3 ms·
To be fair, for what I understand the lawyering up was more about it violating the terms of service and being able to save the videos offline and skip ads. Goo
by stusmall 12y ago
To be fair, for what I understand the lawyering up was more about it violating the terms of service and being able to save the videos offline and skip ads. Google can't be expected to support every single native mobile market out there. What is windows phone's market share these days? A few percentage points?
- ntakasaki 12y agoThat is still upwards of a 50 million install base. Even Vimeo has had a official app since long, and Microsoft offers to pay for it, so the reasons given by Google don't add up since it's actually hurting the content creators who lose some traffic and ad money from Windows Phone users because of Google's refusal to create an official app with ads. This is clearly about using it's power to take Windows Phone down a notch rather than any financial or rational reasons.
- stusmall 12y agoI would agree if they were supporting lots of smaller platforms but just skipping Windows phone. Someone correct me if I am wrong but Google only has serious app support for iOS and Android, correct?
- beagle3 12y ago> so the reasons given by Google don't add up They add up perfectly, though it may be inconvenient for WP users. You CAN use youtube on WP using the mobile site. You just don't have a native app. They're not denying WP users or content creators anything except a little bit of convenience and battery life. And as far financial or rational reasons - Microsoft is still extracting patent fees from Android handset makers. It makes a lot of financial sense to hurt them back - so when you come to the negotiation table, you have something to negotiate. Don't you think?
- sbilstein 12y agoI'm sure Google managers, engineers, and designers are just clamping at the bit to write for a tiny platform.