4 ms·
If it's quid-pro-quo, ala Firefox funding itself via search defaults, I don't see how it's exploitative. I highly doubt Google is paying just to keep themselves
by dmix 4y ago
If it's quid-pro-quo, ala Firefox funding itself via search defaults, I don't see how it's exploitative. I highly doubt Google is paying just to keep themselves in the Apple app store. They would (and could) have made a big fus about it unless they got something in return from Apple.
- matthewdgreen 4y agoWhat are they getting from Apple, then? That’s the question that raises my anti-competitive fears. Presumably if Apple and Google wanted that question to be easily-answered they wouldn’t have written a secret deal.
- dmix 4y agoThe odds they got something instead of just getting bullied is far more likely. My guess: Apple didn't compete with Google in some market with their ad platform.
- matthewdgreen 4y agoEvery answer to this question raises more questions not answered by the T-shirt. When two enormously powerful organizations are secretly cutting deals, the chance that somebody’s losing is very high.
- Spooky23 4y agoCash. Lots of cash. That lets Google grow in a softening market and compete with Facebook, etc. It’s cheaper to pay Apple than to keep Android relevant. No different than Microsoft sending a firehos of cash to OpenAI.