I Was So Wrong About Microsoft
linkedin.com
linkedin.com
------------
Sent from my Windows 10 Enterprise computer https://i.imgur.com/cwZGj0g.png
All of them will. All of them need to be regulated better instead of just getting a slap on the wrist.
Just don't go throwing "Microsoft is my open source hero" (and that last paragraph) bullshit on my face.
[1] https://source.android.com/compatibility/cts/
[2] https://developer.samsung.com/galaxy/sdks
[3] https://developer.motorola.com/tools-kits
[4] https://www.htcdev.com/devcenter/opensense-sdk/opensense-ove...
[5] https://developer.sony.com/develop/theme-creator/overview
This is what Google got fined for.
https://amp.theguardian.com/business/2018/jul/18/google-face...
The second anti-competitive behaviour was preventing smartphone manufacturers from running competing systems that had not been approved by Google.
For instance, Amazon wouldn’t have been allowed to manufacture both Fire phones and phone that were certified by Google as an Android phone.
(Citation #5 as of this writing) https://www.cnet.com/news/alibaba-google-just-plain-wrong-ab...
Google took some heat earlier this week for seemingly using its clout to squash a burgeoning mobile OS.
(Citation #6 as of this writing) https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/07/googles-iron-grip-on...
While it might not be an official requirement, being granted a Google apps license will go a whole lot easier if you join the Open Handset Alliance. The OHA is a group of companies committed to Android—Google's Android—and members are contractually prohibited from building non-Google approved devices. That's right, joining the OHA requires a company to sign its life away and promise to not build a device that runs a competing Android fork.
Besides, even in 2008, what other OS were OEMs going to license to compete with the iPhone? Windows Mobile?
> Besides, even in 2008, what other OS were OEMs going to license to compete with the iPhone? Windows Mobile?
Yes, Windows Mobile was the dominant licensed smartphone operating system at the time. What's that got to do with anything?
Most people customise a new computer in a myriad of ways, how is the start menu any different? Of course it is sleazy marketing dreamt up in a management meeting, but you chose to accept the defaults here.
It's like knowingly buying a bike with a flat tire then complaining to everyone it doesn't work instead of simply pumping up the tire.
Sure you can disable some of them but its like whack-a-mole and your an update away from a new nuisance. The speculative app installing (which does get actually installed) requires a registry change to disable - not exactly user friendly.
I paid extra for a "professional" operating system. Why am I getting candy crush?
Trust has to be earned. It takes a long time to build, a moment to destroy. Microsoft has a lot more building to do.
This is not the first good thing they've done.
> Microsoft has a lot more building to do.
Maybe in your eyes. They've redeemed themselves with a lot of people.
Internally we don't even get free/discount licenses or anything yet. We aren't supposed to operate any differently with them until it closes.
Source: I work at MSFT and asked. It also says so in our blog post "the acquisition is expected to close by the end of the calendar year." https://news.microsoft.com/2018/06/04/microsoft-to-acquire-g...