The irony is this ruling is that the open nature of Android is likely a big reason for it's popularity in Europe. I would be seriously annoyed if my Android phone didn't come bundled with Google software and I had to download the apps separately. Google's apps work well together - to the benefit of the consumer.
1
The underpinnings for the proposed EU action is the "dominance [of American tech giants] over how people in the 28-member bloc get access to digital services." If EU companies cannot beat the "American tech giants" in the marketplace, than they will beat them through the regulatory process with the help of the EU regulators. Significantly, the EU is not at all transparent about this.
More important, where are the EU tech giants? There is considerable cross elasticity in digital services markets. People often have a broad array of choices, but many of those choices are not as popular, easy to use, or useful as others (usually the popular choices) might be. If all you friends have chosen to be on Facebook, for example, is there some reason why you cannot chose to be on Facebook too? Apparently, the EU has a problem with that. Most likely, it is solely because Facebook is an American tech giant.
If the EU wants to deny some of the more popular choices to its people, this will, of course, damage the American tech giants to some degree, but it will also be damaging and frustrating to its people who will find they have more limited ability to use many of the broadly popular choices that the rest of the world uses.
This is really a political issue, and the solution is going to have to be political. The US needs to weigh in on this and level the playing field for American tech giants.
More important, where are the EU tech giants? There is considerable cross elasticity in digital services markets. People often have a broad array of choices, but many of those choices are not as popular, easy to use, or useful as others (usually the popular choices) might be. If all you friends have chosen to be on Facebook, for example, is there some reason why you cannot chose to be on Facebook too? Apparently, the EU has a problem with that. Most likely, it is solely because Facebook is an American tech giant.
If the EU wants to deny some of the more popular choices to its people, this will, of course, damage the American tech giants to some degree, but it will also be damaging and frustrating to its people who will find they have more limited ability to use many of the broadly popular choices that the rest of the world uses.
This is really a political issue, and the solution is going to have to be political. The US needs to weigh in on this and level the playing field for American tech giants.
1
anybody can use any search engine they want on an Android phone. They chose to use Google because it works the best.
1
This unfortunately shows how disoriented EU is in case of digital services. Next we learn EC is about to fine Amazon for preferring itself in kindle...
1
Google should be sued over its behavior. While its true that Android users can install other apps, this can happen only if the phone has enough space available. But Google has made it impossible for users to remove Google apps. Because it is impossible to remove Google apps, the lack of available space makes it impossible to install other apps!
My Android phone has several Google apps I want to get rid of. Those apps sit on my phone, taking up precious space, thereby preventing me from installing apps from other companies.
A lawsuit over this situation is long overdue.
My Android phone has several Google apps I want to get rid of. Those apps sit on my phone, taking up precious space, thereby preventing me from installing apps from other companies.
A lawsuit over this situation is long overdue.
3
Nonsense! You can delete those apps whenever you choose. I have deleted the ones I didn't want - no issues.
I own an Android phone. It comes pre-loaded with garbage apps like G , Google play books, Google music etc.
They update regularly and take up space on my phone for which I paid some $600.
Sure I can download competing apps. But it is impossible to get rid of these original garbage apps I do not want and have never wanted.
They update regularly and take up space on my phone for which I paid some $600.
Sure I can download competing apps. But it is impossible to get rid of these original garbage apps I do not want and have never wanted.
3
I thought that Google's Executive Chairman, Eric Schmidt, who is Google's executive liaison to government, said just last year that he had this issue under control. It would appear Google has a long road to settlement of these issues.
1
Wow, I generally believe that the state must actively promote competiton and prosecute companies that engage in anti-competitive behavior, but this one is a head scratcher.
In a world full of companies avoiding competition, how could they possibly have decided to pursue this one - I guess the lobbying of Google's competitors was more important then the facts of the case.
Even beyond the well known openness and diversity of Android, and the ability of any consumer to install and use any app, Android was really designed to allow 3rd party apps to integrate better then on iOS. It's hard to see any angle by which Android isn't better then iOS in this regard.
In a world full of companies avoiding competition, how could they possibly have decided to pursue this one - I guess the lobbying of Google's competitors was more important then the facts of the case.
Even beyond the well known openness and diversity of Android, and the ability of any consumer to install and use any app, Android was really designed to allow 3rd party apps to integrate better then on iOS. It's hard to see any angle by which Android isn't better then iOS in this regard.
1
Our government regulators are as clueless as can be.
America does not have the ability to police tech markets.
It is obvious that Google favors illegally its own apps. This should be an easy case to win.
Their biggest blunder was allowing Facebook to buy Instagram. Today Facebook is valued at $300 billion dollars and has no competition. Had they not been able to buy Instagram and maybe Whatsapp these 2 companies would have grown into very strong competition. Instead we can thank our stupid government for a monopoly in social media and outsized profits for Facebook. This hurts consumers in so many ways from privacy choices, to who sees our posts. On Facebook only 3-5% of a user's posts make it into your newsfeed thus when you post on Facebook none of your friends see what you post. Facebook is blocking word of mouth and communications amongst users. A competitor would have allow use better privacy, better communications, etc... Just because Facebook is free does not mean there is no cost to using it's service. Consumer's are deeply affected by these "free" services. At the time of the merger Instagram was not just a camera app as our luddite government officials claimed but a social network with 40,000,000 networked users sharing billions of pictures a day. Kevin Systrom, Instagram's founder, was coached by Facebook's lawyers on how to describe his service. IMHO, he misled them. Instagram was growing fast as a social network. Today it has 500,000,000 users.
America does not have the ability to police tech markets.
It is obvious that Google favors illegally its own apps. This should be an easy case to win.
Their biggest blunder was allowing Facebook to buy Instagram. Today Facebook is valued at $300 billion dollars and has no competition. Had they not been able to buy Instagram and maybe Whatsapp these 2 companies would have grown into very strong competition. Instead we can thank our stupid government for a monopoly in social media and outsized profits for Facebook. This hurts consumers in so many ways from privacy choices, to who sees our posts. On Facebook only 3-5% of a user's posts make it into your newsfeed thus when you post on Facebook none of your friends see what you post. Facebook is blocking word of mouth and communications amongst users. A competitor would have allow use better privacy, better communications, etc... Just because Facebook is free does not mean there is no cost to using it's service. Consumer's are deeply affected by these "free" services. At the time of the merger Instagram was not just a camera app as our luddite government officials claimed but a social network with 40,000,000 networked users sharing billions of pictures a day. Kevin Systrom, Instagram's founder, was coached by Facebook's lawyers on how to describe his service. IMHO, he misled them. Instagram was growing fast as a social network. Today it has 500,000,000 users.
1
This after EU regulators ruled, as reported by the Times, that Google is not a search engine (nor Bing)...
This makes zero sense. I have been testing three GPS/Map systems on my android and can download everything, including iTunes, to my heart's content. And so can the Europeans. Apple, on the other hand, forces hardware obsolescence through its IOS updates and has created a closed, preferential universe of what you can place on their phones, pads, and desktops. What an incredible waste of time and resources by the EU and, sadly, another reason to exit this litigious group of bureaucrats.
15
Here's a radical piece of advice: Google, completely ignore any rulings made by the Commission. Don't even show up at the kangaroo court. Ignore it. You'll get issued with a massive fine and potentially a ban to sell your products in the European Union. Ignore the fine, pull your products. Yes, it's a huge financial hit, but just see what happens to the European Commission when consumers no longer have access to the latest Android & Google services.
It's time to play hardball against these shakedown tactics.
It's time to play hardball against these shakedown tactics.
10
WOW! I expected Apple to be hit with this before Google. Just a few weeks ago I was discussing with my friend regarding the closed nature of iOS and why Apple was not being investigated when Microsoft was dinged for bundling IE with Windows and not being able to change default Apps.
On the Android OS you can change the default app for all actions like Maps, Keyboard, Mail, Browser, etc. Whereas in iOS you cannot change anything expect default Keyboard. All other actions default to stock iOS apps, like if I click on a address in a message it will open only in Apple Maps even if Google maps or other mapping software is installed.
On the Android OS you can change the default app for all actions like Maps, Keyboard, Mail, Browser, etc. Whereas in iOS you cannot change anything expect default Keyboard. All other actions default to stock iOS apps, like if I click on a address in a message it will open only in Apple Maps even if Google maps or other mapping software is installed.
13
Europe needs to walk out of the 18th century and enter the 21st. Europe spends more time trying to bring down successful American companies than it does trying to match our innovation. So backward. As Rumsfeld said, "old Europe."
4
Oh how I wish they would simply go after companies for locking us in, instead of attacking an OPEN SOURCE COMPANY. I can use Android sans anything Google.
3
Oh look! European regulators unveiled more unfounded charges to compensate for the lack of strong European competition in one particular industry. I guess there's nothing left in which Americans are allowed to rank among the best? American didn't establish this alleged dominance through any nefarious means. Google (and Apple, Microsoft, etc.) all allow users to customize their systems to various and sometimes extreme degrees (especially Google).
If that's how European regulators want to play then I guess it's time for the US feds (EPA, Justice Department, etc.) and various US states' attorneys general to levy the full slate of fines and charges on Volkswagen for willfully breaking clean air laws that adversely affected human health. Standing against Euro regulators' simplistic contrived charges over web browsers, apps and OS issues these look far more serious and are far more apt to withstand global court challenges. Let's see how one of Europe's most renowned and leading manufacturers survives a hit that could surpass US$100B when all amounts are added up at the local and federal levels.
This is a foolish game and it needs to end. It's time for the American government to stand up for American firms. Once European regulators see that regulatory ammo the US can unleash if the US gov't ever decided to actually end this game once and for all, maybe our 'friends' across the Atlantic will wisely reconsider and retreat.
If that's how European regulators want to play then I guess it's time for the US feds (EPA, Justice Department, etc.) and various US states' attorneys general to levy the full slate of fines and charges on Volkswagen for willfully breaking clean air laws that adversely affected human health. Standing against Euro regulators' simplistic contrived charges over web browsers, apps and OS issues these look far more serious and are far more apt to withstand global court challenges. Let's see how one of Europe's most renowned and leading manufacturers survives a hit that could surpass US$100B when all amounts are added up at the local and federal levels.
This is a foolish game and it needs to end. It's time for the American government to stand up for American firms. Once European regulators see that regulatory ammo the US can unleash if the US gov't ever decided to actually end this game once and for all, maybe our 'friends' across the Atlantic will wisely reconsider and retreat.
6
Funny, when a European company gets fined by American authorities - and the Americans have leveled on the order of 100 billion dollars of fines versus European companies over the past several years - the NYT comments section is full of remarks saying, "If they want to do business in America, they have to play by American rules." Okay, fine. But if American companies want to do business in Europe, these American companies have to play by European rules. If they don't like it, then they can leave.
Google *is* a monopoly, and it's even more a monopoly in Europe than it is in America. It's about time that European regulators are finally began to apply the law.
Google *is* a monopoly, and it's even more a monopoly in Europe than it is in America. It's about time that European regulators are finally began to apply the law.
6
Google has a dominant market position because it offers a good product that customers demand. If Google had done anything nefarious to drive android penetration that would but one thing, but that is not alleged at all. Even if Google held a monopoly position, it should not be punished if that monopoly was achieved because they offer better products than their competition. This looks more like sour grapes because no European firms can innovate or compete.
5
My opinion on this is that Google is really a utility. They provide a search service that no one else can provide.
1
exactly. you would thing these misguided buffoons were getting a check from Google every month. I could care less what happens to any corporation overseas. in fact I applaud the EU for standing up to them unlike in the US.
Europe is frustrated that the digital world is dominated by American companies but rather than get their act together and created the Digital Single (Europe) market they need they spend their time trying to take down the Americans. They need to look over their shoulder because the Chinese will soon surpass them.
5
There is no reason why someone who makes something should not be able to make it just as he likes, whether that favors his own accessories or not. This is a matter of basic freedom, which the European Union does not favor.
If you don't like a google product, simply do not buy it. That's called "the market," or "it is your choice where you spend your money."
Think for yourself?
If you don't like a google product, simply do not buy it. That's called "the market," or "it is your choice where you spend your money."
Think for yourself?
2
Go for the deepest pockets... first rule of government.
Google made $74.5 billion (profit) in 2015; Apple made $18 billion. See, Apple is a "nice" company and Google is an "evil" company. In comparison, the devil's own company, Exxon, made just over $16 billion.
Google made $74.5 billion (profit) in 2015; Apple made $18 billion. See, Apple is a "nice" company and Google is an "evil" company. In comparison, the devil's own company, Exxon, made just over $16 billion.
I don't know where you're getting those numbers. A quick search for the public financial information shows that Google's 2015 profit was $46.8 billion and Apple's was $93.6 billion. Exxon made $71.2 billion in 2015.
6
Sure hope iOS gets held to the same standard. At least you have choice with application handling in Android.
1
Competition on a global scale has been the story of our lives since the industrial revolution. It's understandable that when competition becomes unfair some regulation is introduced. But in the digital age you would expect that when states support major industries. Google doesn't get state support and has been the cradle of innovation for tens of 1000's of small businesses by providing a platform. Just run the numbers and look at how many great entrepeneurs have created businesses and jobs for Google and Apple's IOS. The EU has lost touch with the free market by going after one of the greatest incubators when instead it should be taking the funding of its Competition Commissioner and using it to help smart Europeans build new jobs. But that would be state aid...So maybe they just let the market create real competition. There will always be a need for a better mousetrap and even Google knows that.
“Consumers deserve more choice and innovation in mobile devices and applications,” said Thomas Vinje, a lawyer for FairSearch.
Seems to me like we already have a whole lot of choice, and I don't think an argument can be made that there is a lack of innovation in mobile devices and apps.
Seems to me like we already have a whole lot of choice, and I don't think an argument can be made that there is a lack of innovation in mobile devices and apps.
Totally idiotic. You really have to wonder what and where these folks are looking and who is really driving things. This commission is just looking to justify their existence and wanting another frivolous payday at the expense of some company or organization. The fact it is an American company is likely seen as a benefit.
Bought a Note 5 last year and almost all the stock apps were built by Samsung. Saw the same on HTC One. So after this "attempt" which I suspect will fail, who is next? Apple?
Considering the Canadians just cleared Google of the same after a year long investigation... These EU folks are looking more and more foolish. It's a shame.
Bought a Note 5 last year and almost all the stock apps were built by Samsung. Saw the same on HTC One. So after this "attempt" which I suspect will fail, who is next? Apple?
Considering the Canadians just cleared Google of the same after a year long investigation... These EU folks are looking more and more foolish. It's a shame.
EU regulators seem to be suffering from irregularity. Perhaps they're looking for a more transparent business model like FIFA's.
2
At what point do the E.U. politicians wake up and understand that Google/Apple/Samsung/HT provide tools to enable people to use it's services as well as others out of the box?
This in no way hinders a person from going to any of the myriad of app stores and installing a different, possibly more favored, app providing similar functionality in search, browsing, maps, etc., while still enabling that person to either disable, uninstall or remove, whichever app they don't like! Unless they are tech illiterate!
Why do they believe that providing baseline functionality, beyond calling, in a smartphone is so bad? Would they buy a car without wiper blades, a radio, paint, headlights, glass or tires?
If they come to my home, do they wish me to expect that THEY will be bringing their own entertainment, refreshments, snacks, food and seating? I'm not saying they can't!
However, I expect to provide a large assortment of snacks and sodas, and a fair assortment of beer, before the buffet is ready. The TV in the main room will be tuned to whatever big game is playing, the playroom TV will be available for video games and children's shows and the pool will be heated and open for use.
If I apply their reasoning, I should be simply opening my house for them to use as they wish during the course of MY party and supply NOTHING beyond the building and power. No pool, food, seating, lights or entertainment!
Sorry EU overlords! I can NOT be that terrible a host! To even you!
This in no way hinders a person from going to any of the myriad of app stores and installing a different, possibly more favored, app providing similar functionality in search, browsing, maps, etc., while still enabling that person to either disable, uninstall or remove, whichever app they don't like! Unless they are tech illiterate!
Why do they believe that providing baseline functionality, beyond calling, in a smartphone is so bad? Would they buy a car without wiper blades, a radio, paint, headlights, glass or tires?
If they come to my home, do they wish me to expect that THEY will be bringing their own entertainment, refreshments, snacks, food and seating? I'm not saying they can't!
However, I expect to provide a large assortment of snacks and sodas, and a fair assortment of beer, before the buffet is ready. The TV in the main room will be tuned to whatever big game is playing, the playroom TV will be available for video games and children's shows and the pool will be heated and open for use.
If I apply their reasoning, I should be simply opening my house for them to use as they wish during the course of MY party and supply NOTHING beyond the building and power. No pool, food, seating, lights or entertainment!
Sorry EU overlords! I can NOT be that terrible a host! To even you!
1
Big American company "giving" some products away in the interests of fostering its BIG money products and activities and destroying its competition?
History never fails to repeat itself, from Standard Oil, to GM, to IBM, to Microsoft, to Google... And look at the state of some of those Goliaths now!
History never fails to repeat itself, from Standard Oil, to GM, to IBM, to Microsoft, to Google... And look at the state of some of those Goliaths now!
2
What company doesn't give samples away in attempts to draw more business?
When someone has a bake sale and offers you a free sample, do you criticize them for trying to destroy the competition? Of course it's done with the intention of gaining business over competitors, because that's how business works.
It's as if Google is supposed to be saying, "well, we've been successful enough, let's give someone else a chance." They aren't blocking other apps. They aren't making it so you HAVE to use what they give you. So I don't get what the problem is. Google has shareholders too. They do what they believe will bolster business. Just because some unheard of app company in Portugal is unhappy doesn't warrant anti-trust charges. Google became dominant because they're the best at what they do. They certainly aren't making entry into the industry impossible. If anything, they buy the competition, not kill it.
I suspect that this issue has been pushed forward as quickly as possible as retribution for the Panama Papers.
As much as the E.U. would like to find U.S. companies to blame for their absolutely horrendous growth, I think they would be better off focusing somewhere else.
When someone has a bake sale and offers you a free sample, do you criticize them for trying to destroy the competition? Of course it's done with the intention of gaining business over competitors, because that's how business works.
It's as if Google is supposed to be saying, "well, we've been successful enough, let's give someone else a chance." They aren't blocking other apps. They aren't making it so you HAVE to use what they give you. So I don't get what the problem is. Google has shareholders too. They do what they believe will bolster business. Just because some unheard of app company in Portugal is unhappy doesn't warrant anti-trust charges. Google became dominant because they're the best at what they do. They certainly aren't making entry into the industry impossible. If anything, they buy the competition, not kill it.
I suspect that this issue has been pushed forward as quickly as possible as retribution for the Panama Papers.
As much as the E.U. would like to find U.S. companies to blame for their absolutely horrendous growth, I think they would be better off focusing somewhere else.
What Google is doing is WAY BEYOND "giving away samples"! It's just like Microsoft deliberately bundling IE into Windows and then claiming it was "integral to the OS" (which the judge dismissed as absurd!).
It's all about building monopolies and crushing the competition! Both Google and Apple would LOVE to be the ONLY game in town! Watch choice go down and prices skyrocket then! A la cable TV!
It's all about building monopolies and crushing the competition! Both Google and Apple would LOVE to be the ONLY game in town! Watch choice go down and prices skyrocket then! A la cable TV!
2
The EU is full of monopolies of many sorts. It should start dismantling those instead of obsessively going after Google and other American tech companies.
According to its own earlier pronouncements, the EU should be the leader in all things digital already. The EU is very good at talking, but not so good at doing.
According to its own earlier pronouncements, the EU should be the leader in all things digital already. The EU is very good at talking, but not so good at doing.
Sounds like we American tourists are off the hook in Europe, now that Google has come to embody the Ugly American over there. Thanks, Google, for helping them to hate you rather than me. Or will they still do that too?
Somehow I don't think these EU regulators would prosecute Google with such zeal if it were not an American company. Moreover, the antitrust arguments have no merits -- anyone can disable these Google apps on their Android phone.
Unfortunately, anti-American sentiment is rampant in the EU so these technological facts probably don't matter.
Unfortunately, anti-American sentiment is rampant in the EU so these technological facts probably don't matter.
14
Google's apps are the one serious aggravation of having an Android phone. You can disable *some* of them, but you can't get rid of *any* of them. And there are daily updates that can only be delayed briefly, but not avoided. I hope the EU is successful and that success transfers to the U.S.
In other words, I'm happy that the EU is tough on monopolistic leanings of American corporations. Our own government is very poor at that.
In other words, I'm happy that the EU is tough on monopolistic leanings of American corporations. Our own government is very poor at that.
7
You are right all-round. And I speak from Europe.
1
And, so what? Some apps you maybe don't want take up a few dozen megabytes on your phone? I don't know if it's still true, but you used to be able to trivially 'jailbreak' and Android phone and remove 'non-removable' apps if you wanted, without any more effort than it takes to replace the windshield wipers on your car.
This is as equally ridiculous as the Microsoft browser antitrust litigation a decade-ish ago. I don't know what the EU hopes to gain besides a payday from their fines — I guess the lawyers are making themselves another high-paid job at the expense of the taxpayer.
This is as equally ridiculous as the Microsoft browser antitrust litigation a decade-ish ago. I don't know what the EU hopes to gain besides a payday from their fines — I guess the lawyers are making themselves another high-paid job at the expense of the taxpayer.
1
Maybe the EU can invent something the rest of the world wants, instead of setting up regulations. I know they already limits American music and movies.
23
That is the key here. I couldn't have said it any better. They build great cars and great high tech products but when it comes to the digital world, the complaints are increasingly sounding like whining.
Right, Europe's Spotify is doing great in USA because they have one regulation to abide by and an open market. Meanwhile America's Pandora has 28-different regulatory regimes to deal with in their effort to enter the European market.
1
Like Skype for instance ? :)
Include a 'laundry list" with the horse Google rode in on, that will just make the EU look silly. The EU might have listened to Almunia and continued to negotiate, but no. After spilling her hot drink all over herself the EU is no closer to having a chance of winning in court. Now some German lawyer is trying her to try that approach again. She has only one good foot left. Let's see.. will she shoot herself in the other foot. SOPA-zombies never give up but they are running out of stooges still in government.
1
This seems like a shakedown. iPhones come preloaded with Apple's browser, maps, iTunes and Apple Music.
34
It is all about market share. Android is 77% of the European smartphones. Hence the legal action.
Apple has proprietary apps on a proprietary product. It's not the same situation as having a virtual monopoly in cell phone operating systems made by many manufacturers. Microsoft's phone OS is superior, according to reviews I've read, but the company has had little success in breaking the monopoly of Google.
In addition, Google may the greatest threat to having any kind of personal privacy left in this country. It's everywhere and it's intrusive.
In addition, Google may the greatest threat to having any kind of personal privacy left in this country. It's everywhere and it's intrusive.
4
"Apple has proprietary apps on a proprietary product. It's not the same situation "
No, its worse. Thats like saying "monopoly's are fine as long as its 100%""
Apple specifically write into their EULA they will ban any apps replicating functionality of their own. Thats pretty much the definition of monopoly.
For example, you cant even release a webbrowser on iOS - they are all just skins of Safaris engine. Users have to use iOSs browser, no choice.
You are scared of privacy lose? Thats a legitimate fear. But the answer is not to allow a firm -any firm - to provide the only software too and from the internet. (especially when its closed source software too).
Its also worth noting that the iOS app store is absolutely essential for anyone trying to make money as a app seller. Even then its hard.
Apple make huge profits on their hardware - far more then google - they can easily afford to open up choice a bit on their platform and should be made too.
No, its worse. Thats like saying "monopoly's are fine as long as its 100%""
Apple specifically write into their EULA they will ban any apps replicating functionality of their own. Thats pretty much the definition of monopoly.
For example, you cant even release a webbrowser on iOS - they are all just skins of Safaris engine. Users have to use iOSs browser, no choice.
You are scared of privacy lose? Thats a legitimate fear. But the answer is not to allow a firm -any firm - to provide the only software too and from the internet. (especially when its closed source software too).
Its also worth noting that the iOS app store is absolutely essential for anyone trying to make money as a app seller. Even then its hard.
Apple make huge profits on their hardware - far more then google - they can easily afford to open up choice a bit on their platform and should be made too.
1
I remember back when the U.S. and Europe was going after Microsoft for bundling services into Windows like Internet Explorer. The arguments were pretty similar then. Microsoft stated that eventually internet browser would likely eclipse the operating system as most users primary interface with computers.
This seems similar, Google is all but giving away its products as a way of marketing its main businesses. I don't see that as a problem. Apple doesn't seem to mind the competition. I think these complaining companies would do fine if they offered a better product.
This seems similar, Google is all but giving away its products as a way of marketing its main businesses. I don't see that as a problem. Apple doesn't seem to mind the competition. I think these complaining companies would do fine if they offered a better product.
7
How about some European companies make software that people actually want to use instead of going after American companies that make superior software? No one has to use gmail, google maps, or google search. People do because people like them more. Users can install whatever they want.
37
Your comment is wrong. Most users 70% use what is already installed on their phone. The best videogame programmers (who are the best programmers period) come from Europe. The web was invented by a European -- Tim Berners Lee.
1
Indeed Tim Berners Lee invented (80s) the wide global system of hypertext documents, linked through the Internet... which in turn had had been developed by Vince Cerf (+ Bob Khan and a few others), who produced the TCP-UDP, IP and Snmp protocols.
In the last years Vince Cerf has been working to extend the Internet beyond planet Earth (e.g. Mars and others, which requires a redesign for the huge distances involved).
In summary: glory for both sides of the Atlantic.
In the last years Vince Cerf has been working to extend the Internet beyond planet Earth (e.g. Mars and others, which requires a redesign for the huge distances involved).
In summary: glory for both sides of the Atlantic.
Good for Europe and Good for the FTC. It is time to break up the HUGE worldwide tech monopolies and regulate them. It is time to protect consumers FROM them and hackers. NOW.
4
You know you don't have to use Google products, nobody is making you. You can always pay for something else, never mind, you didn't pay, it was free to you.
19
Seriously? A small group of technology drivers is far preferential to a multitude of small businesses when you are looking at a regional or global business model. Small has neither the pockets nor infrastructure to handle business at that level.
Be realistic.
Let the small folks stabilize and grow until they can compete at that level.
Be realistic.
Let the small folks stabilize and grow until they can compete at that level.
I use alternatives to google for everything. The only thing I can't give up is YouTube. There is no good competitor to this sadly.
1
Is that what Europe is complaining about - they don't want people to choose? This is a joke.