|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 09 2013 @ 02:06 PM EDT |
Microsoft strong armed OEMs into either installing Microsoft only OSes, or else
charging retail purchasers between US$100 and US$500 for purchasing a system
without a Microsoft OS on it. (Whitebox makers were hit really hard by that
clause in their contract with Microsoft.)
Google charges OEMs for including the "Google experience applications"
in their devices. However, if an OEM does not want to include those
"Google experience applications", or more importantly, an end user
does not want that "experience", Google does not charge the OEM or end
user for that absence. Microsoft did charge for that absence.
Now, if Google were to suddenly bill every user of an Android device, that does
not have the entire "Google experience application" package, then
Google would be abusing its alleged monopoly in search.
Alleged, because if you track such things, you'd discover that Google is loosing
market share.
I'll also point out that anybody can setup their own search engine, tweaked for
their specific needs, using COTS hardware and FLOSS software, for an initial
investment of roughly US$100K, and budget roughly US$10K per month.
That neither Yahoo nor Microsoft are able to create such a search engine, is
merely a reflection of their incompetence.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: PJ on Tuesday, April 09 2013 @ 02:40 PM EDT |
Having monopoly power and misusing it are
two different things. The first is called
a successful business. There is no law
against that. Misuse is the issue, and
I don't see any. The complaint alleges
such, but it's, to me, laughable.
And there are no obligations by a monopoly
except to stay away from misuse. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|