Ask HN: Is Android a case of predatory pricing?

Microsoft have been making the Windows Phone OS entirely by themselves and they sell it as a commercial product. It is a 'fair' and direct approach: you have made a product, you sell it, you get the money. (Meanwhile, they are also getting money from Android devices using some patent agreement, but it is a different question.) Google have been making the free Android OS using the money they have earned from their main business (also they use open source, but it is also a different question). Hardly Android is a charity project, eventually it brings profit to Google by significantly increasing traffic to their search engine and services. So Android is obviously commercial, though indirectly. It seems to me that this is a classic case of predatory pricing being commited by Google over Microsoft: Google uses money from their main business to make a free competing product. I can imagine a correspoding example with tangible entities: what if the BMW company decided to produce scooters and give them away with no profit taking finance for the production from their car business, thus killing the scooter market and becoming the monopolist. This would be an immediate case for the authorities such as the Federal Trade Commission to take action. For me this example is the same situation as with Google and Microsoft. What do you think about this idea?