|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 09 2013 @ 01:27 PM EDT |
Well, it's free. That means it's "predatory" in the sense that
Microsoft can't build a business that competes with it. But it's not predatory
in the sense that Google is losing money on it.
"It" in the previous paragraph was "maps". Android is a
different thing. Android costs Google to develop, and (as far as I know),
Google does not make any (direct) revenue from it. Android pricing could
therefore be regarded as predatory, and paid for by a cross subsidy. This is in
fact the kind of behaviour that gets monopolies in antitrust trouble.
Now: Is Google a monopoly in search and/or maps? Depends on your definition;
they are a dominant force, but certainly they are a much less dominant force
than Microsoft was in OSes at the time of the browser wars.
MSS2[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|