3 ms·

Let's not forget the time they refused to make a YouTube app for Windows Phone and when Microsoft made one, Google forced them to remove it. And then seemingly

Let's not forget the time they refused to make a YouTube app for Windows Phone and when Microsoft made one, Google forced them to remove it. And then seemingly in retribution for making the app, Google blocked Windows Phone from being able to access Google Maps even though the browser was technically capable of using it. Google's reasoning was (similarly to another comment here) "it's too hard to check functionality in so many browsers" like they're not literally the most powerful Internet company in the world engaging in petty nonsense with a basically non-existing competitor. Remember when Microsoft did the stuff Google does now and the government actually cared enough to do something about it?

alttab 9y ago
They seriously did that as you said? What a bunch of self important twats.
- freehunter 9y ago
  https://thenextweb.com/insider/2013/01/05/calling-shenanigans-on-googles-windows-phone-8-maps-narrative/ https://thenextweb.com/insider/2013/01/05/calling-shenanigan... Google's comment was >The mobile web version of Google Maps is optimized for WebKit browsers such as Chrome and Safari. However, since Internet Explorer is not a WebKit browser, Windows Phone devices are not able to access Google Maps for the mobile web. The problem is, mobile IE uses the same rendering engine as desktop IE10, which works. Firefox works even though it's not Webkit. And if you visited maps.google.co.uk, everything worked perfectly. And it worked before Google blocked it. Between the time Google blocked WP8 from viewing Google Maps and the time they said "oh hey the browser works now", there were no updates to Windows Phone to change browser functionality. In short, Google blocked their competitor from accessing their website, got called out, issued a complete lie of a statement, then rolled back the change. Yes, as a Windows Phone user at the time I was not amused, and that was when I stopped using Google services.
  - robocat 9y ago
    > The problem is, mobile IE uses the same rendering engine as desktop IE10, which works. Windows mobile was a mess last I had to deal with it. As far as I recall, Windows Mobile uses IE11 within an app, or Edge from the browser. Both had either proprietary or buggy touch events. Supporting Windows phone was a nightmare for us (and as it turned out, a complete waste of time). Not defending Google, just saying my facts are different from yours.
mistermann 9y ago
Google has better lobbyists. Government legislation is mostly purchased and "negotiated", voting has very little to do with it.
- RijilV 9y ago
  That's actually not true... I ended up sitting next to a tech lobbyist on a 5 hour flight and we chatted about tech and politics for most of the flight. Google's lobbying strategy is to come in and dump a bunch of money to fix an immediate problem. They don't keep up the pressure - aka they aren't getting people use to the steady flow of "lobbying", it is all reactionary. This just encourages folks on the receiving side to come up with situations for google to panic over then reap the predictable "lobbying". Other companies across industries approach things differently- they get their targets hooked on a steady stream of "lobbying" and use the withdrawal of that as leverage. Microsoft is actually quiet good at lobbying and has been successful on many fronts to keep their products and services the dominant solution for US government systems.
golfer 9y ago
Microsoft's YouTube app removed the ads. Violation of TOS. Pretty straightforward reason for wanting it removed. Don't act like Microsoft, of all companies, is some poor victim. They compete their ass off, and sometimes they win, sometimes lose. They lost that time.
- FreezerburnV 9y ago
  Don't forget that Microsoft publicly offered to work directly with Google to get the Youtube app working correctly according to what Google wanted, ads and all. The only reason it "stripped" ads originally was because Google didn't work with them to add them in the first place. Also keep in mind that there were, at the time, other Youtube apps that worked (to some extent) just fine, and Google didn't go after them. I also remember something about how Google demanded that Microsoft implement something that wasn't technically possible at the time in order to get the Youtube app to be fully compliant. I don't remember what that was exactly, but I think it had something to do with how they were rendering the videos. I was a Windows Phone user at the time, and was very irritated about Google being petty and not working with Microsoft to get the app working with ads.
  - golfer 9y ago
    Ahh, the public offer to help. Great PR move that ignores all Microsoft's other actions against Google throughout time. Competition is fair game. Consider: - the existence of Bing - Every version of IE and Windows starting from over a decade ago has made it more difficult to change the default search engine from Bing. Comically difficult, even - Microsoft's creation/funding of entities like Fairsearch.org, whose primary reason for existence is to destroy Google - Stealing Google's search results - etc etc Microsoft has tried to defeat Google from day one. Again, they competed and lost. If they had built up any good will maybe Google would have helped. But they didn't.
    - pyroinferno 9y ago
      "the public offer to help" Well Microsoft is a PUBLIC company. I'm sure their shareholders probably wanted to know what was going on.
katastic 9y ago
Ah... the pre-Eric Holder Department of Justice. I'm not even kidding. Look it up for yourself. The Bush DOJ took down Enron even when it destroyed people's pensions. Meanwhile, Wall Street destroyed the country's economy requiring trillions of spending (read: debt) to "fix" and how many went to jail? Oh yeah... one--a scapegoat. And the statistics don't lie. Prosecutions of white collar crimes have dropped from 17.6% in 1995-7 to 9.4% in 2010-12. Did everyone stop committing crimes? Did everyone say they're sorry? In 2015, prosecutions were at a "20 year low". 20 year low... during one of the largest economic collapses in US history, where there should be sky high rates. http://trac.syr.edu/tracreports/crim/398/ http://trac.syr.edu/tracreports/crim/398/
xster 9y ago
Not that I'm saying either side has moral superiority but also to keep in mind is that YouTube isn't a monolithic entity. It has its own contracts and obligations with its creators and label companies. When Microsoft's officially branded agent-provocateur-ish version lets you download videos, YouTube can't really independently decide on how to respond.

alttab 9y ago

They seriously did that as you said? What a bunch of self important twats.

freehunter 9y ago
https://thenextweb.com/insider/2013/01/05/calling-shenanigans-on-googles-windows-phone-8-maps-narrative/ https://thenextweb.com/insider/2013/01/05/calling-shenanigan... Google's comment was >The mobile web version of Google Maps is optimized for WebKit browsers such as Chrome and Safari. However, since Internet Explorer is not a WebKit browser, Windows Phone devices are not able to access Google Maps for the mobile web. The problem is, mobile IE uses the same rendering engine as desktop IE10, which works. Firefox works even though it's not Webkit. And if you visited maps.google.co.uk, everything worked perfectly. And it worked before Google blocked it. Between the time Google blocked WP8 from viewing Google Maps and the time they said "oh hey the browser works now", there were no updates to Windows Phone to change browser functionality. In short, Google blocked their competitor from accessing their website, got called out, issued a complete lie of a statement, then rolled back the change. Yes, as a Windows Phone user at the time I was not amused, and that was when I stopped using Google services.
- robocat 9y ago
  > The problem is, mobile IE uses the same rendering engine as desktop IE10, which works. Windows mobile was a mess last I had to deal with it. As far as I recall, Windows Mobile uses IE11 within an app, or Edge from the browser. Both had either proprietary or buggy touch events. Supporting Windows phone was a nightmare for us (and as it turned out, a complete waste of time). Not defending Google, just saying my facts are different from yours.

mistermann 9y ago

Google has better lobbyists. Government legislation is mostly purchased and "negotiated", voting has very little to do with it.

RijilV 9y ago
That's actually not true... I ended up sitting next to a tech lobbyist on a 5 hour flight and we chatted about tech and politics for most of the flight. Google's lobbying strategy is to come in and dump a bunch of money to fix an immediate problem. They don't keep up the pressure - aka they aren't getting people use to the steady flow of "lobbying", it is all reactionary. This just encourages folks on the receiving side to come up with situations for google to panic over then reap the predictable "lobbying". Other companies across industries approach things differently- they get their targets hooked on a steady stream of "lobbying" and use the withdrawal of that as leverage. Microsoft is actually quiet good at lobbying and has been successful on many fronts to keep their products and services the dominant solution for US government systems.

golfer 9y ago

Microsoft's YouTube app removed the ads. Violation of TOS. Pretty straightforward reason for wanting it removed. Don't act like Microsoft, of all companies, is some poor victim. They compete their ass off, and sometimes they win, sometimes lose. They lost that time.

FreezerburnV 9y ago
Don't forget that Microsoft publicly offered to work directly with Google to get the Youtube app working correctly according to what Google wanted, ads and all. The only reason it "stripped" ads originally was because Google didn't work with them to add them in the first place. Also keep in mind that there were, at the time, other Youtube apps that worked (to some extent) just fine, and Google didn't go after them. I also remember something about how Google demanded that Microsoft implement something that wasn't technically possible at the time in order to get the Youtube app to be fully compliant. I don't remember what that was exactly, but I think it had something to do with how they were rendering the videos. I was a Windows Phone user at the time, and was very irritated about Google being petty and not working with Microsoft to get the app working with ads.
- golfer 9y ago
  Ahh, the public offer to help. Great PR move that ignores all Microsoft's other actions against Google throughout time. Competition is fair game. Consider: - the existence of Bing - Every version of IE and Windows starting from over a decade ago has made it more difficult to change the default search engine from Bing. Comically difficult, even - Microsoft's creation/funding of entities like Fairsearch.org, whose primary reason for existence is to destroy Google - Stealing Google's search results - etc etc Microsoft has tried to defeat Google from day one. Again, they competed and lost. If they had built up any good will maybe Google would have helped. But they didn't.
  - pyroinferno 9y ago
    "the public offer to help" Well Microsoft is a PUBLIC company. I'm sure their shareholders probably wanted to know what was going on.

katastic 9y ago

Ah... the pre-Eric Holder Department of Justice. I'm not even kidding. Look it up for yourself. The Bush DOJ took down Enron even when it destroyed people's pensions. Meanwhile, Wall Street destroyed the country's economy requiring trillions of spending (read: debt) to "fix" and how many went to jail? Oh yeah... one--a scapegoat. And the statistics don't lie. Prosecutions of white collar crimes have dropped from 17.6% in 1995-7 to 9.4% in 2010-12. Did everyone stop committing crimes? Did everyone say they're sorry? In 2015, prosecutions were at a "20 year low". 20 year low... during one of the largest economic collapses in US history, where there should be sky high rates. http://trac.syr.edu/tracreports/crim/398/ http://trac.syr.edu/tracreports/crim/398/

xster 9y ago

Not that I'm saying either side has moral superiority but also to keep in mind is that YouTube isn't a monolithic entity. It has its own contracts and obligations with its creators and label companies. When Microsoft's officially branded agent-provocateur-ish version lets you download videos, YouTube can't really independently decide on how to respond.