6 ms·

Apple has a market share of 100% of the iOS platform.

Analemma_ 10y ago
Which is like saying that Ford has 100% of the market share for Ford cars. Antitrust regulation cares about product categories, not brands.
- Steltek 10y ago
  But the EU charges are about Google's tactics within the Google run Android market. Google isn't leveraging it's monopoly outside of it's own brand either. The argument hinges on Google not owning or operating Android. AOSP has been a dead dream for a while now due to carriers locking down phones and Google needing to circle the wagons.
  - Esau 10y ago
    Android is bigger than Google. Other companies make Android devices.
    - danieldk 10y ago
      Google can exert a large amount of control over device makers --- Android without Google Play Services and the Google Play Store is pretty useless. (Unless you have Amazon's scale and can clone all that.)
      - totitipo 10y ago
        Android without Google Play Services/Store is not useless at all. Ask any Chinese Android user.
        ocdtrekkie 10y ago
        In China, apps Chinese citizens want are available in app stores available there. Everywhere else, Android apps people want are solely available through Google's store. And the only reason China has a competitive Android market: Google doesn't operate there. In fact, China proves what's so bad about the Play Store: We can definitively see how much more freedom exists if Google is axed from the equation.
        Fazzle 10y ago
        I don't think most of the Chinese app stores are good examples though. Too much piracy, too many repackaged apps and security nightmares.
        hooluupog 10y ago
        On the contrary,China proves what's so bad without the Play Store and GCM.Android is a mess there.
  - danieldk 10y ago
    iOS is a luxury brand (remember that carrier subsidies are smaller in the EU and are not allowed in some member states). So, realistically for a lot of people there is only one kind of affordable smartphone and that is an Android phone. As you mention, AOSP alone does not give you much Android and Google is likely to dictate all kinds of terms to use the Play services, Play Store, etc. So, the question is indeed does AOSP give enough to argue that Google does not fully control the Android market. Personally, I am not sure this is the most problematic aspect of Android though. If we assume for a moment that Android is a near-monopoly in the EU, the more troubling aspect is that people can only choose between having no smartphone (which is becoming harder) or letting Google suck all kinds of data out of them. In other words, only when you are rich enough, you can afford not to let a company suck up a lot of your private data.
    - home_boi 10y ago
      the info to root your device is free on the internet
      - ethbro 10y ago
        *For certain devices
        milankragujevic 10y ago
        Can't repeat this enough. My shitty Android tablet from Huawei that I got for free on contract cannot be rooted and is stuck on Android 4.1 forever, even though it has a modern ARM cpu and 1GB of RAM... :(
    - on_and_off 10y ago
      not sure that the argument that iOS is a luxury brand holds up in most european countries where you can just as well get an iOS or Android device with the same subsidization from the carrier (especially since Apple does not only sell its last generation high end devices). There are still a couple of european countries where iOS devices sell extremely poorly. I am not sure if this is because of an absence of subsidies or another reason. Even if Android is the only option, you can always choose to refuse all data sharing from google, you are not forced to create a google account or to use google play. Admittedly, it makes things harder for a neophyte.
  - tarancato 10y ago
    >AOSP has been a dead dream for a while now due to carriers locking down phones That's only in the US. Let's be honest here, AOSP is a dead dream because porting and maintaining AOSP for a device is kinda complicated. Many people do it for free, but you can't rely on that.
    - IshKebab 10y ago
      No, AOSP is a dead dream because Google moved essential code into Google Play Services, which isn't open source.
      - tarancato 10y ago
        Essential code such as what? Can't you boot AOSP without installing the Google apps?
        cwyers 10y ago
        Essential code for apps written against the platform's official APIs.
        IshKebab 10y ago
        You can but a huge number of apps use Google Play Services and you can't use those. I suppose technically you couldn't get them anyway since you don't have Google Play, but anyway. GPS includes stuff like location services, Firebase, Chromecast, analytics, Google account authentication, Google Drive APIs, all the game stuff, Android Pay, etc.
      - rhodysurf 10y ago
        You can write plenty of good apps without google play services. Thats hyperbole.
        ocdtrekkie 10y ago
        You can. But since almost nobody does, there's no viable use for a phone without it. Bear in mind, even Microsoft, who was part of starting this investigation against Google... Even Microsoft's apps like Outlook and Skype won't run without Play Services installed and enabled.
- jmfayard 10y ago
  The point is that given how cars and software work, "ios devices" is a meaningful category while "ford cars" is not. Or which things can monopolistic companies do that non-monopolistic companies can't do? Can or do Apple do those things?
  - onli 10y ago
    It's not a meaningful category. They are all mobile phones, or smartphones if need be to distinguish there. Which practices a monopolistic company can do, but is not allowed to, is written clearly in the article: Forcing/Paying other companies to pre-install its proprietary apps. A non-monopolistic company is allowed to do that.
M2Ys4U 10y ago
The same could be said about anything if you draw the 'market' boundaries narrowly enough. My local corner shop has a market share of 100% of the places I can buy things if I walk 30 seconds but that's hardly relevant when I can drive 10-15 minutes and have 4 different supermarkets at my disposal.
- Nullabillity 10y ago
  If you bought bread from the corner store then you can still spread butter from the supermarket on it. Your two purchases were independent. That's not relevant in the phone market, where you're stuck with a specific platform once you've made your initial phone purchase. You can't use it with applications from other platforms, and switching platforms means you need to purchase all the stuff you're using all over again.
johncolanduoni 10y ago
So if I write any piece of software, even if only one person uses it, I can be forced by anti-trust regulation to make it compatible with any other software or at least release the source code? Do you really think that's what anti-trust regulation implies?
- piyush_soni 10y ago
  No. I think it doesn't matter to them until it becomes the majority platform (not that that's any less stupid).
- ocdtrekkie 10y ago
  It seems incredibly hard for people to grasp how antitrust law works. It's very simple: Antitrust law only affects those with a massively dominant control over a market.
  - mwfunk 10y ago
    Exactly. If you're not a monopoly (or otherwise massively dominant in the market you compete in), antitrust law doesn't apply to you. Antitrust law is specifically to guard against the situation where one player in a market is so dominant, that the market itself becomes less competitive. Although usually when I hear people misuse antitrust concepts on tech forums, they're not trying to understand complicated legal conflicts, rather they're grasping at straws to use as ammunition in dumb flamewars about platforms/companies/etc. that they don't like.

Which is like saying that Ford has 100% of the market share for Ford cars. Antitrust regulation cares about product categories, not brands.

Steltek 10y ago
But the EU charges are about Google's tactics within the Google run Android market. Google isn't leveraging it's monopoly outside of it's own brand either. The argument hinges on Google not owning or operating Android. AOSP has been a dead dream for a while now due to carriers locking down phones and Google needing to circle the wagons.
- Esau 10y ago
  Android is bigger than Google. Other companies make Android devices.
  - danieldk 10y ago
    Google can exert a large amount of control over device makers --- Android without Google Play Services and the Google Play Store is pretty useless. (Unless you have Amazon's scale and can clone all that.)
    - totitipo 10y ago
      Android without Google Play Services/Store is not useless at all. Ask any Chinese Android user.
      - ocdtrekkie 10y ago
        In China, apps Chinese citizens want are available in app stores available there. Everywhere else, Android apps people want are solely available through Google's store. And the only reason China has a competitive Android market: Google doesn't operate there. In fact, China proves what's so bad about the Play Store: We can definitively see how much more freedom exists if Google is axed from the equation.
        Fazzle 10y ago
        I don't think most of the Chinese app stores are good examples though. Too much piracy, too many repackaged apps and security nightmares.
        hooluupog 10y ago
        On the contrary,China proves what's so bad without the Play Store and GCM.Android is a mess there.
- danieldk 10y ago
  iOS is a luxury brand (remember that carrier subsidies are smaller in the EU and are not allowed in some member states). So, realistically for a lot of people there is only one kind of affordable smartphone and that is an Android phone. As you mention, AOSP alone does not give you much Android and Google is likely to dictate all kinds of terms to use the Play services, Play Store, etc. So, the question is indeed does AOSP give enough to argue that Google does not fully control the Android market. Personally, I am not sure this is the most problematic aspect of Android though. If we assume for a moment that Android is a near-monopoly in the EU, the more troubling aspect is that people can only choose between having no smartphone (which is becoming harder) or letting Google suck all kinds of data out of them. In other words, only when you are rich enough, you can afford not to let a company suck up a lot of your private data.
  - home_boi 10y ago
    the info to root your device is free on the internet
    - ethbro 10y ago
      *For certain devices
      - milankragujevic 10y ago
        Can't repeat this enough. My shitty Android tablet from Huawei that I got for free on contract cannot be rooted and is stuck on Android 4.1 forever, even though it has a modern ARM cpu and 1GB of RAM... :(
  - on_and_off 10y ago
    not sure that the argument that iOS is a luxury brand holds up in most european countries where you can just as well get an iOS or Android device with the same subsidization from the carrier (especially since Apple does not only sell its last generation high end devices). There are still a couple of european countries where iOS devices sell extremely poorly. I am not sure if this is because of an absence of subsidies or another reason. Even if Android is the only option, you can always choose to refuse all data sharing from google, you are not forced to create a google account or to use google play. Admittedly, it makes things harder for a neophyte.
- tarancato 10y ago
  >AOSP has been a dead dream for a while now due to carriers locking down phones That's only in the US. Let's be honest here, AOSP is a dead dream because porting and maintaining AOSP for a device is kinda complicated. Many people do it for free, but you can't rely on that.
  - IshKebab 10y ago
    No, AOSP is a dead dream because Google moved essential code into Google Play Services, which isn't open source.
    - tarancato 10y ago
      Essential code such as what? Can't you boot AOSP without installing the Google apps?
      - cwyers 10y ago
        Essential code for apps written against the platform's official APIs.
      - IshKebab 10y ago
        You can but a huge number of apps use Google Play Services and you can't use those. I suppose technically you couldn't get them anyway since you don't have Google Play, but anyway. GPS includes stuff like location services, Firebase, Chromecast, analytics, Google account authentication, Google Drive APIs, all the game stuff, Android Pay, etc.
    - rhodysurf 10y ago
      You can write plenty of good apps without google play services. Thats hyperbole.
      - ocdtrekkie 10y ago
        You can. But since almost nobody does, there's no viable use for a phone without it. Bear in mind, even Microsoft, who was part of starting this investigation against Google... Even Microsoft's apps like Outlook and Skype won't run without Play Services installed and enabled.
jmfayard 10y ago
The point is that given how cars and software work, "ios devices" is a meaningful category while "ford cars" is not. Or which things can monopolistic companies do that non-monopolistic companies can't do? Can or do Apple do those things?
- onli 10y ago
  It's not a meaningful category. They are all mobile phones, or smartphones if need be to distinguish there. Which practices a monopolistic company can do, but is not allowed to, is written clearly in the article: Forcing/Paying other companies to pre-install its proprietary apps. A non-monopolistic company is allowed to do that.

M2Ys4U 10y ago

The same could be said about anything if you draw the 'market' boundaries narrowly enough. My local corner shop has a market share of 100% of the places I can buy things if I walk 30 seconds but that's hardly relevant when I can drive 10-15 minutes and have 4 different supermarkets at my disposal.

Nullabillity 10y ago
If you bought bread from the corner store then you can still spread butter from the supermarket on it. Your two purchases were independent. That's not relevant in the phone market, where you're stuck with a specific platform once you've made your initial phone purchase. You can't use it with applications from other platforms, and switching platforms means you need to purchase all the stuff you're using all over again.

johncolanduoni 10y ago

So if I write any piece of software, even if only one person uses it, I can be forced by anti-trust regulation to make it compatible with any other software or at least release the source code? Do you really think that's what anti-trust regulation implies?

piyush_soni 10y ago
No. I think it doesn't matter to them until it becomes the majority platform (not that that's any less stupid).
ocdtrekkie 10y ago
It seems incredibly hard for people to grasp how antitrust law works. It's very simple: Antitrust law only affects those with a massively dominant control over a market.
- mwfunk 10y ago
  Exactly. If you're not a monopoly (or otherwise massively dominant in the market you compete in), antitrust law doesn't apply to you. Antitrust law is specifically to guard against the situation where one player in a market is so dominant, that the market itself becomes less competitive. Although usually when I hear people misuse antitrust concepts on tech forums, they're not trying to understand complicated legal conflicts, rather they're grasping at straws to use as ammunition in dumb flamewars about platforms/companies/etc. that they don't like.