Fork it! Google fined €4.34bn over Android, has 90 days to behave

Re: Apple

Try reading the article, its not about forcing consumers but about forcing phone manufacturers

Re: Apple

...how have Apple been able to keep on doing this on OSX (after Microsoft Windows decision with IE) and with iOS (Safari is the only browser preinstalled and there is NO other App store option).

Apple does not have a monopoly share of the market, and never has. They may have a monopoly on iPhones, but >80% of the smartphone market is Android. Before Android took off they were in third place behind RIM and Symbian.

Re: First time someone gets fined for giving something for free

"Is that Googles fault, or a market that does not work well ?."

From the article:

"But by making even one FireOS phone, the OEM would have lost the ability to include Google Play Store on its other devices."

It's Google's fault.

"Without Google we still would live in a 90's hell of .NET dominated internet sites"

And what opened the way to Google if not the EU ruling (and the DOJ investigation as well) about IE forcing not only MS to advertising competitive browser, but also forcing it to rethink the company culture and become much more cautious about trying to abuse their dominant position?

Just Google adopted the same strategy twenty years later - greed is greed, whatever your logo is.

Re: First time someone gets fined for giving something for free

> First time someone gets fined for giving something for free

1) it's not free;

2) it comes with a long complex license with many strings attached.

So nothing is 'given', and nothing is 'free' about Android for handset makers.

but what, in practical terms, could the Competition Commission do if Google said 'No'. Not going to argue… not going to appeal... just 'No, not going to pay'.

I presume the EU could ban the sale of google/alphabet products in the EU

If Google don't pay then I guess the EU could try to sieze the bits of Google that are in Europe and sell their assets to pay the fine. Or start arresting their executives whenever they fly through European airspace. Or stop EU companies from paying them.

If Google want to operate in the EU, and they do because they make profits there, then they'll have to pay up.

Also Google get away with being massive privacy thieves and data-hoarders through inertia. They're useful, and it's a lot of hassle to regulat them. But if they tried to pull a stunt like that, the gloves would come off pretty quickly.

Re: Margrethe Vestager

As long as it's available in a supermarket. I'm guessing they like bottles priced at more than £20 each

Well, buying plonk in £ isn't a great idea, buy it somewhere in Europe where fermented vegetable drinks are cheaper.

Re: Morons

Nah. Google are dead useful. But not irreplaceable.

It's business. They get fined, they pay the fine, they change behaviour as little as they think they can get away with and they keep making money. The EU can do this, because people make profits there.

Re: Morons

The thing is, Google needs the EU more than the EU needs Google. You can't just cut off the second-largest economy in the world and expect to make it as a publicly-traded company; investors would revolt instantly. Heck, China is only the third largest and Google bends over backwards to meet their demands.

Re: Morons

Thank you for your second ever post to El Reg, on the EU. I missed your first post to El Reg a month ago, also about the EU.

I suspect you're right but the point is that with these lockins no one else stands a chance. If I develop a search engine that's 10x better than Google's no one's ever going to know about it because Google are paying the manufacturer's to use their own, quite obviously supressing competition.

You specifically mention search and maps, two areas where Google are justifiably market leaders. They also have an awful lot of other tools which, at best, are distinctly average but they gain an unfair leg up by being bundled with the rest.

My guess is that more would than wouldn't. By a seriously long way.

I daresay they would. The easy functionality is a strong inducement, even if you are aware of the slurp and tracking, even the feeling of your lifeforce being constantly drained by the knowledge of the slow drip of your personal data and activities syphoned off to feed the Google beast is not enough for many users.

But having the choice not to, if your don't need or don't want the thing leeching at your life is much better.

There are other satnavs, and openstreetmaps (is that still about, I lose track) could do with the attention. One Google fan (or even one Google van) certainly didn't make Street View the rich resource it is.