3 ms·

While they make many good points, they also show their cards by failing to substantiate their claims about search algorithm changes and Android Google Play lock

While they make many good points, they also show their cards by failing to substantiate their claims about search algorithm changes and Android Google Play lockin allegations.

wpietri 12y ago
Do they? This is an open letter that's a response to an open letter. This seems like about the right level of detail for that. It needs to be short, snappy, and readable by a general audience. I suspect that their interactions with the EC regulator [1] are rather more detailed. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directorate-General_for_Competition_(European_Commission) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directorate-General_for_Competi...
- Mithaldu 12y ago
  I'm mainly talking about the fact that in the previous points they substantiate heavily by linking to Google pages about what they're doing. On other points they simply do the literary equivalent of "nuh-uh".
kllrnohj 12y ago
How did they fail to substantiate the claims? There wasn't even anything to actual counter there, News Corp's letter had nothing of substance. Google responded by quoting Yelp, who has said that the algorithm changes have not harmed Yelp (aka, an independent 3rd party is also disputing News Corp's claims). As for the Android Google Play lockin allegations, what more is there for Google to say? Android is open source and usable by anyone, this is simple fact. Google even calls out Amazon and Nokia doing exactly this. There literally does not exist a certification process for Android-related products. There exists a certification process if you want GOOGLE PLAY, but not if you just want Android.
- Mithaldu 12y ago
  Links that actually detail the changes made to the algorithm, and links to the Google Play certification requirements would be useful substantiation; just like they did for all the good points they had above that. Also, i don't understand why you felt the need to emphasize Google Play. That is exactly what i had said in my comment above.
  - kllrnohj 12y ago
    > Links that actually detail the changes made to the algorithm That's a joke, right? > links to the Google Play certification requirements would be useful substantiation Irrelevant. You should re-read News Corps' claims, which is what Google is responding to. Google Play certification was not a complaint. Android certification was the complaint - and you can't link to something that doesn't exist.
    - Mithaldu 12y ago
      You know, while i hate Murdoch and what he's doing, this doesn't mean that i'll be blind-eyed to the bad things Google is doing alongside the good things. You're being no better than Murdoch in your blind defenses. > That's a joke, right? Absolutely not. Why should it? There is no need to lay bare the entire thing, but a change log has no reason to be hidden. > You should re-read News Corps' claims I did, and while they do not say "Google Play" outright (since it involves actually MORE things than Google Play), they very clearly state that they are talking about things other than the core OS package: Google has developed a "certification" process for *Android-related products*
seanflyon 12y ago
I'm confused why someone would expect a company to never improve their product. Short of the ridiculous (not changing their search algorithm) what would you consider a favorable response?

While they make many good points, they also show their cards by failing to substantiate their claims about search algorithm changes and Android Google Play lockin allegations.

wpietri 12y ago

Do they? This is an open letter that's a response to an open letter. This seems like about the right level of detail for that. It needs to be short, snappy, and readable by a general audience. I suspect that their interactions with the EC regulator [1] are rather more detailed. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directorate-General_for_Competition_(European_Commission) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directorate-General_for_Competi...

Mithaldu 12y ago
I'm mainly talking about the fact that in the previous points they substantiate heavily by linking to Google pages about what they're doing. On other points they simply do the literary equivalent of "nuh-uh".

kllrnohj 12y ago

How did they fail to substantiate the claims? There wasn't even anything to actual counter there, News Corp's letter had nothing of substance. Google responded by quoting Yelp, who has said that the algorithm changes have not harmed Yelp (aka, an independent 3rd party is also disputing News Corp's claims). As for the Android Google Play lockin allegations, what more is there for Google to say? Android is open source and usable by anyone, this is simple fact. Google even calls out Amazon and Nokia doing exactly this. There literally does not exist a certification process for Android-related products. There exists a certification process if you want GOOGLE PLAY, but not if you just want Android.

Mithaldu 12y ago
Links that actually detail the changes made to the algorithm, and links to the Google Play certification requirements would be useful substantiation; just like they did for all the good points they had above that. Also, i don't understand why you felt the need to emphasize Google Play. That is exactly what i had said in my comment above.
- kllrnohj 12y ago
  > Links that actually detail the changes made to the algorithm That's a joke, right? > links to the Google Play certification requirements would be useful substantiation Irrelevant. You should re-read News Corps' claims, which is what Google is responding to. Google Play certification was not a complaint. Android certification was the complaint - and you can't link to something that doesn't exist.
  - Mithaldu 12y ago
    You know, while i hate Murdoch and what he's doing, this doesn't mean that i'll be blind-eyed to the bad things Google is doing alongside the good things. You're being no better than Murdoch in your blind defenses. > That's a joke, right? Absolutely not. Why should it? There is no need to lay bare the entire thing, but a change log has no reason to be hidden. > You should re-read News Corps' claims I did, and while they do not say "Google Play" outright (since it involves actually MORE things than Google Play), they very clearly state that they are talking about things other than the core OS package: Google has developed a "certification" process for *Android-related products*

seanflyon 12y ago

I'm confused why someone would expect a company to never improve their product. Short of the ridiculous (not changing their search algorithm) what would you consider a favorable response?