It seems like the only reason Google paid 8B, is because another company would have paid 7B otherwise. If Samsung was told "You can't let anyone pay you - have to show a screen with four competitors and let the user pick which one they want as default" I assume the vast majority of people would just pick Google?
Then Samsung would just use its own apps more than they already do. Banning payments doesn't get the outcome you're suggesting of a mandatory set of multiple apps from multiple companies.
Microsoft was stopped from playing favorite with its own Internet Explorer. Samsung is playing favorites here under both these scenarios (having itself as the default or having Google as the default)
And how's that working out?
Samsung doesn't have a monopoly with its Android devices, and doesn't stop alternative apps from being installed.
Stopping device makers from installing whatever the hell they want, on the devices they produce, is nuts.
Also where do you draw a line? e.g. can you have a preinstalled camera app (with custom features) or is that also not fair.
What if I’m the 5th messaging app? How do I get a place over the first 4? How does Samsung decide?
What if I’m the 20th or 50th? Do I deserve a shot? If not where is the cut off? How do I become a winner and not a loser in this situation as the first N shown will have a huge growth advantage
In the EU, android phones ask the user to pick a search engine from a list on startup. The list order is randomized [1].
From Oxford Languages:
> the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform
How about wanting to legally abolish tips, because it's unfair and leads to subminimum wages for workers? Must you refuse to tip a waiter, lest you be called a hypocrite?
That’s generally not really true though? Especially in many states like CA, NY etc. where there is (almost) no tipped minimum wage.
Anyway, sounds like a hypocritical position because in general consumers would benefit more from abolishing tips than waiters/other tipped workers.
The vast majority would pick Google because Google has been paying to be the default for years.
That consumer preference isn’t exactly 100% organic.
I feel like the manufacturers are the one holding Google hostage, threatening to give users a different/less popular default option if Google doesn't pay up.
No, that was for Microsoft, in the past.
People would just start paying Samsung for being one of the four competitors. Otherwise who gets to decide who those four are?
Assuming Google really does provide a valuable service, then why aren't Apple and Samsung paying for it. Instead, they are getting paid to use it.
Banning these payments is bad for Google because then Apple and Samsung will ship their own apps.