4 ms·
In cases where users' freedoms for legitimate uses are curtailed I believe we should be siding with the end users. Maybe in time we will see microsoft banning c
by ksk 9y ago
In cases where users' freedoms for legitimate uses are curtailed I believe we should be siding with the end users. Maybe in time we will see microsoft banning chrome, firefox, steam etc from running on devices not certified by MS. Its "their OS" so "its their right".
- joshuamorton 9y agoBut the end user can do whatever they want. The end user is free to install a custom ROM and use GApps. They have to jump through an extra hoop. This would be like Microsoft banning Lenovo from sticking unlicensed copies of windows on Lenovo laptops. Something which Microsoft already does.
- ksk 9y agoWell my analogy was that the 'service' MS provides is the OS Platform API, and its blocking applications from executing on their platform. Which would be ridiculous. A user should be able to run any software they want. Similarly, as a user (paid or otherwise) of Google's services, unless specific evidence is given that the user is abusing their services, Google is in the wrong here of blocking someone preemptively.
- joshuamorton 9y agoWhat end user do you feel is being blocked from using what software? I have a feeling you misunderstand what's actually happening here.
- closeparen 9y agoGoogle is not blocking third-party apps from running on its platform. It's blocking its own proprietary apps from running on third-party platforms which happen to share the same base. A more appropriate analogy might be MS not releasing Internet Explorer for the Mac... which they haven't since IE5.