EU accuses Google of Android abuse

[porina]

Quote

Google has been issued formal antitrust charges over claims that it abuses the dominant position of its Android operating system.

The European Commission sent a statement of objections to the tech firm, alleging that it has breached EU competition law.

Google is accused of placing onerous requirements on firms using Android and stifling competition.

We will need to look at this carefully as to what is alleged and if that is lawful or not. Google dominate in search, and Android is also dominant in mobile space. This complaint as described seems to focus on the alleged forced bundling of Google apps with Android. To my understanding, there are two classes of Android OS. There's the full fat Google version, which I understand Google does require the bundling of their apps if a manufacturer chooses to use this version. It is still allowable to have other apps installed, but you get the duplication of functions leading to potential confusion e.g. look at Samsung phones with both a Samsung set and Google set of apps. This appears to be a source of friction for manufacturers.

 

There is also the fat free version of Android, which is used by Amazon and I think Cyanogenmod. This goes the other way, in that you can't bundle Goggle apps although a user may still choose to install them later. I suspect this will form part of Google's defense in that manufacturers do have options, even if undesirable in other ways. I guess the EU would like to see more of a middle ground here, less of the all or nothing offering from Google.

 

If we look to the past, the EU took on MS over IE and media player bundling in Windows, resulting in a time limited browser choice popup and a special version of Windows without media player bundled that no one really cared about. Will we have a similar result here?

 

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36092441

 

[Aytex]

I don't really see any other people making Stock apps as good as google so.....

I mean when your flashing GAPPS to a rom you can choose how much stuff you want in the package..

Also Android is Open source so...

[Bananasplit_00]

but why would someone NOT want google maps tho? its so handy

[porina]

I'm trying to re-read up on how Android licencing works now... suffice to say it isn't simple. The Google apps are non-open source and to licence them you have to jump through some hoops. The alternative is Android AOSP without the Google apps bundled.

[ShadowCaptain]

Its strange surely if a company creates their own OS they can bundle their own software with it

Its a really strange issue

[biggiebody]

This confuses, if a company creates their own OS, why wouldn't they be allowed to have requirements for others to use it?  There's also the AOSP that's available to use if they don't want Google's apps, doesn't make sense to me.

[shdowhunt60]

Can someone inform me if the EU has done anything fucking good in the entirety of its existence? Anything?

[suicidalfranco]

i think a good solution would be to implement the OpenGApps aroma package so that when booting for the first time users can actually choose what google app they want on their device

www.opengapps.com

 

 

[dalekphalm]

1 hour ago, ShadowCaptain said:

Its strange surely if a company creates their own OS they can bundle their own software with it

Its a really strange issue

You'd think so, but the huge Anti-Trust cases with Microsoft proved that the various world governments (EU and US), as well as Microsoft's competition, strongly disagrees with you.

 

Granted, Microsoft was up to some pretty shady and underhanded tactics back then, but the basis for the argument is that Windows bundles IE and therefore people who don't know any better (Random Joe Citizen who doesn't know what a browser is, and thinks the big "e" icon is "The Internet"), will just use IE because they don't know alternatives exist, or how to get them.

 

Apple never had any issues with this, because they're smaller, and were never a leader in marketshare for computers.

 

Google has a pretty high marketshare (Something like 80%), which I guess is enough for the EU to take notice.

[ShadowCaptain]

2 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

SNIP

It would be worse if Microsoft released an OS with NO browser

 

Its a stupid law, since it does not prohibit the user from choosing their own, is not a forcing the customer to buy anything, and there needs to be one included since it is base functionality of the OS

Even if they offered a choice, they cant offer ALL browsers since there are like a billion browsers so you could argue this too

[steini1904]

26 minutes ago, shdowhunt60 said:

Can someone inform me if the EU has done anything fucking good in the entirety of its existence? Anything?

Created the largest and most powerful market in the history of humanity?

 

The problem with the EU is, that most influential countries of the EU are ruled by left-wings. In short people who like quota women, soft-core Marxism, complaining everywhere about everything and creating their safe-spaces.

[Orangeator]

13 minutes ago, ShadowCaptain said:

It would be worse if Microsoft released an OS with NO browser

 

Its a stupid law, since it does not prohibit the user from choosing their own, is not a forcing the customer to buy anything, and there needs to be one included since it is base functionality of the OS

Even if they offered a choice, they cant offer ALL browsers since there are like a billion browsers so you could argue this too

Yeah also no one uses the built in one. Most of the population in the US use Firefox and Chrome. So I mean, just because they give there browser so you can download others doesn't mean they are being unfair. 

[shdowhunt60]

17 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

You'd think so, but the huge Anti-Trust cases with Microsoft proved that the various world governments (EU and US), as well as Microsoft's competition, strongly disagrees with you.

 

Granted, Microsoft was up to some pretty shady and underhanded tactics back then, but the basis for the argument is that Windows bundles IE and therefore people who don't know any better (Random Joe Citizen who doesn't know what a browser is, and thinks the big "e" icon is "The Internet"), will just use IE because they don't know alternatives exist, or how to get them.

 

Apple never had any issues with this, because they're smaller, and were never a leader in marketshare for computers.

 

Google has a pretty high marketshare (Something like 80%), which I guess is enough for the EU to take notice.

Android's marketshare has been neck and neck with iOS for years now. 

[xentropa]

3 minutes ago, ShadowCaptain said:

It would be worse if Microsoft released an OS with NO browser

 

Its a stupid law, since it does not prohibit the user from choosing their own, is not a forcing the customer to buy anything, and there needs to be one included since it is base functionality of the OS

Even if they offered a choice, they cant offer ALL browsers since there are like a billion browsers so you could argue this too

I would believe this, but with the microsoft antitrust case, two key turning points (IMO) were

 

a.) It was not possible to remove internet explorer or opt out.  (They claimed that IE was crucial to the functionality of the OS as a whole though I found that to be dubious)

b.) It was alleged that Windows had a modified kernel to cause other browsers and or possible competing software to underperform.

 

[dalekphalm]

1 hour ago, ShadowCaptain said:

It would be worse if Microsoft released an OS with NO browser

 

Its a stupid law, since it does not prohibit the user from choosing their own, is not a forcing the customer to buy anything, and there needs to be one included since it is base functionality of the OS

Even if they offered a choice, they cant offer ALL browsers since there are like a billion browsers so you could argue this too

Indeed, not to mention that if Microsoft DOES offer a choice, then they are in fact "choosing" the competition, as well. They still get to decide, for example, whether it's just FF and Chrome, or if Opera is included too. What about smaller browsers? Then the smaller guys could come in and claim that Microsoft is hurting their market growth because "Joe's Browser 69 yolo" isn't included in the selection of browsers.

46 minutes ago, shdowhunt60 said:

Android's marketshare has been neck and neck with iOS for years now. 

That graph is INCREDIBLY misleading. The title of your graph is literally "Intended Next Smartphone Purchase". That means some guy walked up to me and said "What do you think your next phone will be" - not "Which phone do you own?"

 

It's meaningless, since it's speculation at best - and people lie or are unreliable or change their minds. You could ask me what my next intended car is going to be - I could say a Tesla Model S, but is that true? Maybe. Probably not.

 

I've been looking at OS and Vendor marketshare graphs, and there's quiet a bit of variation, to be sure, but the basic premise is this: Depending on the particular stat, Apple hovers between 15-30% of Marketshare. Not even close to "neck and neck".

 

https://www.idc.com/prodserv/smartphone-os-market-share.jsp

This one puts Android at about ~70-80% and iOS at ~15-20%

 

http://www.statista.com/statistics/271496/global-market-share-held-by-smartphone-vendors-since-4th-quarter-2009/

This one puts Apple devices at about ~18%, and the rest is basically just Android (Since BB and WP combined maybe make 5% - they're both too small to even appear on this stat)

 

https://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=8&qpcustomd=1&qptimeframe=Y

This is by far the most generous stat, and still has Android at 60%, and iOS at 32%.

 

Android has, at worst, still twice as much Marketshare as iOS.

[RazrLeaf]

I fear that the user experience will deteriorate for Android smartphone users in the EU.  The amount of bloatware that can't be uninstalled is already high.  If the default applications being pre-installed were ones that a majority of people use (e.g. Facebook on the S7 From T-Mobile in the US), then I wouldn't have an issue. But if most people are using the default Google apps, then you're hurting them by pre-installing apps they won't use (and can't uninstall without rooting). You're taking away device storage space that they've payed for.

Or just make it so that any app can be uninstalled (and not just disabled) without rooting. Not sure if this is a global problem, or just a US problem...

[Inkz]

Really they should slam Apple too. I am not try to be "that guy" but both Google and Microsoft have been in trouble with antitrust laws, and Apple is not really that small.

[Bensemus]

4 minutes ago, Inkz said:

Really they should slam Apple too. I am not try to be "that guy" but both Google and Microsoft have been in trouble with antitrust laws, and Apple is not really that small.

its market share is quite small though. Its physical size is also not that big compared to Google and MS. The only big thing about Apple is its value which is irelevent for monopoly abuse. Apple also only puts its OS on its own hardware. You buy an Apple device for the Apple software and ecosystem. 

[LAwLz]

9 hours ago, ShadowCaptain said:

It would be worse if Microsoft released an OS with NO browser

 

Its a stupid law, since it does not prohibit the user from choosing their own, is not a forcing the customer to buy anything, and there needs to be one included since it is base functionality of the OS

Even if they offered a choice, they cant offer ALL browsers since there are like a billion browsers so you could argue this too

The thing is though, Microsoft were blackmailing and using other illegal means to push IE over the competitors. Anyone that has read about the case will most likely agree that they got what they deserved. Bill was also being extremely obtuse while in court. Internal emails from Microsoft even said they needed to "continue our jihad next year" (yes, Microsoft actually called their strategy "jihad"), after doing these types of deeds.

Here is a great documentary about it for those who are interested.

 

I agree that it is a stupid law to limit what a manufacturer can ship with their own OS... Unless there is blackmailing and other illegal activities going on that tries to kill competitors.

I don't know enough about Google's demands with Androids to say whether or not it should qualify for the anti-trust lawsuit in my opinion, but there is a real possibility that they are hurting competitors, which would be bad.

 

 

9 hours ago, shdowhunt60 said:

Can someone inform me if the EU has done anything fucking good in the entirety of its existence? Anything?

They have done a ton of great things. If you want three technology related ones then

1) They invalidated a directive where ISPs were required to save data about what their customers were doing. It got invalidated because the EU court decided that it was too intrusive and hurt citizen's right to privacy.

2) Currently reforming roaming charges, with the goal to completely remove them.

3) Currently working on removing geolocked content in the EU. So for example Netflix won't have different shows if you are in the Sweden or in Germany. Same shows everywhere.

 

Then there are a ton of other things such as directives regarding medicinal tests and standards, pushing for lower emissions, regulations regarding tobacco (preventing things like this from happening) and many, many more things.

But if you want even more things then you can look at the GDP of some poorer countries such as Spain and Portugal and how it developed after joining EU. Spoiler: It dramatically improved.

 

I am not saying that the EU is perfect (there are a lot of issues and stupid shit going on), but saying that they have never done anything good is extremely ignorant. It's like taken out of a Monty Python skit.

 

 

 

5 hours ago, RazrLeaf said:

I fear that the user experience will deteriorate for Android smartphone users in the EU.  The amount of bloatware that can't be uninstalled is already high.  If the default applications being pre-installed were ones that a majority of people use (e.g. Facebook on the S7 From T-Mobile in the US), then I wouldn't have an issue. But if most people are using the default Google apps, then you're hurting them by pre-installing apps they won't use (and can't uninstall without rooting). You're taking away device storage space that they've payed for.

Or just make it so that any app can be uninstalled (and not just disabled) without rooting. Not sure if this is a global problem, or just a US problem...

The lawsuit seems to be regarding Google's requirements to have Google apps preinstalled. The fix to this would simply be to not have them as requirements anymore. The end result would be that you would have the same or fewer pre-installed apps. So instead of having both Samsung's browser and Chrome, you would just have Samsung's browser for example. Chrome is only there because Google forces Samsung to include it.

[Belgarathian]

Next up: Tesla will have to let you know you can buy a Nissan Leaf when you start entering your credit card details to purchase a Tesla Model 3. 

 

I kind of understand if you're forced to use the apps, can't uninstall them or install other options - but as it is, I'm pretty sure you can uninstall the Google Apps that are bundled with the phone. 

[chickenteriyaki99]

I understand that chart posted earlier on why people prefer Apple for so long over another brand. However, most smartphone purchases are done on what the mainstream market wants, in which is what ever is more used. In this case Apple. I use a Windows Phone as it is easy to use and I like how I can sync it with my Windows 10 PC. This feature is important to quite a few people as the need it as they study or have an occupation where a PC is widely used. However my next phone will be an Android on how you can get a half decent phone running android for around $300aud. (Yes I am an Australian). Android and Apple always to be said to have fights and reach out that one is like the other (Similar to the MacBook Retina and the Raze Blade as well as the Blade Stealth and the MacBook Air.). If you think about it they all have storage, all can play music and all can basically do the same stuff so should they not be all a rip off of the original Motorola? I am now thinking that mobile phones are overrated. But hey, that is just me...

[RazeG3SG1]

11 hours ago, shdowhunt60 said:

Can someone inform me if the EU has done anything fucking good in the entirety of its existence? Anything?

Remember before 2010 where each brand of phones have different types of charging port and charger? I heard EU was responsible in unifying them into the Micro USB standard we have today.

[Boobies Sprinkle]

10 minutes ago, RazeG3SG1 said:

Remember before 2010 where each brand of phones have different types of charging port and charger? I heard EU was responsible in unifying them into the Micro USB standard we have today.

My brother!

[Garfieldus]

17 hours ago, shdowhunt60 said:

Can someone inform me if the EU has done anything fucking good in the entirety of its existence? Anything?

Ofc EU did nothing good. Here in Europe many are in a misery as we are overwhelmed by the choice of ISP's available in the area who offer cheap, no data cap plans for half the US price. I mean my wtf is this, how I as a consumer can have a choice? I still cannot believe they have directive pressuring ISP's to upgrade their infrastructure so more people would have access to broadband, why would any1 need such speeds anyway? Furthermore many citizens were in anger when EU caped roaming data/calls/sms fees across EU countries to dirt cheap rates. Also don't get me started with universal charger that is forced across EU(which in turn is forced on the whole world as most manufactures don't bother making different chargers)... I mean why do we need standardized charger that can charge all of your devices, I like having 10 different chargers. MAKE CHARGERS GREAT AGAIN!!! With things like this happening it's almost impossible to live in EU....

 

Sarcasm off, EU operates on set of principles that are put in law therefore is those principles are violated and some entity puts up a case against they have to act no matter how stupid it might sound.

[Garfieldus]

7 minutes ago, Garfieldus said:

 

wrong quote.