Exactly ... you get to click accept and disregard.
Google's force implementation with OEMs means you never get to click accept and disregard
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Mobile OSs Google faces EU charge over Android 'abuse of dominance'
- Thread starter lowendlinux
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Exactly ... you get to click accept and disregard.
Google's force implementation with OEMs means you never get to click accept and disregard
You have a license to use but not own..
With all my heart I wanted Apple to lose the case with the FBI because they own the SW my hope was it would force Apple to transfer ownership of the SW to the end user. While I think Stallman needs to shut up, take a shower, cut his hair, and shave he's right Apple, Google, and Amazon need to stop post haste.
[doublepost=1461264866][/doublepost]
Exactly ... you get to click accept and disregard.
Google's force implementation with OEMs means you never get to click accept and disregard
GMS needs to opt in period..I shouldn't need to flash my phone to remove google from it. "would you like an express install or custom" would work for me.
at least you have the power to remove GMS though..
on ios you have to rely on hacks to gain user choices (application defaults) and even then it is still not as robust as android (WRT third party service integration)
Not if the bootloader is unlocked imo. That is 'allowed'. There is no vulnerability utilized
It's still a hack it should just be a list when you fire up you phone everything google needs to be opt in
But apple doesn't force other OEMs..I've got pretty much zero love for Apple but because they effect only Apple there's nothing to do. Google effects something in the neighborhood of 80% of smart phones so they're more evil.
But they force the user! Why are Oems so much more important?! Are there even any Eu android Oems? It's sounding like it really is about user choice, which ios infringes on way more!
Last edited:
Don't they all..that's why I want Ubuntu, Sailfish, Tizen, WinMo, Android, iOS, and my next door neighbors OS to compete I want choice and ideally I want them all to open source...For the time being I'll run an AOSP ROM and fdroid or pico GAPPSand I wouldn't do even do that if WhatsApp would release source. If that doesn't happen soonish I'll just force the issue and use telegram.
I guess my point is the ability to do the above is a dream high in the sky compared to what you can accomplish on iOS, and iOS is getting no scrutiny at all. I understand all this mumbo jumbo licensing legalese is the reason, but that doesn't mean it is right. The spirit of the eu push seems to be about user choice, since they have no local OEMS to defend. It is just their means to attack google, which unfortunately can't apply to Apple. Double standards w/ semantics overload
It's interesting where the complaint came from:
A lobbyist group called "FairSearch", made up of companies like Kayak, Expedia, TripAdvisor (and later, Microsoft, Nokia and Oracle), all of whom would rather that Google did not dominate their competing search spaces.
The basic claim seems to be that Google requires phone makers to use Google Services as the default apps if they want "the latest Android version". It's unclear if that means a version that hasn't been released to open source yet. Anyone know?
In any case, cannot a maker come up with a better web browser or GMail replacement, and let the user decide to set that as the default instead of Google's version? For that matter, does any maker really want to invest that much effort to replace Google Services in the first place? Or is this really only about Search dominance?
A lobbyist group called "FairSearch", made up of companies like Kayak, Expedia, TripAdvisor (and later, Microsoft, Nokia and Oracle), all of whom would rather that Google did not dominate their competing search spaces.
The basic claim seems to be that Google requires phone makers to use Google Services as the default apps if they want "the latest Android version". It's unclear if that means a version that hasn't been released to open source yet. Anyone know?
In any case, cannot a maker come up with a better web browser or GMail replacement, and let the user decide to set that as the default instead of Google's version? For that matter, does any maker really want to invest that much effort to replace Google Services in the first place? Or is this really only about Search dominance?
Last edited:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dumping_(pricing_policy)
Android has a lot in common with dumping. People can argue all they want and type paragraph after paragraph and use those thesauruses but that doesn't make it untrue.
Android has a lot in common with dumping. People can argue all they want and type paragraph after paragraph and use those thesauruses but that doesn't make it untrue.
Don't forget BB10 and Fire OS, both capable of running Android applications and preloaded with the Amazon Appstore.
This is the second charge that the EU is slapping Google with, and it is not stopping there. And they had already been lenient some other time.
In this case, a major point are the secret contracts which might be hampering the distribution of alternatives with the operators, forcing Samsung to not preinstall the Android compatibility layer in Tizen, and perhaps making BlackBerry stop updating the BB10 Android runtime to 4.4 or later.
[doublepost=1461283923][/doublepost]Also, another of the issues is hampering alternative Android app stores to flourish.
Play Store app exclusivity is also a problem for Android forks.
In this case, a major point are the secret contracts which might be hampering the distribution of alternatives with the operators, forcing Samsung to not preinstall the Android compatibility layer in Tizen, and perhaps making BlackBerry stop updating the BB10 Android runtime to 4.4 or later.
[doublepost=1461283923][/doublepost]Also, another of the issues is hampering alternative Android app stores to flourish.
Play Store app exclusivity is also a problem for Android forks.
So you believe that if I create an OS that is free to be utilized by anyone, in any way they see fit, but then monetize by licensing my own apps for that OS, I should be penalized? This is what this boils down to. Not one single OEM is forced to use Google's apps. If they want them they have to pay. Do you see any issues with Amazon's Fire OS? Or China's various app stores and alternative apps for Android phones? Apparently, no country in the EU is capable of producing an alternative, so it is just easier to claim consumer protection.
By the way, the EU is claiming they want t €26 billion in fines. I find that a very strange number they came up with considering it equals the annual debt interest for the 2 main failing EU States: Portugal and Greece. Coincidence?
Fake free? I can dl Android right now and not have any Google Apps. I can manipulate it any way I want and then sell it to an OEM. Want an example? Cyanogenmod.
or....just go XDA and look at all the 1000s of roms most have GAPS as an additional download.
I think it is funny just 2 days ago Canada's Competition Bureau finished their 3 year investigation and said Google is not acting in an anti competitive way. Who do I believe.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/google-competition-bureau-1.3544384
Edit: nevermind, that is about advertising, not android.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/google-competition-bureau-1.3544384
Edit: nevermind, that is about advertising, not android.
