3 ms·
> unfairly dominating other areas Out of curiosity, what exactly about Maps is unfair? They made money, they invested it in better mapping technology. You coul
by neya 6y ago
> unfairly dominating other areas
Out of curiosity, what exactly about Maps is unfair? They made money, they invested it in better mapping technology. You could say the same about Apple too, they bundled their Maps application with every iPhone sold which you couldn't even uninstall for a long time. And they had more money than Google too - yet their maps application was and still is garbage.
It just so happens Google Maps is the better product here and has nothing to do with anti-competitiveness. I was in China and I tried using both Apple and Google Maps (via VPN). And guess which one lead me to a wrong railway station?
- Ntrails 6y ago> Apple too, they bundled their Maps application with every iPhone sold which you couldn't even uninstall for a long time. And even now, having done so, clicking on an address to copy it will take you to a page telling you to reinstall maps to see it...
- s3r3nity 6y ago> They made money, they invested it in better mapping technology. That’s the part that is illegal and anticompetitive: they didn’t make money from Maps to reinvest to create a better product. Rather, they invested revenue from other different markets for which they are exceedingly dominant, to invest and operate Maps at a loss (I.e. free and no revenue sources.) >Apple Apple did not have anywhere near dominant market share of devices when Maps came out. Antitrust cases hinge on that point. This is also why Bing can get away with many of the same tactics that Google uses : because Bing has very low market share of search compared to Google.