EU to Close Antitrust Investigation into Apple's Browser Choice Screen

[Stuwil]

19 Companies That Were Once Giants but No Longer Exist

Once upon a time, certain companies seemed utterly unstoppable. They dominated their industries, employed thousands, and became household names across America. Yet the business world shows no mercy, even to its mightiest players. Market shifts, technological advancement, and sometimes just plain...

go2tutors.com

Right but there is a very big difference
Not one of you individuals
Have managed to explain how a mobile company that creates their own os will be able to compete with google & Apple on the financial side & also get big developers to make apps for a new operating system without any market share

Now you keep saying look at these previous companies but none of you have explained how

 

[Stuwil]

It isn't Google's job to help a competitor compete with them. Google made the OS. Google made the search engine. Of course they're going to use their own product.

Yes it’s not googles job to help competitors however as a consequence of that we now have one dominant company

 

[Stuwil]

I take it he’s very young and has never lived outside the Google/Apple era. Not that history is difficult to study but…..well, I’ve got nothing more. 😉

Yeah I’m very young because I never had a Commodore 64

Mate your on an apple fan website
You don’t really want competition because even if a company with a new OS did come out it’s very unlikely that you would switch to it.

And that’s the fundamentally the problem that any new company in mobile will have

Now again that’s one example & just another one is if google give their OS away for free to everyone that’s not apple
Then how can a startup compete with that?

 

[Stuwil]

“Say you don’t know the name of the website you’re posting on without SAYING you don’t know the name of the website you’re posting on.”


Yes, and it’s practically impossible that a computer company not known for making cellular phones to break through with a new cellular phone.

This DOES actually help understand where a lot of people (EU regulators especially) lack in their understanding of technology, though. People like them looked at companies that had more money than Apple and more developers than the iPhone and were like, “WHELP! They don’t have the money OR the developers, so it’ll never take off!” This was without understanding that what it HAD was more important than money OR developers. They had something people wanted to buy and use.

It’s silly to essentially state “No one else will ever make anything that people want to buy and use”. But, they didn’t see the iPhone before it came, and they are similarly blind to the next thing that’s sure to appear.

right you are on an apple fan website who buys apple products right?

It’s extremely very unlikely that you will leave the Apple ecosystem

Then even if a company built a new OS
And even if they managed to get a company to put it on their mobile
Then because google give their OS away for free to everyone then developers don’t have to worry about wasting money on an OS with zero customers hence the problem

And that is how it will be near impossible due to how the mobile market in the west is setup.

 

[Stuwil]

That's what drives me crazy. People don't see that. Somehow, the best will always rise to the top. No matter how outgunned they appear to be. If Google search engine wasn't the best, it'd be overtaken by now. We don't need regulation, we need a competitor to step

Right
Now again how can a competitor rise to the top if chrome is pre installed on the world’s most popular mobile OS?

The only way you will realistically stop that is if there was a 3rd OS with a big user base with about 1 billion active users however said company is restricted in the west.

 

[TgeekB]

Right but there is a very big difference
Not one of you individuals
Have managed to explain how a mobile company that creates their own os will be able to compete with google & Apple on the financial side & also get big developers to make apps for a new operating system without any market share

Now you keep saying look at these previous companies but none of you have explained how

So even with examples of companies that owned the market (it works for more than browsers) you decline to accept facts that these companies eventually fell to…..competition. How did those companies ever compete? They should never tried according to you. There is ZERO difference and the proof is right in front of you.

 

[TgeekB]

Yeah I’m very young because I never had a Commodore 64

Mate your on an apple fan website
You don’t really want competition because even if a company with a new OS did come out it’s very unlikely that you would switch to it.

And that’s the fundamentally the problem that any new company in mobile will have

Now again that’s one example & just another one is if google give their OS away for free to everyone that’s not apple
Then how can a startup compete with that?

That’s shocking to me. You should understand then that nothing stays the same.
I owned the 128 and spent a lot of time in BBS’s with dial in modems. It was a lot of fun back then.
As far as not wanting competition I welcome it! It’s what drives innovation forward as it always has. Create something people want and they will leave the “monopoly “ in a heartbeat. It’s happened over and over and that will never change.

 

[Stuwil]

So even with examples of companies that owned the market (it works for more than browsers) you decline to accept facts that these companies eventually fell to…..competition. How did those companies ever compete? They should never tried according to you. There is ZERO difference and the proof is right in front of you.

I never said a company shouldn’t try
However there is a big difference

In the west there are only 2 mobile OS
One being android who are owned by google and they give that OS away to almost everyone apart from Apple to use & as a consequence of that chrome is installed on every device.

The other being Apple who just so happens to take a big bag of cash from google so they are the default search engine on iOS

So how is a company actually going to be able to successfully compete with that with them hurdles in the way.

 

[mrochester]

I never said a company shouldn’t try
However there is a big difference

In the west there are only 2 mobile OS
One being android who are owned by google and they give that OS away to almost everyone apart from Apple to use & as a consequence of that chrome is installed on every device.

The other being Apple who just so happens to take a big bag of cash from google so they are the default search engine on iOS

So how is a company actually going to be able to successfully compete with that with them hurdles in the way.

Regulators should get rid of those hurdles. That’s their job.

And by all accounts developers absolutely hate the Apple App Store and Google play store so are ready and willing to make apps for a third ecosystem. It should not be a problem attracting masses of developers to a third platform by offering a better commission rate.

 

[Stuwil]

Regulators should get rid of those hurdles. That’s their job.

And by all accounts developers absolutely hate the Apple App Store and Google play store so are ready and willing to make apps for a third ecosystem. It should not be a problem attracting masses of developers to a third platform by offering a better commission rate.

Ah right
The windows phone failed because it couldn’t attract lots of customers & developers wouldn’t make apps for it because of the low market share hence why it eventually failed.

It’s not about a better commission the problems are financially competing against the 2 big boys
Plus google give the OS away for free to every OEM & by doing that
It then makes it fundamentally harder for a new company to break through for a number of reasons.

In regards to your regulation comment no western government can stop google giving their OS away for free

 

[Stuwil]

That’s shocking to me. You should understand then that nothing stays the same.
I owned the 128 and spent a lot of time in BBS’s with dial in modems. It was a lot of fun back then.
As far as not wanting competition I welcome it! It’s what drives innovation forward as it always has. Create something people want and they will leave the “monopoly “ in a heartbeat. It’s happened over and over and that will never change.

The problem is as long as google give away their OS for free to every OEM then the mobile market in the west is not going to change regardless if someone makes a new OS
Because of finance & developers

Yes your right about competition but maybe ask yourself this why is there competition for mobiles & search engines in Asia countries & not in the west?

 

[mrochester]

Ah right
The windows phone failed because it couldn’t attract lots of customers & developers wouldn’t make apps for it because of the low market share hence why it eventually failed.

It’s not about a better commission the problems are financially competing against the 2 big boys
Plus google give the OS away for free to every OEM & by doing that
It then makes it fundamentally harder for a new company to break through for a number of reasons.

In regards to your regulation comment no western government can stop google giving their OS away for free

It's in developers interests to have as many competing platforms as possible so that there is competition for commission rates.

It's in consumers interests to have as many competing platforms as possible so that they have a lot of choice.

If a developer deliberately withholds their apps from a particular platform then they should be investigated for anticompetitive behaviour and fined/dealt with as appropriate.

We should just make it illegal to use the profits from one business area to subsidise another. Problem solved. It's highly anti-competitive and leads to the company with the biggest pot of cash winning in every market it decides to compete in and sells below cost/gives away.

Imagine if google wasn't allowed to give search away for free? Imagine how much more equal market share would be between available paid for search engines if google wasn't allowed to distort the market but giving it's product away for nothing and subisidisng it with advertising money?

Imagine if smartphone manufactureres had to pay to license Android? Suddenly there'd be a market for mobile operating systems that other companies could compete in. Right now no company can afford to compete with google because they can't afford to give their product away for free. The market needs to be regulated so that mobile operating systems can be sold for a profit.

 

[Stuwil]

It's in developers interests to have as many competing platforms as possible so that there is competition for commission rates.

It's in consumers interests to have as many competing platforms as possible so that they have a lot of choice.

If a developer deliberately withholds their apps from a particular platform then they should be investigated for anticompetitive behaviour and fined/dealt with as appropriate.

We should just make it illegal to use the profits from one business area to subsidise another. Problem solved. It's highly anti-competitive and leads to the company with the biggest pot of cash winning in every market it decides to compete in and sells below cost/gives away.

Imagine if google wasn't allowed to give search away for free? Imagine how much more equal market share would be between available paid for search engines if google wasn't allowed to distort the market but giving it's product away for nothing and subisidisng it with advertising money.

Well your argument is a bit flawed because there is no dedicated instagram app for the iPad with all there customers
So why would a big developer make apps available for a platform with no customers?

Explain how you can get competing mobile OS’s is google gives theirs away to every OEM for free.

 

[mrochester]

Well your argument is a bit flawed because there is no dedicated instagram app for the iPad with all there customers
So why would a big developer make apps available for a platform with no customers?

Explain how you can get competing mobile OS’s is google gives theirs away to every OEM for free.

Because a developer knows that the way to attract customers to a platform is for their apps to be on it? And a developer wants there to be multiple platforms so it's in their interests to make their apps for all platforms?

We'd change the law so that Google cannot give their OS away for free. The law would prevent companies from using the profits from one business area to subsidise other products and thus behaving anti-competitively.

 

[Stuwil]

Because a developer knows that the way to attract customers to a platform is for their apps to be on it? And a developer wants there to be multiple platforms so it's in their interests to make their apps for all platforms?

But that never answered my question
If the iPad has millions & millions of customers then why does it not have a dedicated instagram app for it.

If some new company launches dream on
OS with zero customers & only on a few devices then why should a company invest in developing apps for said platform
When they are competing against google who gives their platform away to every OEM for free & it’s already got over 2 billion users worldwide

 

[Stuwil]

It's in developers interests to have as many competing platforms as possible so that there is competition for commission rates.

It's in consumers interests to have as many competing platforms as possible so that they have a lot of choice.

If a developer deliberately withholds their apps from a particular platform then they should be investigated for anticompetitive behaviour and fined/dealt with as appropriate.

We should just make it illegal to use the profits from one business area to subsidise another. Problem solved. It's highly anti-competitive and leads to the company with the biggest pot of cash winning in every market it decides to compete in and sells below cost/gives away.

Imagine if google wasn't allowed to give search away for free? Imagine how much more equal market share would be between available paid for search engines if google wasn't allowed to distort the market but giving it's product away for nothing and subisidisng it with advertising money?

Imagine if smartphone manufactureres had to pay to license Android? Suddenly there'd be a market for mobile operating systems that other companies could compete in. Right now no company can afford to compete with google because they can't afford to give their product away for free. The market needs to be regulated so that mobile operating systems can be sold for a profit.

Right but no government in the west will force google to put a price on android because google’s response will be we give android away for free because we want every company to be able to use it regardless the size of the company
And if you make us charge for it then it would then stop OEM’s from being able to sell their product & it would mean companies that are small wouldn’t be able to sell their mobile’s.

 

[mrochester]

Right but no government in the west will force google to put a price on android because google’s response will be we give android away for free because we want every company to be able to use it regardless the size of the company
And if you make us charge for it then it would then stop OEM’s from being able to sell their product & it would mean companies that are small wouldn’t be able to sell their mobile’s.

We want every company to be able to use it so we can dominate the market is not the selling point you think it is to regulators. Regulators want to STOP companies from dominating markets.

 

[mrochester]

But that never answered my question
If the iPad has millions & millions of customers then why does it not have a dedicated instagram app for it.

If some new company launches dream on
OS with zero customers & only on a few devices then why should a company invest in developing apps for said platform
When they are competing against google who gives their platform away to every OEM for free & it’s already got over 2 billion users worldwide

Maybe instagram need investigating for anticompetitive behaviour then to determine why they aren’t making that product? Google withheld its apps from windows phone for anti-competitive purposes so there’s precedent for these big companies to be withholding things for nefarious purposes.

 

[Stuwil]

We want every company to be able to use it so we can dominate the market is not the selling point you think it is to regulators.

You can’t regulate something if a company gives it away for free because then you would have to charge different prices for it like charge fairphone a different price to Samsung
so that’s not going to happen because right now everybody gets treated the same & there is no discriminations against any company

 

[Stuwil]

Maybe instagram need investigating for anticompetitive behaviour then to determine why they aren’t making that product? Google withheld its apps from windows phone for anti-competitive purposes so there’s precedent for these big companies to be withholding things for nefarious purposes.

It’s about they don’t think it’s worth their while to make a proper app for it & that’s the problem a new os would have

 

[TgeekB]

I never said a company shouldn’t try
However there is a big difference

In the west there are only 2 mobile OS
One being android who are owned by google and they give that OS away to almost everyone apart from Apple to use & as a consequence of that chrome is installed on every device.

The other being Apple who just so happens to take a big bag of cash from google so they are the default search engine on iOS

So how is a company actually going to be able to successfully compete with that with them hurdles in the way.

You keep saying the same thing over and over without any proof. A company will compete when it makes a better product or when the technology changes. Things don’t stay the same forever or we would be using dumb phones still. It so simple and we have history to prove it yet you refuse to see that. According to you Google OS will still be relevant 100 years from now. Doesn’t that sound silly?

 

[Stuwil]

You keep saying the same thing over and over without any proof. A company will compete when it makes a better product or when the technology changes. Things don’t stay the same forever or we would be using dumb phones still. It so simple and we have history to prove it yet you refuse to see that. According to you Google OS will still be relevant 100 years from now. Doesn’t that sound silly?

Mate you have not explained
How a new startup company that would make a new mobile OS
Will be able to compete with google who is worth 2 trillion dollars & gives their platform away for free to every OEM & has a customer base of over 2 billion people & developers know they will get a return on their investment with google
Unlike a new startup.

If you can explain to me how a startup company that makes a new mobile operating system will be able to compete with android in the west then I’m all ears.

 

[TgeekB]

Mate you have not explained
How a new startup company that would make a new mobile OS
Will be able to compete with google who is worth 2 trillion dollars & gives their platform away for free to every OEM & has a customer base of over 2 billion people & developers know they will get a return on their investment with google
Unlike a new startup.

If you can explain to me how a startup company that makes a new mobile operating system will be able to compete with android in the west then I’m all ears.

I have but it’s falling on deaf ears.
I’ve enjoyed this conversation but we will have to agree to disagree. Keep talking to yourself.

 

[Stuwil]

I have but it’s falling on deaf ears.
I’ve enjoyed this conversation but we will have to agree to disagree. Keep talking to yourself.

Exactly just as I suspected no answer
Because Google are very clever in by giving their OS away for free
Then it’s harder for anyone to actually challenge them in the mobile space
Because if your a 50 quid device or a 1,500 device your guaranteed a return on your investment with android because of the customer base & apps readily available for it.

 

[surferfb]

Right
Now again how can a competitor rise to the top if chrome is pre installed on the world’s most popular mobile OS?

If a browser is significantly better it will rise to the top. Both OSes allow alternative browsers. Maybe one that is built with agenetic-AI in mind? Or, perhaps more likely, browsers don’t matter as much in the future - I certainly use it less thanks to AI.