• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Antitrust: European Commission Fines Google for Record €4.34 billion for Illegal Practices

This is too little when compared of previous incidents. Google is doing much worse than what microsoft did in the IE case.
 
Xaled said:
This is too little when compared of previous incidents. Google is doing much worse than what microsoft did in the IE case.
Click to expand...
Please, do elaborate.
We have Apple that is free to put up any fences they want, because they control their phones from top to bottom. We have Google that gives everyone the OS for free, but requires some apps be installed by default so they make some money back through ads. And we had Windows Phone that carried a licensing fee and like iOS didn't allow customization at all (afaik). How is Google the bad guy here? I'd really like to know.
 
Google isn't the only 'bad guy', but certainly is one. Monopolies often emerge from something initially good and revolutionary, and end in something different. Google is definitely a search-engine monopolist - it was the best in early days, and is the best still. But, does it come from their continuous increasing in proficiency, or has it some connection with destroying competition and enlarging initial business in one super-business (take care about companies that Google/Alphabet now owns)?

The one which incidentally wants to have most of your private info, credit card number, and whatnot; has search history and scans your email for keywords (last one without visible notice, perhaps it was hidden somewhere in huge end user agreement) - or, to be paranoid, sells you a OS on device with camera and microphone where mic is always 'on' to hear 'OK, Google' - does it listens for something else, too? Does it listens only what owner says? And Google has highly developed voice recognition and translation software, too. Paranoid person can't feel safe as long as any Google-powered device is around. Non-paranoid one just doesn't care about those.

I stopped using smart-phones (tending to be paranoid) several years ago, but for everyone - it's (in my firm belief) not a question *what if it happens* if Google is hacked, but rather *when it happens* or *did it happened already*. There's no 100% unbreakable system - and having years of information all in one basket...

And I'm happy because of EC penalty and hope this is just a beginning - not only for Google, but all companies in similar position. Someone might remember at some time Microsoft was near to be separated into several companies (by US laws and on their initiative), because 'monopolistic behaviour'....
 
I don't disagree with what you have said. But I still disagree with the way this was handled. If indeed Google started leveraging its position long ago, why wasn't action taken earlier?
And the answer is, because EU laws were not clear in this area, nobody could tell whether Google's actions were legit or not. However, when you have rules that you yourself aren't sure how to enforce, a lengthy investigation that ends up in a huge fine seems to be just about the worst way to go about it.

Also, I'm still puzzled at people acting like gmail scanning emails was some shady thing Google does. I've had a gmail address since the thing was in beta and invitational only. And it was crystal clear for every user back then that the service was about targeted advertising by scanning emails. I don't know how almost 15 years later people act like this is surprising: it was crystal clear from day 1.
 
Durvelle27 said:
This is no different than Apple preinstalled Safari or Siri search
Click to expand...

Uh yes it is.

Your example: Company A is having Company A's Software on Company A's branded hardware that is sold/distributed by Company A/x/y/z.
Example in the article: Company A is having Company A's Software on Company B's branded hardware that is sold/distributed by Company x/y/z.

Wanna play spot the differences?
 
But Google also included an app that makes getting any competing apps standard... It's called Google play store...
 
jmcslob said:
But Google also included an app that makes getting any competing apps standard... It's called Google play store...
Click to expand...

What? If that's a valid argument then any company can say they provide access to competing apps is a standard feature because the platform can access the internet. Convenience doesn't and shouldn't have any bearing. Otherwise logging in to windows opening IE to navigate to Mozilla's website to download Firefox shouldn't have been an issue at all.
 
Seems like a ridiculous thing to me. Why isn't Apple being fined into oblivion then? We all know they run a walled garden, far more than Google. And they really do restrict choice on their platform. Having a phone come with chrome and gmail etc isn't limiting choice, anyone with two brain cells to rub together can install an alternative app from the play store. More unsettling to me are things like what i ran into with a Galaxy Tab A 10.1 I recently worked on. Things like root app deleter and adaway did not work because the System partition was locked down somehow to where even with root I couldn't get rid of bloat apps, nor could adaway do what it needs to do to apply ad blocking. I also think root should be a standard, toggleable option somewhere inthe settings. It shouldn't be some out of the way process. It's my hardware, I should be able to do what I want with it. That said, I reiterate that it's laughable that Google is being sued for including Google apps in Android. There is no phone on the market that prevents you from installing an alternate app of your choice from the Play Store. I felt the same way when the EU went after Microsoft for including IE with Windows. Nobody forces you to use IE exclusively. Windows does not attempt to block you from installing whatever browser you want.
 
hat said:
Seems like a ridiculous thing to me. Why isn't Apple being fined into oblivion then? We all know they run a walled garden, far more than Google. And they really do restrict choice on their platform. Having a phone come with chrome and gmail etc isn't limiting choice, anyone with two brain cells to rub together can install an alternative app from the play store. More unsettling to me are things like what i ran into with a Galaxy Tab A 10.1 I recently worked on. Things like root app deleter and adaway did not work because the System partition was locked down somehow to where even with root I couldn't get rid of bloat apps, nor could adaway do what it needs to do to apply ad blocking. I also think root should be a standard, toggleable option somewhere inthe settings. It shouldn't be some out of the way process. It's my hardware, I should be able to do what I want with it. That said, I reiterate that it's laughable that Google is being sued for including Google apps in Android. There is no phone on the market that prevents you from installing an alternate app of your choice from the Play Store. I felt the same way when the EU went after Microsoft for including IE with Windows. Nobody forces you to use IE exclusively. Windows does not attempt to block you from installing whatever browser you want.
Click to expand...
I will add Samsung Connect to your list. A "nice" little apps that accesses your camera and microphone, but doesn't show up in the list of apps so you can control its permissions.
Legally, the EU can look at this however they want. But the truth is if Android was more "free for all", it would be a much worse ecosystem. Just at what giving manufacturers the freedom to install skins did.
 
Fortunately, custom ROMs are a thing on Android. Unfortunately, those are rather hit or miss...
 
hat said:
Fortunately, custom ROMs are a thing on Android. Unfortunately, those are rather hit or miss...
Click to expand...
I have yet to see a custom ROM that doesn't come with a list of rather scary issues. It's not Android's fault though, it's the closed drivers that get left behind and don't work well with newer Android versions (Linux kernel actually). So yeah, custom ROMs are a hobbyist's escape,but they're definitely not for the average Joe.
 
hat said:
There is no phone on the market that prevents you from installing an alternate app of your choice from the Play Store.
Click to expand...
iPhone.
Try installing an App from anywhere else but their closed shop and you get nowhere.
Admittedly you meant Android, but Apple pisses me off enough to warrant a mention.
 
bug said:
I'm sure you'd see the problem if GM sold you a car with GM tires that you can't replace, only install other tires alongside/over them ;)
But that was the case with Windows-IE. As I have written above, Android-Google Apps is not like that.

The fine seems excessive, though. Unless Google has been given the chance to fix these before and didn't act on it. I don't recall the press writing about anything like that.
Click to expand...


But, if I was car shopping, and having the option of replacing tires on my car was desired, then I wouldn't buy a GM vehicle. You have to be stupid to buy something, or agree to a contract, and then complain about what you bought or agreed to.

It's not like it's a bait and switch. They knew these details when they agreed to license the Play Store. Your choice is to not license it and go with another option - and if there are no appealing other options, create it yourself, and go through the all the R&D costs, and growing pains, then you can make your own decisions on how you share your own product, or not.
 
Diverge said:
But, if I was car shopping, and having the option of replacing tires on my car was desired, then I wouldn't buy a GM vehicle. You have to be stupid to buy something, or agree to a contract, and then complain about what you bought or agreed to.

It's not like it's a bait and switch. They knew these details when they agreed to license the Play Store. Your choice is to not license it and go with another option - and if there are no appealing other options, create it yourself, and go through the all the R&D costs, and growing pains, then you can make your own decisions on how you share your own product, or not.
Click to expand...
Yeah, the GM analogy was aimed at the Windows-IE combo.
And yes, I agree about Play Store: there's no Play Store in China, so technically it can be done.
 
My phone came installed with Chrome and Opera and Opera had its own app store...
The decision to put Opera on my phone was that of ZTE....
Isn't it funny how every phone manufacturer customizes the OS to their standards and that of the carrier that it works on and yet Google is at fault.....
No this decision is quite stupid...
Methinks this is nothing but extortion to help pay for the Nanny state.
 
jmcslob said:
Isn't it funny how every phone manufacturer customizes the OS to their standards and that of the carrier that it works on and yet Google is at fault.....
Click to expand...

Yep. Kinda funny how power works isn't it? You know, having to have it before you can abuse it?
 
bug said:
Yeah, the GM analogy was aimed at the Windows-IE combo.
And yes, I agree about Play Store: there's no Play Store in China, so technically it can be done.
Click to expand...

Meh, even that isn't a valid excuse. You don't need the Play Store to install apps. You can find and install .apk files without the Play Store. Still, for most of the world, the Play Store (one of the included Google Apps, at that) is the easiest way to do it. As for China, I'd imagine the reason there's no Play Store is probably due to some wacky law they have over there... which is hardly Google's fault.
 
hat said:
Meh, even that isn't a valid excuse. You don't need the Play Store to install apps. You can find and install .apk files without the Play Store. Still, for most of the world, the Play Store (one of the included Google Apps, at that) is the easiest way to do it. As for China, I'd imagine the reason there's no Play Store is probably due to some wacky law they have over there... which is hardly Google's fault.
Click to expand...

Google has been cracking down on hard on acquiring and installing .apks from outside the play store. I don't know when they started I only found out when I had to send my phone in for repairs and needed to use a specific app. I tried using nox and bluestacks but since I kept getting device not supported on the play store page for either of them. I resorted to downloading the .apk. After the app launched and tried to check for updates, I was served an error message telling me to download the app via the play store. Curious I tried a few other apps and got the same notice.
 
Totally said:
Google has been cracking down on hard on acquiring and installing .apks from outside the play store. I don't know when they started I only found out when I had to send my phone in for repairs and needed to use a specific app. I tried using nox and bluestacks but since I kept getting device not supported on the play store page for either of them. I resorted to downloading the .apk. After the app launched and tried to check for updates, I was served an error message telling me to download the app via the play store. Curious I tried a few other apps and got the same notice.
Click to expand...

That's really strange... if Google (or anybody else from that matter) is attempting to block such installations, I find that more worthy of litigation than the thread topic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top