Hacker News Reader

Comment by ghshephard | Hacker News Reader

I'm very confused. Isn't it in Google's best interests to have everyone in the world using their mapping product? Why would they want to get people on new platforms used to using alternative maps, like, say, http://www.bing.com/maps/?

Something doesn't sound right here...

View on HN

It confuses me, too, but they also want me to have to find an alternative to their contacts, calendar, and push-email stuff when I get my next Windows Phone device, even though they're still going to be supporting Exchange syncing for paid Apps accounts.

The sad thing is that the alternative I use might just end up being a Google Apps account... :| so they'll get some money out of that, at least (I'm assuming the free one I have right now will have to be upgraded to get the sync support added back in).

They see Google maps as a strong enough brand that they think people will avoid Windows Phone if it doesn't have it.

I think it's a good move. The last thing we need is our one chance at an Open Source OS being undermined by Microsoft.

Whatever ones views on Android's openness, this is one interesting way to defend open.

They're just trying to avoid having a single company, Microsoft, dominate the industry again.

Microsoft will never have a shot at dominating the mobile industry. What I don't understand is your willingness to support a duopoly, which is almost as bad as a monopoly.

It's not a duopoly - anyone can use Android for free, and many do.

Don't forget how much money MS makes in each handset in extortion money, that is, "patent licensing"

As some people have already been pointing out, try maps.google.com in Opera Mobile (if you have an android device handy). I honestly think they just don't care about most mobile browsers.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com