If Microsoft were to release Halo 4 for their Windows market then maybe I would actually support them. Unfortunately the old saying "what goes around comes around" applies here. Google is just borrowing one of Microsoft's old tricks. Video games, netbooks, web browsers, secure boot, rival operating systems...Microsoft has hurt these with their platform restrictions. I hope they realize how damaging it can be on the receiving end.
[citation][nom]sdfasgsd[/nom]Did Microsoft released Office for Linux? No? Then why should Google release Youtube for a phone OS with the same market share as Bada?[/citation]
There is a big difference between not spending money on releasing and updating a program for linux and blocking MS from using an app on youtube.
[citation][nom]CaedenV[/nom]True, MS does not support Linux with software, but they have always been pretty open to supporting Linux on a more fundamental platform level. MS is no longer looking to support specific software to other platforms anyways, it is all about cloud services for other platforms. Want to use linux or MacOS? then look to using office 365, or some other web based software. It is not as convenient as local software, but it can still get the job done.The real issue here is that of Google (not linux) and Microsoft are not playing nicely together. MS accuses (often rightfully so) Google of all manner of data stealing and mining, while google uses their new-found power in the mobile market to keep MS locked into a fading desktop market.[/citation]
This is the same damn thing. Yes you can install open office on linux and yes you can open, read, and edit a MS .doc file with it. However you can access Youtube via the Browser and watch video's. There not making MS office for linux just like Google aint make an app for MS. Same stupid shit. Now if google was block MS all together that a whole different story. No court is going to make Google like them make and app to there service. Not going to happen.
[citation][nom]minipad[/nom]This is an odd situation as the current biggest competitor to Google mobile OS is Apple, not Microsoft. There is almost no incentive for Google to block a weak competitor while allowing access to their strong competitor for the reason of undermining the competition. There should be other reasons why this is happening. Also, there is nothing wrong not to provide app to the Windows 8 platform while there market for that platform is too small. After all, Microsoft already has Office on their W8 platform so there should not be a real need for Google doc to be available. As for map, it runs just as well in desktop mode, for x86 W8 anyway.Oh, refering desktop market as fading? 10 years later many people will still be using desktop. Current mobile platform is still not able to replace desktop completely and it is unlikely ARM can be scaled up too much without encountering the same power vs performance issue that Intel CPU has.[/citation]
I could see in 10+ years from now x86 replacing ARM in phones given that we can now put a x86 CPU in a tablet now.
When that happens ARM is going to have to fight if it hasn't made it's base really solid.
Granted the desktop and phone experences are different, but the programs should be useable on ether or possably. And that would be a big threat to ARM since you could more or less sync your work and take it with you and that would be great, at least for the business world since you might be able to lose the laptop if you are traveling and just need to run a simple program or 2 to read or do some small things till you can get to a desktop.
Anyway, as for google blocking WP, I wouldn't doubt it given MS's and Motorola Mobility's recent history of patent wars.
People love admitting that Microsoft is no longer the biggest player there is, but they hate admitting that the other players are just as bad as Microsoft apparently were in their long history.
Selectively withholding services can easily fall under anti-competitive laws in the EU. Microsoft is not asking Google to make an app, it is asking for the same levels of access as iOS so that Microsoft themselves can make a better app.
The only way a phone OS gains traction these days is app support. If services selectively deny app support for phone OSs by not producing an app, that's probably fine as the business case would be there for "not enough users". The indirect effect is the OS won't gain any traction without the app, vicious cycle. To combat this cycle, they front up the cost of making the app themselves for their own platform OS, great. However, in this case it isn't great because they are being blocked by this route too. Closing all avenues to offer the same level of app integration is anti-competitive.
Comparing this to MS offering Office on Linux isn't the same. MS offered the access to the file formats, allowing others to produce competing, and most importantly inter-operating software alternatives. I use both Office and LibreOffice on the same sets of files. MS have not been given this luxury from Google yet Apple have.
[citation][nom]Red_one[/nom]Is is just me? But Apple doesn't have a search engine, Microsoft has one. If they give over meta data to Microsoft it could some how boost their search tech some how.(I don't know the specifics) Microsoft is a Software company mainly(or has been), Apple is mostly hardware. So Microsoft=main competitor to Google(google is mainly a software company as well). Seems almost like asking a candy bar company for their recipe and then saying well we will direct business your way once we put it in our store.[/citation]Most insightful comment here. The others seem to be thinking Google is somehow obliged to develop an app or something for WP whereas the issue at hand seems to be them not unlocking a full API so MS can make a decent app of their own.
And protecting your metadata would be a very relevant issue for this. Not saying it's right, but it's got to be a factor.
[citation][nom]dameon51[/nom]Free? Sorry, I want to get paid for the hard work I do.[/citation]
What do you suppose the phrase "free as in Freedom... not free as in no cost" means? It was a two sentence statement and you think he doesn't want to pay for his software! If you are as astute at developing software as you are at reading for comprehension, I think I'll pass on your software!
from my understanding google loses money on youtube but still offers the service or at least that was the case a few years back, basically cost to host and maintain video was nto equaling ad revenue generated, why would they want to add an app for m$ that actually costs them $
iPhones and Android phones compete, but their markets are not identical. There is overlap, but there are some iPhone customers who would never consider Android, and vice versa. I would never want an iPhone, while my wife would not want an Android; case in point.
On the other hand, I believe Windows Phone and Android have much more closely-aligned target markets. They both incorporate a larger "geek factor", with a stronger focus on function and less focus on form. They both also are designed for getting as much done as possible, rather than being as simple-to-use as possible. So I can understand why Google would want to try to cut WP8 off at the knees while the nascent platform has little market share.
What they are doing will get them into trouble. It is also an indication that they fear WP8. If they didn't, they would have no legitimate business reason to block the YT mobile metadata. Why give yourselves a black eye in the press if there's minimal impact on your targeted competitor?