Google allows 3rd parties to use their OS, allows 3rd party app stores, etc but gets a huge fine for bundling their own native app store.
Apple doesn't allow 3rd parties to do anything and you need to use their app store but they're totally fine here.
Good job Europe.
"But Google tied the use of its popular Play app store, where customers can download more than 1 million apps made by outside developers, to requirements that companies feature other services like Google’s search engine and web browser that drive advertising revenue."
"Android phone makers wishing to distribute Google apps may now also build noncompatible, or forked, smartphones and tablets."
You don't think there's any bad faith in Google saying, "if you want to use our app store, and for all practical purposes you have to use our app store, then you must include our apps for other services -- and by the way if you sell one phone with Gapps, all of your phones must have them too?"
Google doesn't make money on the devices themselves. Being able to enforce rules like this is their motivation for developing Android in the first place.
Android was created in October 2003 by Andy Rubin, before Google bought it in 2005
> "because they did not want Apple to win all the market"
Actual purpose was: "The early intentions of the company were to develop an advanced operating system for digital cameras, and this was the basis of its pitch to investors in April 2004. The company then decided that the market for cameras was not large enough for its goals, and by five months later it had diverted its efforts and was pitching Android as a handset operating system that would rival Symbian and Microsoft Windows Mobile."
Google draws scrutiny from antitrust regulators in regard to phone software because Google is separate from the phone makers.
> phone software because Google is separate from the phone makers
What if pixel phones become the only way to use Android?
These are just semi-rhetorical (and unlikely scenarios) questions.
Yes, why not? Or that rule only applies to Google?
With Apple the OS maker, the store maker, and the phone maker are all the same entity so it doesn't even make sense to say that the OS vendor is trying to force their store on the phone vendor.
If Apple draws antitrust scrutiny, it will be for something different that what is drawing attention to Google, such as for not letting third party stores on their phone.
It's about the dominance in the search engine/advertising market in europe, not about "giving away apps for free". If Apple would have a similar dominant position, they would face the same problems.
I don't understand why people keep trying to use the Internet Explorer precedent as an example of good antitrust maneuvers. It's literally the exact opposite.
I would have to dig around for the source of the original story, but the suit is the only reason Google was able to topple Microsoft's dominance. The antitrust case gave Google and companies like it room to grow, and an antitrust case against Google may be the only thing can launch the next wave of innovation that surpasses it.
nobody would've changed ie6 as their default browser because of the anti trust ruling. they changed because internet explorer was developed way slower than other competitors that slowly took over the market.
Smartphone manufacturers are in the smartphone business because of Google. If those manufacturers don't like Google's terms, they're free to go Microsoft's route and build their own OS.
Nobody is forcing these companies to do anything.
Google and its smartphone partners are both in the business because of each other. If Google had kept Android closed and limited to its own phones, it would not have become the #1 mobile OS -- we'd be using Palm or Microsoft or Nokia or someone else's product.
The carriers have iPhones at roughly the same price as a half-decent Android phone, and those that can't afford to do that, get them second hand (usually older models..).
I have an Android, and I know several techie friends with Androids, but "normal people" have iPhones.
Really - It's almost a surprise to see someone with an Android here..
As I said, I've no data.. I'd love to see some though!
That said the rest of Europe is definitely android
http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/ireland
Current stats show Android in the lead. As it is almost everywhere.
Not according to this.
[1] https://techcrunch.com/2018/07/16/apples-app-store-revenue-n...
The issue here is where the anti-trust line is drawn. Why people in the tech side never seem to understand this is beyond me, but the line is clear.
It has everything to do with your marketshare. Google could make zero dollars off Android, if they still own & control it and it reaches a vast majority marketshare, as it has in Europe, then they are pressured to open it up and increase competition within the platform.
Whining about Apple and whataboutism is ridiculous. They are not the majority of devices in any major region (NA/Europe/Asia/Worldwide). Some isolated countries are majority iOS, but they all exist within the EU and the EU is 75% Android.
However, I don't think that Apple has the market share in the EU to be compared to Google in this case.
I stand by my whataboutism callout.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_legal_systems
As far as I know this is not true.
If Apple actually had any kind of comparable market share to Google over here, they would equally be fined.