4 ms·

Google is equally horrible about adwords (and probably most other customer service related issues). They terminated our adwords account saying that there was s

• diminoten 7y ago
  Breaking up Google has absolutely nothing to do with this problem, and is exclusively spiteful and childish. You can be better.
  • jarym 7y ago
    Google’s dominant position in the market is enabling it to abuse its position by treating customers unfairly and not as one might be treated if there was more competition. I don’t think it’s spiteful or childish to suggest breaking up a monopoly in these circumstances although I would say less drastic options should be tried first.
    • noarchy 7y ago
      >I don’t think it’s spiteful or childish to suggest breaking up a monopoly in these circumstances although I would say less drastic options should be tried first. You've shown your hand here, in a way, by suggesting that Google is a monopoly in this instance. Android devices can install apps via other sources, like F-Droid or Amazon, or even just by side loading. There's no denying that out of the box, most Android devices are setup to favour Google's Play Store, just as Amazon's Kindle devices are setup to favour Amazon's own store. Does this make them a monopoly? If so, what do we make of iOS?
      • kevingadd 7y ago
        The iOS app store is a monopoly. Are you arguing otherwise? There's no way to run an alternative store there. If it's really so easy to ship an alternative store on Android and Play Store isn't an artificial monopoly why are there no successful alternative stores? Is it because Google's is really the best possible store and thus a healthy, functioning market produces no competition? Are people really choosing to be stuck giving Google 30% of all sales and recurring revenue because Play Store is that good? They wouldn't rather use one of these other stores to save 30%?
        • noarchy 7y ago
          >The iOS app store is a monopoly. Are you arguing otherwise? There's no way to run an alternative store there. I have to agree, it is a monopoly within the context of iOS devices. Apple works fairly hard to patch iOS in order to prevent the latest jailbreaks, thus removing a major avenue where a user would have the freedom to sideload the apps of their choosing. In Google's case, while I don't think the Play Store is a monopoly, it is clearly a dominant player on many Android devices around the world.
          • deogeo 7y ago
            A better way of defining (near) monopolies is through market power [1]. It gets at the heart of the matter for which 'monopoly' is just a proxy - the ability of a company to shape the market, even if it has competitors. For example, Microsoft never once had monopoly on operating systems... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_power https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_power
        • mflare 7y ago
          Although it is possible to distribute Android apps through other channels, you should not forget that for some applications you are still bound to Google. Due to the changes in Android Oreo regarding background services, you need Firebase Cloud Messaging (FCM) for a Messenger or other communication app to get the device out of Doze mode and to deliver push notifications without delay. If Google closes your account, you can still distribute the app through other stores, but FCM won't work anymore and there's no replacement for it.
    • diminoten 7y ago
      It's spiteful and childish because it's not a monopoly, and the only reason anyone wants to break up Google is to lash out. Build an iPhone app if you're so upset.
• ngold 7y ago
  An ad company middleman doesn't care about humans.
• lozenge 7y ago
  What was your spend? A $100/month customer's profits can easily be wiped out by a couple of customer service queries.