3 ms·
This is great. They're trying to penalize a company that actually produces value, and propping up the ones that don't.
by shiny 17y ago
This is great. They're trying to penalize a company that actually produces value, and propping up the ones that don't.
- iamelgringo 17y agoIsn't that what they said about Microsoft in the 90's? How is this different? Microsoft was seen as playing dirty vs Netscape when they started giving away Internet Explorer for free. And, Microsoft is still in trouble with the EU because of bundling a free media player with its OS. The argument for Microsoft was that they were "adding value". I'm not really trying to defend Microsoft's actions. I'm just curious to hear why others think that Google is different than Microsoft in this regard? Google gives almost all of its products away for free: Search, Gmail, Docs, Analytics, Calendar, etc... Some call it "adding value" others call it a monopolistic behavior. I know MSFT got into trouble because of its deals with hardware companies. But how is that different than Google building Android and bundling their apps on my G1?
- Semiapies 17y ago1) "How is this different?" For one, it's not Microsoft in the 90s. 2) Who's taking legal action against Google for "Search, Gmail, Docs, Analytics, Calendar"? I'll give you three guesses. 3) What do you think is the difference between having agreements with most PC manufacturers to pre-install Windows and offering an linux distro for a few models of phones?