5 ms·

The crux of the article: Google said in February that device makers “are free to install the apps they choose, and consumers always have complete contro

by x0x0 11y ago

The crux of the article: Google said in February that device makers “are free to install the apps they choose, and consumers always have complete control over the apps on their devices.” Several device manufacturers that pre-install Yandex apps notified the company in 2014 that they were “no longer able to pre-install Yandex services,” such as Yandex’s search and map apps on Google’s Android devices, prompting Yandex to make a complaint to the antitrust authorities. [1] From an earlier article: In order to install Google Play on their devices, device manufacturers are required to preinstall the entire suite of Google GMS services, and set Google as the default search. In addition to that, device manufacturers are increasingly prohibited from installing any services from Google’s competitors on their devices… The openness of Android is now in a thing of the past.” [Yandex' claim] [2] [1] http://www.wsj.com/articles/google-found-guilty-of-abusing-dominant-market-position-in-russia-1442250025 http://www.wsj.com/articles/google-found-guilty-of-abusing-d... [2] http://techcrunch.com/2015/02/18/yandex-google-russia-antitrust/ http://techcrunch.com/2015/02/18/yandex-google-russia-antitr...

gress 11y ago
Protectionist as this move indoubtedly is, it seems as though the allegation is actually true.
fapjacks 11y ago
Sounds like some monopolization to me. Google can't be trusted to tell the truth here anymore than the US govt can be trusted to tell the truth about spying. There is absolutely zero incentive to admit to wrongdoing. My only question is why can't we go after Microsoft for locking down hardware in the same way.
- Someone1234 11y ago
  > My only question is why can't we go after Microsoft for locking down hardware in the same way. Microsoft's hardware (e.g. Surface Pro) is less locked down than the competition's version of the same (e.g. iPad). Why must ever topic devolve into Microsoft bashing?
  - fapjacks 11y ago
    I should clarify that here I'm not talking about Microsoft's hardware like the Surface. I'm talking about being able to buy a computer from a manufacturer without having to pay $99 for an installation of Microsoft Windows that I explicitly do not want. Some effort was made to stop this practice (of MS paying manufacturers not to offer machines without Windows), but it clearly didn't go very far in solving the problem. Either you're going to pay for a copy of MS Windows, or you're going to build your own machine (or pay about as much as Apple hardware costs from "specialty" hardware retailers). And to answer your question, I bring this up because I find it difficult to point fingers at Google for the same behavior without bringing up an example of a company that is flatly getting away with murder.
    - jasonlotito 11y ago
      > I'm talking about being able to buy a computer from a manufacturer without having to pay $99 for an installation of Microsoft Windows that I explicitly do not want. You can. You are not limited to specialty outfits as well, nor are you required to pay a lot for it, or any of the other numerous criteria you try to add on as well. Being able to buy a PC without paying for Windows or paying for an Apple product is incredibly easy for the average person today.
      - fapjacks 11y ago
        No, you are shoehorned into buying a very specific model. It should be no problem whatsoever to choose any model on that site, and select "Ubuntu" for the OS, but you can't. If you go and look (and here I mean actually go and look[0]), the vast majority of machines that you can buy do not have the option to not pay for a Windows license. The choice you get is "Windows 8.1 or Windows 10". [0] http://www.dell.com/us/p/laptops/xps-laptops http://www.dell.com/us/p/laptops/xps-laptops
        dump100 11y ago
        that is a choice Dell has made based of customer demand, sales and is no longer forced by MS to do so. MS tried this in 90s and it was major issue in the antitrust investigation
trhway 11y ago
basically deja vu of MS vs. Netscape and other independent software providers of 199x. For the last decade Google was basically replaying the MS scenario.

by x0x0 11y ago

gress 11y ago

Protectionist as this move indoubtedly is, it seems as though the allegation is actually true.

fapjacks 11y ago

Sounds like some monopolization to me. Google can't be trusted to tell the truth here anymore than the US govt can be trusted to tell the truth about spying. There is absolutely zero incentive to admit to wrongdoing. My only question is why can't we go after Microsoft for locking down hardware in the same way.

Someone1234 11y ago
> My only question is why can't we go after Microsoft for locking down hardware in the same way. Microsoft's hardware (e.g. Surface Pro) is less locked down than the competition's version of the same (e.g. iPad). Why must ever topic devolve into Microsoft bashing?
- fapjacks 11y ago
  I should clarify that here I'm not talking about Microsoft's hardware like the Surface. I'm talking about being able to buy a computer from a manufacturer without having to pay $99 for an installation of Microsoft Windows that I explicitly do not want. Some effort was made to stop this practice (of MS paying manufacturers not to offer machines without Windows), but it clearly didn't go very far in solving the problem. Either you're going to pay for a copy of MS Windows, or you're going to build your own machine (or pay about as much as Apple hardware costs from "specialty" hardware retailers). And to answer your question, I bring this up because I find it difficult to point fingers at Google for the same behavior without bringing up an example of a company that is flatly getting away with murder.
  - jasonlotito 11y ago
    > I'm talking about being able to buy a computer from a manufacturer without having to pay $99 for an installation of Microsoft Windows that I explicitly do not want. You can. You are not limited to specialty outfits as well, nor are you required to pay a lot for it, or any of the other numerous criteria you try to add on as well. Being able to buy a PC without paying for Windows or paying for an Apple product is incredibly easy for the average person today.
    - fapjacks 11y ago
      No, you are shoehorned into buying a very specific model. It should be no problem whatsoever to choose any model on that site, and select "Ubuntu" for the OS, but you can't. If you go and look (and here I mean actually go and look[0]), the vast majority of machines that you can buy do not have the option to not pay for a Windows license. The choice you get is "Windows 8.1 or Windows 10". [0] http://www.dell.com/us/p/laptops/xps-laptops http://www.dell.com/us/p/laptops/xps-laptops
      - dump100 11y ago
        that is a choice Dell has made based of customer demand, sales and is no longer forced by MS to do so. MS tried this in 90s and it was major issue in the antitrust investigation

trhway 11y ago

basically deja vu of MS vs. Netscape and other independent software providers of 199x. For the last decade Google was basically replaying the MS scenario.