how prices differ across regions which was something you were taking a stab at guessing. "Sorry, you're wrong again" was both uncalled for and, well, wrong. But do carry on.
Again, you’re not Reid g your charts correctly. Those are not Android smartphone prices, they’re smartphone prices. Why are you ignoring what the chart is measuring, and crying as thought it’s measuring Android pricing, when it is not? The chart I provided shows Android pricing. That’s the relevant number, not the one you provided. Pay attention to what you show us.
Sp Mel, what's the average Android smartphone price in Western Europe compared to Asia or Eastern Europe? You're saying it's the same everywhere? It looks like your number s simply reporting a projected worldwide average price form "analysts" rather than based on actual results. Is that correct? If so pay more attention yourself.
To repeat what I said earlier, I was attempting to be helpful by showing that average prices differ by region. They are NOT the same in every market.
Comments
i’ve said that a manufacturer running Android couldn’t make AOSP models too, and the other way around. And AOSP makers aren’t allowed to officially call it android.
amazon uses AOSP.
Basically the last. It the same situation they had with Java. While Google’s engineers sent emails back and forth stating that they needed to license it, and did management know, Google was saying that as an “innovator” they could take any IP they wanted.
The controversy with this is that a lot of what the EU commission does does affect companies worldwide. Not this issue, particularly, but many others.
https://www.theverge.com/2018/10/17/17988564/chinese-phone-software-android-iphone-copy-ui
Makes the point that the EU could look like China's Android market; ASOP plus each company's own UI, and access to a lot of stores, and lots of services not necessarily Google.
Me, I'm happy for Apple's Walled Garden, thanks very much.
The European Commission didn't tell Google that it has to charge for a Play Store license. The Commission told Google that, among other things, it couldn't require device makers to pre-install the Google Search app and Chrome browser if they want to license the Play Store. The Commission believes the Play Store is a must-have app for device makers. Google was, in essence, monetizing that reality by requiring device makers to pre-install Google Search and Chrome as well. Because it can no longer do that, Google needs (or wants) to monetize the must-have nature of the Play Store by charging for it directly. So it is meaningfully changing its business model, at least when it comes to the European market.
https://9to5mac.com/2018/10/21/do-apple-products-warrant-their-premium-price/
https://www.statista.com/statistics/309472/global-average-selling-price-smartphones/
Meaningless. What matters is sales, not abberent discussion.
EDIT: Your "preferred" average price isn't even as good as I initially thought it was. The graph you chose for "proof" shows the actual average selling price for smartphones in 2012 and 2013. The numbers for 2014 thru 2018 that you thought were proof are showing forecasts rather than actual results.
The chart I had posted for you and others (which I thought you'd find helpful, my mistake) was based off actual results, real point-of-sale data and not some projected guess.
Calling out others rudely really isn't the way to go Mel. Sometimes as in this case it turns out that you were the one relying on data that wasn't stating the facts you thought it was and so just makes you look silly by claiming someone else is "Sorry, wrong again".
and you are wrong again.
Once again I think you'd be better off just dropping it. You aren't doing yourself any favors.
To repeat what I said earlier, I was attempting to be helpful by showing that average prices differ by region. They are NOT the same in every market.