3 ms·

If you actually read the article, you'd see the issue is not dislike of WP. The issue is that Microsoft is stripping off the ads that fund Youtube and its conte

by necubi 13y ago

If you actually read the article, you'd see the issue is not dislike of WP. The issue is that Microsoft is stripping off the ads that fund Youtube and its content, in violation of the YouTube terms of service. It also includes a button that allows people to download videos which is, again, a violation of the ToS.

Avalaxy 13y ago
I read the article, I am the one who posted it. Don't talk to me like I'm an idiot. The fact that Google gives the violation of their agreement as the reason doesn't mean it IS the real reason behind it. There are many other youtube apps (like MetroTube) that do the same thing, but they don't get removed. It's a fact that Google has been boycotting Microsoft for years. They blocked GMail syncing for Windows Phone devices, they disabled Google Maps for WP (it worked before, but then they just blocked all WP devices), and now they do it again.
- jbp 13y ago
  Doesn't Microsoft do samething to Goolge though?
  - rlu 13y ago
    iirc, microsoft has onenote, skydrive, skype and outlook.com apps for android. Sure, you can argue that "well Android has majority market share so it's in microsoft's advantage to have apps in that platform!" - and you would be correct. However, that doesn't excuse having the web views for Windows Phone on gmail and maps (and maybe youtube?) be significantly worse than those for iOS/Android. Like, the work has already been done - Google just does not redirect WP users to the "pretty" sites. If you manually enter in the iOS/Android URL on WP, it works fine. It's just not defaulted. And that's lame.
- makomk 13y ago
  So what you're saying is that there's another app - MetroTube - that also allows users to view YouTube videos on Windows 8 and Windows Phone that hasn't been removed. Congratulations on disproving your own argument that this is an attack on Windows Phone!
- fpgeek 13y ago
  ToS violations may not be "the" reason, but it is enough of a reason to force Google's hand, whether or not they have other reasons. Exactly how long do you think, say, Viacom woulds tolerate a high-profile, name-brand YouTube app that blocked ads and supported video downloads? And what do you think Viacom would do to Google if Google's response to that app was turning a blind eye?
recoiledsnake 13y ago
>If you actually read the article, you'd see the issue is not dislike of WP. The issue is that Microsoft is stripping off the ads that fund Youtube and its content, in violation the YouTube ToS. It also includes a button that allows people to download videos which is, again, a violation of the ToS. Crossposting my own comment from another thread. So, for years, Google's stated reason for lack of a Youtube client was that Windows Phone didn't have enough marketshare, and now suddenly it has so many users that it loses so many ad impressions because Microsoft's Youtube that the content creators are suffering because all the millions of freeloaders using Windows Phone? i.e It doesn't care enough for the ad impressions on Windows Phone to itself make an app , but when MS does, the loss of the same revenue is the reason for sending the lawyers in and pulling the app?
- ok_craig 13y ago
  YouTube users make a living off the ads. It is just as much about their rights. Google is the only one who can defend this on their behalf, and they should, down to the platforms with only 1 user.
- pyre 13y ago
  So, when Microsoft's IP is infringed (patents, etc), it's a tragedy. When Google's (or its partner's) IP is infringed it's something sinister. Gotcha.
  - mortehu 13y ago
    Are you suggesting that software patents are as worthwhile as videos and music?
- aeturnum 13y ago
  One decision about TOS enforcement affects their ability to attack other TOS violations. If you don't enforce your TOS consistently, you open yourself to exactly the sort of anti-competitive charges MS users are leveling against Google.
- invisible 13y ago
  Any amount of loss due to not following the Terms of Service is grounds for terminating usage. Those same users that are not watching the ad could instead be watching the ad on the web and making them ad revenue. Your logic is so flawed.

by necubi 13y ago

Avalaxy 13y ago

I read the article, I am the one who posted it. Don't talk to me like I'm an idiot. The fact that Google gives the violation of their agreement as the reason doesn't mean it IS the real reason behind it. There are many other youtube apps (like MetroTube) that do the same thing, but they don't get removed. It's a fact that Google has been boycotting Microsoft for years. They blocked GMail syncing for Windows Phone devices, they disabled Google Maps for WP (it worked before, but then they just blocked all WP devices), and now they do it again.

jbp 13y ago
Doesn't Microsoft do samething to Goolge though?
- rlu 13y ago
  iirc, microsoft has onenote, skydrive, skype and outlook.com apps for android. Sure, you can argue that "well Android has majority market share so it's in microsoft's advantage to have apps in that platform!" - and you would be correct. However, that doesn't excuse having the web views for Windows Phone on gmail and maps (and maybe youtube?) be significantly worse than those for iOS/Android. Like, the work has already been done - Google just does not redirect WP users to the "pretty" sites. If you manually enter in the iOS/Android URL on WP, it works fine. It's just not defaulted. And that's lame.
makomk 13y ago
So what you're saying is that there's another app - MetroTube - that also allows users to view YouTube videos on Windows 8 and Windows Phone that hasn't been removed. Congratulations on disproving your own argument that this is an attack on Windows Phone!
fpgeek 13y ago
ToS violations may not be "the" reason, but it is enough of a reason to force Google's hand, whether or not they have other reasons. Exactly how long do you think, say, Viacom woulds tolerate a high-profile, name-brand YouTube app that blocked ads and supported video downloads? And what do you think Viacom would do to Google if Google's response to that app was turning a blind eye?

recoiledsnake 13y ago

>If you actually read the article, you'd see the issue is not dislike of WP. The issue is that Microsoft is stripping off the ads that fund Youtube and its content, in violation the YouTube ToS. It also includes a button that allows people to download videos which is, again, a violation of the ToS. Crossposting my own comment from another thread. So, for years, Google's stated reason for lack of a Youtube client was that Windows Phone didn't have enough marketshare, and now suddenly it has so many users that it loses so many ad impressions because Microsoft's Youtube that the content creators are suffering because all the millions of freeloaders using Windows Phone? i.e It doesn't care enough for the ad impressions on Windows Phone to itself make an app , but when MS does, the loss of the same revenue is the reason for sending the lawyers in and pulling the app?

ok_craig 13y ago
YouTube users make a living off the ads. It is just as much about their rights. Google is the only one who can defend this on their behalf, and they should, down to the platforms with only 1 user.
pyre 13y ago
So, when Microsoft's IP is infringed (patents, etc), it's a tragedy. When Google's (or its partner's) IP is infringed it's something sinister. Gotcha.
- mortehu 13y ago
  Are you suggesting that software patents are as worthwhile as videos and music?
aeturnum 13y ago
One decision about TOS enforcement affects their ability to attack other TOS violations. If you don't enforce your TOS consistently, you open yourself to exactly the sort of anti-competitive charges MS users are leveling against Google.
invisible 13y ago
Any amount of loss due to not following the Terms of Service is grounds for terminating usage. Those same users that are not watching the ad could instead be watching the ad on the web and making them ad revenue. Your logic is so flawed.