7 ms·

Google could simply block services like Gmail and YouTube. Microsoft tried it with Windows Phone.

xyzzyz 8y ago
Google cannot block Gmail and YouTube. These are and will be accessible through web browser. What Google can do is not spend engineering time to build a special version of mobile app to support the platform, and block other apps that access them that don't conform to Terms and Conditions. (disclaimer: I work for Google on GCP)
- jhasse 8y ago
  YouTube without an app is just not the same.
  - scarface74 8y ago
    It’s better. I deleted the YouTube app from my iPhone and iPad because I would rather use the website and if you click on a YouTube link it will launch the app. The YouTube app doesn’t support background playback without paying for YouTube Red and it doesn’t support picture in picture mode on the iPad - I use a third party app.
- gsnedders 8y ago
  > Google cannot block Gmail and YouTube. These are and will be accessible through web browser. Well, through web browsers that Google chooses to support, given at least Gmail uses UA whitelisting (and, at various times, various non-Chrome Chromium based browsers have been excluded). If Google chooses not to support any browser that runs on the given system and blocks access to any other browser, then Google absolutely can block access to them.
  - bubblethink 8y ago
    Email is an open protocol. Anyone can write a client. All major ones work with Gmail. For YouTube, see newpipe. The main missing piece is Google maps (at least the navigation bit) which you can't legally get without explicit cooperation from Google.
    - JetSpiegel 8y ago
      Until Google deprecates IMAP for @gmail accounts. It's already disabled by default for new accounts.
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
      - icebraining 8y ago
        It's been disabled by default for years, as far as I know. Not sure why they'd deprecated it now. EDIT: A quick search shows it was always disabled by default, since 2007, when it launched.
        TomMarius 8y ago
        Doesn't that support GP's argument? Seems like they really don't want anyone to use it, since the beginning.
        vetinari 8y ago
        The Gmail concepts do not really map very well to IMAP and traditional mail clients. They do provide a custom API that does mirror their semantic for that.
        TomMarius 8y ago
        Not today, I agree. It was just an ordinary email up until a few years ago though.
        micv 8y ago
        Gmail's labels have always been an arse to map on to normal IMAP-based email.
        int_19h 8y ago
        The replacement API that GMail offers (which reflects their different approach) is open and free to use, so it's not really an issue, as third-party apps can support it. And many, in fact, do. That's not the case for YouTube, though, which is exactly why it's a problem when GMail isn't.
  - mooman219 8y ago
    @bubblethink Maps is a tricky beast. Given Google Maps has been around for so long, there may be a lot of licensing going on with the images. You also have to comply with various government requests to be able to host images of specific areas.
  - GeekyBear 8y ago
    They backed down almost immediately, but after Google removed the YouTube app for Amazon's Fire TV, Google also blacklisted the Fire TV web browsers from accessing the YouTube webpage that had been optimized for televisions. >As discovered by The Verge, the TV-optimized web version of YouTube is no longer accessible on the Fire TV. Instead, visitors using both Amazon’s Silk browser and Firefox for Fire TV are being redirected to the full desktop client. https://9to5google.com/2018/01/22/google-blocks-youtube-tv-optimized-web-version-amazon-fire-tv/ https://9to5google.com/2018/01/22/google-blocks-youtube-tv-o...
- cordite 8y ago
  Google services being refused on the windows mobile platform contributed greatly to its death. Who would ever make an app for something that doesn't even have youtube--when trashy tv boxes do? Who would get and keep a phone that doesn't have the apps they and their friends use?
  - briandear 8y ago
    Maybe I’m weird, but I probably use YouTube even less than twice a month.
    - ascorbic 8y ago
      You are. 18-34 year olds in the US spend an average of 19 hours per month watching videos on YouTube. https://www.businessinsider.com/millennials-still-watch-tv-despite-cord-cutting-increases-2017-11 https://www.businessinsider.com/millennials-still-watch-tv-d...
  - kettlecorn 8y ago
    YouTube not being on Windows Phone is really Microsoft's fault. They wrote their own "YouTube" app that removed ads and allowed downloading videos. Google rightfully was like "No way" and Microsoft continued to be belligerant. Google didn't want to let Microsoft develop their own YouTube client because Google frequently changes how the YouTube client works. Microsoft could have wrapped the web client, but after they acted stupidly Google didn't want to further cooperate.
    - philliphaydon 8y ago
      Ah, YouTube API's do not supply ad's. Google refused to make an app for Windows Phone. MS created an app with the available API. Google didn't want to work with MS to address any issues Google had with it.
- MikusR 8y ago
  Didn't google block various Amazon devices (like Echo Show) from accessing Youtube?
- JamesBarney 8y ago
  If the terms and conditions were onerous enough that Microsoft could not conform to them then I feel like this rounds to "Google can effectively block the native consumption of YouTube and Gmail."
  - Phrodo_00 8y ago
    It's probably tied to the play store. If they want to have it in their version of Android, they should be able to install Youtube on those phones. If they want to roll their own, they'd probably end up in a similar situation as WP.
- int_19h 8y ago
  YouTube website is not a replacement for a web app, and anyone who used the app on, say, Android would know. The most basic thing I expect from any YouTube mobile app is being able to play things in the background. Mobile browsers don't allow websites to do that, and for very good reasons. As for "don't conform to Terms and Conditions" ... well, if you guys don't offer an API to build a conforming app, then such a complaint is misleading, because there's no way to build one. So what you're really saying is that you will block all apps except your own, or made with your blessing. And then we're back to square one - your refusal to grant such a blessing to an app on a competing platform is abuse of your monopoly position wrt YouTube.
  - Ezhik 8y ago
    >Mobile browsers don't allow websites to do that Mobile browsers do allow that, YouTube just breaks that functionality for reasons unknown. They do it on mobile only as well, videos do play in the background when I use the desktop site.
    - iggldiggl 8y ago
      > They do it on mobile only as well, videos do play in the background when I use the desktop site. Or if you use a browser that supports add-ons and install something like https://addons.mozilla.org/android/addon/video-background-play-fix/ https://addons.mozilla.org/android/addon/video-background-pl... to block Youtube from accessing the APIs it uses to detect when a tab has been backgrounded. And the reasons aren't that unknown - if I'm not mistaken background playback is one of the selling points of a Youtube Premium (formerly Red) subscription.
GeekyBear 8y ago
I'm honestly surprised that there isn't already an EU antitrust action in progress based on Google blocking YouTube access on Windows Phone and some of the Amazon Fire devices. It seems like YouTube should have more than enough market share for EU competition law to apply.
- azurezyq 8y ago
  If I remembered correctly, windows phone users can use web version of YouTube just fine. The app was not developed by Google and based on undocumented API. I'm not speaking for Google but if I'm building a streaming app, I won't like other people make "clones" without my permission or review. Reasons are: 1. Customers who meet bugs on these clones may blame me but it's actually bugs in these clones. 2. Compability may be a pain because I have no idea how these clones use my "API". This happens a lot when Mint is scraping webpages for data and fails on webpage redesigns. "something appears to be working" is a light year away from "what guaranteed to be working". 3. One solution may be building the official app for windows phones but it just doesn't financially work out. WP never got traction to justify the cost of migrating a big app like Youtube to some totally different platform. Might be chicken and egg problems though. What do you think can be solutions for the problems above? Standardization might help but online video site is not something you can easily carve out a "standard".
  - 3rdAccount 8y ago
    YouTube still works great on WP, but I've never tried looking for an app.
  - ppseafield 8y ago
    The problem that Google stated was the YouTube app for WP (written by Microsoft) did not display any ads. Microsoft countered that Google wouldn't make a YouTube app themselves. But of course no business is compelled to create apps for their platform.
    - GeekyBear 8y ago
      Under antitrust law, once you have a large enough market share in one area, you may not use that as a weapon against competitors in other areas. In the EU, a 40% market share is large enough to place your conduct under these restrictions, so actions that would be perfectly legal in the US can be quite illegal there. Also, the chance of the EU competition commission buying the advertising argument is approximately zero. >Microsoft agreed to Google’s terms and in version 3.2 of the YouTube app, released earlier this week, they had enabled Google’s advertisements, disabled video downloads and eliminated the ability for users to view reserved videos https://m.windowscentral.com/microsoft-responds-detail-google-blocking-youtube https://m.windowscentral.com/microsoft-responds-detail-googl...

Google cannot block Gmail and YouTube. These are and will be accessible through web browser. What Google can do is not spend engineering time to build a special version of mobile app to support the platform, and block other apps that access them that don't conform to Terms and Conditions. (disclaimer: I work for Google on GCP)

jhasse 8y ago
YouTube without an app is just not the same.
- scarface74 8y ago
  It’s better. I deleted the YouTube app from my iPhone and iPad because I would rather use the website and if you click on a YouTube link it will launch the app. The YouTube app doesn’t support background playback without paying for YouTube Red and it doesn’t support picture in picture mode on the iPad - I use a third party app.
gsnedders 8y ago
> Google cannot block Gmail and YouTube. These are and will be accessible through web browser. Well, through web browsers that Google chooses to support, given at least Gmail uses UA whitelisting (and, at various times, various non-Chrome Chromium based browsers have been excluded). If Google chooses not to support any browser that runs on the given system and blocks access to any other browser, then Google absolutely can block access to them.
- bubblethink 8y ago
  Email is an open protocol. Anyone can write a client. All major ones work with Gmail. For YouTube, see newpipe. The main missing piece is Google maps (at least the navigation bit) which you can't legally get without explicit cooperation from Google.
  - JetSpiegel 8y ago
    Until Google deprecates IMAP for @gmail accounts. It's already disabled by default for new accounts.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - icebraining 8y ago
      It's been disabled by default for years, as far as I know. Not sure why they'd deprecated it now. EDIT: A quick search shows it was always disabled by default, since 2007, when it launched.
      - TomMarius 8y ago
        Doesn't that support GP's argument? Seems like they really don't want anyone to use it, since the beginning.
        vetinari 8y ago
        The Gmail concepts do not really map very well to IMAP and traditional mail clients. They do provide a custom API that does mirror their semantic for that.
        TomMarius 8y ago
        Not today, I agree. It was just an ordinary email up until a few years ago though.
        micv 8y ago
        Gmail's labels have always been an arse to map on to normal IMAP-based email.
        int_19h 8y ago
        The replacement API that GMail offers (which reflects their different approach) is open and free to use, so it's not really an issue, as third-party apps can support it. And many, in fact, do. That's not the case for YouTube, though, which is exactly why it's a problem when GMail isn't.
- mooman219 8y ago
  @bubblethink Maps is a tricky beast. Given Google Maps has been around for so long, there may be a lot of licensing going on with the images. You also have to comply with various government requests to be able to host images of specific areas.
- GeekyBear 8y ago
  They backed down almost immediately, but after Google removed the YouTube app for Amazon's Fire TV, Google also blacklisted the Fire TV web browsers from accessing the YouTube webpage that had been optimized for televisions. >As discovered by The Verge, the TV-optimized web version of YouTube is no longer accessible on the Fire TV. Instead, visitors using both Amazon’s Silk browser and Firefox for Fire TV are being redirected to the full desktop client. https://9to5google.com/2018/01/22/google-blocks-youtube-tv-optimized-web-version-amazon-fire-tv/ https://9to5google.com/2018/01/22/google-blocks-youtube-tv-o...
cordite 8y ago
Google services being refused on the windows mobile platform contributed greatly to its death. Who would ever make an app for something that doesn't even have youtube--when trashy tv boxes do? Who would get and keep a phone that doesn't have the apps they and their friends use?
- briandear 8y ago
  Maybe I’m weird, but I probably use YouTube even less than twice a month.
  - ascorbic 8y ago
    You are. 18-34 year olds in the US spend an average of 19 hours per month watching videos on YouTube. https://www.businessinsider.com/millennials-still-watch-tv-despite-cord-cutting-increases-2017-11 https://www.businessinsider.com/millennials-still-watch-tv-d...
- kettlecorn 8y ago
  YouTube not being on Windows Phone is really Microsoft's fault. They wrote their own "YouTube" app that removed ads and allowed downloading videos. Google rightfully was like "No way" and Microsoft continued to be belligerant. Google didn't want to let Microsoft develop their own YouTube client because Google frequently changes how the YouTube client works. Microsoft could have wrapped the web client, but after they acted stupidly Google didn't want to further cooperate.
  - philliphaydon 8y ago
    Ah, YouTube API's do not supply ad's. Google refused to make an app for Windows Phone. MS created an app with the available API. Google didn't want to work with MS to address any issues Google had with it.
MikusR 8y ago
Didn't google block various Amazon devices (like Echo Show) from accessing Youtube?
JamesBarney 8y ago
If the terms and conditions were onerous enough that Microsoft could not conform to them then I feel like this rounds to "Google can effectively block the native consumption of YouTube and Gmail."
- Phrodo_00 8y ago
  It's probably tied to the play store. If they want to have it in their version of Android, they should be able to install Youtube on those phones. If they want to roll their own, they'd probably end up in a similar situation as WP.
int_19h 8y ago
YouTube website is not a replacement for a web app, and anyone who used the app on, say, Android would know. The most basic thing I expect from any YouTube mobile app is being able to play things in the background. Mobile browsers don't allow websites to do that, and for very good reasons. As for "don't conform to Terms and Conditions" ... well, if you guys don't offer an API to build a conforming app, then such a complaint is misleading, because there's no way to build one. So what you're really saying is that you will block all apps except your own, or made with your blessing. And then we're back to square one - your refusal to grant such a blessing to an app on a competing platform is abuse of your monopoly position wrt YouTube.
- Ezhik 8y ago
  >Mobile browsers don't allow websites to do that Mobile browsers do allow that, YouTube just breaks that functionality for reasons unknown. They do it on mobile only as well, videos do play in the background when I use the desktop site.
  - iggldiggl 8y ago
    > They do it on mobile only as well, videos do play in the background when I use the desktop site. Or if you use a browser that supports add-ons and install something like https://addons.mozilla.org/android/addon/video-background-play-fix/ https://addons.mozilla.org/android/addon/video-background-pl... to block Youtube from accessing the APIs it uses to detect when a tab has been backgrounded. And the reasons aren't that unknown - if I'm not mistaken background playback is one of the selling points of a Youtube Premium (formerly Red) subscription.

GeekyBear 8y ago

I'm honestly surprised that there isn't already an EU antitrust action in progress based on Google blocking YouTube access on Windows Phone and some of the Amazon Fire devices. It seems like YouTube should have more than enough market share for EU competition law to apply.

azurezyq 8y ago
If I remembered correctly, windows phone users can use web version of YouTube just fine. The app was not developed by Google and based on undocumented API. I'm not speaking for Google but if I'm building a streaming app, I won't like other people make "clones" without my permission or review. Reasons are: 1. Customers who meet bugs on these clones may blame me but it's actually bugs in these clones. 2. Compability may be a pain because I have no idea how these clones use my "API". This happens a lot when Mint is scraping webpages for data and fails on webpage redesigns. "something appears to be working" is a light year away from "what guaranteed to be working". 3. One solution may be building the official app for windows phones but it just doesn't financially work out. WP never got traction to justify the cost of migrating a big app like Youtube to some totally different platform. Might be chicken and egg problems though. What do you think can be solutions for the problems above? Standardization might help but online video site is not something you can easily carve out a "standard".
- 3rdAccount 8y ago
  YouTube still works great on WP, but I've never tried looking for an app.
- ppseafield 8y ago
  The problem that Google stated was the YouTube app for WP (written by Microsoft) did not display any ads. Microsoft countered that Google wouldn't make a YouTube app themselves. But of course no business is compelled to create apps for their platform.
  - GeekyBear 8y ago
    Under antitrust law, once you have a large enough market share in one area, you may not use that as a weapon against competitors in other areas. In the EU, a 40% market share is large enough to place your conduct under these restrictions, so actions that would be perfectly legal in the US can be quite illegal there. Also, the chance of the EU competition commission buying the advertising argument is approximately zero. >Microsoft agreed to Google’s terms and in version 3.2 of the YouTube app, released earlier this week, they had enabled Google’s advertisements, disabled video downloads and eliminated the ability for users to view reserved videos https://m.windowscentral.com/microsoft-responds-detail-google-blocking-youtube https://m.windowscentral.com/microsoft-responds-detail-googl...