Here we go again: Google vs. Microsoft

[pantsaregood]

http://www.theverge.com/2013/5/15/4334030/google-demands-microsoft-remove-youtube-windows-phone-app

There hasn't been a "real" first party YouTube app on Windows Phone until recently. The app provided previously was just a shortcut to the YouTube mobile site that allowed integration with the music/video hub. This was apparently because Google repeatedly denied Microsoft the right to create a feature-rich YouTube app.

Several third party apps showed up. MetroTube was released not long after WP7's initial release, and it was (and is) one of the best YouTube apps on any mobile platform. It is still out and updated (though some conflicts with Google caused it to be removed for about a year), which is great.

The app Microsoft just released is also excellent, and exactly what should've been present to begin with. Google apparently isn't happy with it. It's understandable because, though it isn't growing quickly, Windows Phone is becoming more than a fringe OS in some territories. Worldwide market share is approaching 5%, and it has broken 10% in several areas.

I don't know how easily Microsoft will back down, though. MetroTube may be great, but most people don't look for it simply because they don't know about it. A solid YouTube app is of great importance to the platform, and given that it is finally experiencing measurable growth, I don't think Microsoft will give up very easily.

 

[ChronoReverse]

Well if it's blocking Youtube's ads then I think it's fair? Build the app using the API so that the ads are shown and I don't think Google would complain.

 

[pantsaregood]

Oh, I'm not taking the side of Microsoft. Blocking ads is certainly wrong, but Google has it out for Microsoft as well. Ad-blocking is certainly only a pretense to take a shot at Microsoft, as well; a lot of third-party apps on multiple platforms block ads and receive no complaints.

 

[Crono]

Google's reasoning for not developing for Windows Phone is that the userbase is insignificant... so why is this bothering them? You would think that a few users not seeing ads wouldn't be a problem.

Or they should just make good apps for Windows Phone instead of whining.

 

[pantsaregood]

Google's reasoning for not developing for Windows Phone is that the userbase is insignificant... so why is this bothering them? You would think that a few users not seeing ads wouldn't be a problem.

Or they should just make good apps for Windows Phone instead of whining.

Again, I'm not calling Google "evil" or anything of the sort - it's just an attempt to protect their business.

But really? We all know that Google has had it out for Microsoft (and Microsoft clearly has it out for Google) since WP7 launched. Google avoided launching apps on WP7 because that would be supportive of an ecosystem that they want to fail. Killing Windows Phone early failed (because Microsoft is taking their standard approach of "throw money at it until it succeeds," like with the Xbox), so now they need other reasons to snub the OS. For a long time, Google Maps specifically blocked mobile IE9; nothing prevented it from functioning, it was just blocked.

Google would not support iOS if it wasn't already so deeply entrenched in the mobile market.

 

[dagamer34]

Well if it's blocking Youtube's ads then I think it's fair? Build the app using the API so that the ads are shown and I don't think Google would complain.

"Blocking" implies that Microsoft actively took an action not to support the ads. All of YouTube's videos are available in .mp4 form. It's pretty easy to play them. That's how HTML5 video works.

It's more accurate to say that the YouTube Windows Phone 8 app doesn't support ads. You need Google's blessing to get that kind of API access (the kind Microsoft has been asking for all along), because it directly ties into financial transactions (watching an ad = someone paying you to view it, false views = fraud, which is why it's highly protected).

 

[bearxor]

This is why I roll my eyes when someone says something along the lines of "it's in google's best interest to be multiplatform." Google has taken a severe issue with Windows Phone since the release.

Look, I understand that this app circumvents ads and lets users download videos. Google doesn't approve of that, and they shouldn't. But what I take issue with is the blatant stonewalling Microsoft has gotten from Google.

Ever since Google acquired YouTube, they've basically given the middle finger to Microsoft.
http://blogs.technet.com/b/microsof...voice-to-concerns-about-search-in-europe.aspx

First, in 2006 Google acquired YouTube—and since then it has put in place a growing number of technical measures to restrict competing search engines from properly accessing it for their search results. Without proper access to YouTube, Bing and other search engines cannot stand with Google on an equal footing in returning search results with links to YouTube videos and that, of course, drives more users away from competitors and to Google.

Second, in 2010 and again more recently, Google blocked Microsoft’s new Windows Phones from operating properly with YouTube. Google has enabled its own Android phones to access YouTube so that users can search for video categories, find favorites, see ratings, and so forth in the rich user interfaces offered by those phones. It’s done the same thing for the iPhones offered by Apple, which doesn’t offer a competing search service.

Unfortunately, Google has refused to allow Microsoft’s new Windows Phones to access this YouTube metadata in the same way that Android phones and iPhones do. As a result, Microsoft’s YouTube “app” on Windows Phones is basically just a browser displaying YouTube’s mobile Web site, without the rich functionality offered on competing phones. Microsoft is ready to release a high quality YouTube app for Windows Phone. We just need permission to access YouTube in the way that other phones already do, permission Google has refused to provide.

And Microsft has still been refused any help or offer to make a YouTube app compliant with Google's standards, though they've been open to it for three years. Why.

Because Google doesn't believe WP has an install base?
http://www.neowin.net/news/microsoft-received-no-help-from-google-for-windows-phones-youtube-app

Google declined to make a Windows Phone version of its YouTube app, which is available on its Android operating system as well as Apple's iOS. Clay Bavor, product management director at Google Apps, has said his division has no plans on releasing future apps for Windows or Windows Phone platforms because the company "will go where the users are, but they are not on Windows Phone or Windows 8."

Meanwhile, the install base of WP has caught up to BB. A research firm suggests the install base of WP device could be 45 million by the end of the year.
http://www.abiresearch.com/press/45-million-windows-phone-and-20-million-blackberry

Google, who is most interested in search and collecting information independently of the Operating System, is just going to say "eh, couldn't give a shit" about 45 million devices? Really? That's 45 million opportunities to sell ads. All because you can't bother to have an intern port the iOS YouTube app to Windows Phone? Really? Or gmail?

Speaking of GMail, what about Googles decision, out of the blue, to eliminate Exchange Activesync from its GMail system, essentially giving every future WP user the finger and leaving Microsoft scrambling to update their system with a work around?
http://www.theverge.com/2012/12/14/3768274/google-gmail-activesync-windows-phone

Back to install base, not only will there be an estimated 45m WP devices by the end of 2013, but its estimate that 60m computers are running Windows 8 right now.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2013/may/10/windows-8-actual-installed-base-58m

That number will do nothing but grow. It will probably be at 100m+ by the end of the year.

But no, I guess 150m devices is just nothing according to Google. I guess that's just not a big enough number to spend a month of your time on. It has NOTHING to do with Microsoft having a competing search engine.

Do no evil? Sure. Act like a dick? Absolutely!

 

[Ravynmagi]

If Microsoft can be a dick about all these patent issues... heck they are making more money off Android than Windows Phone probably. Then I think it's totally okay for Google to be a dick and want their ad revenue.

 

[Deeko]

Google is also upset that they call the app "YouTube", apparently it violates the ToS to have YouTube in the name, it has to be something like "MetroTube".

I'm sure if Google actually gave Microsoft access to the APIs they would implement it properly such that ads are displayed. They are just playing politics here, trying to cripple a rival platform.

 

[finbarqs]

Google is just protecting their customers. If I purchased an ad that suppose to be shown on Youtube, and it doesn't get displayed because it didn't support it, I'd be pissed. Would I complain to Microsoft? no. I'd go straight to Google.

 

[pantsaregood]

I don't really understand Google's decision to abandon Exchange ActiveSync, but the next minor WP8 update introduces CalDAV and CardDAV support, so it isn't an issue so much as an attempt to give Microsoft trouble.

The install base of Windows Phone has surpassed BlackBerry in a lot of large markets, and by the looks of things, BlackBerry isn't coming back. WP7 saw relatively stagnant figures for two years, but BlackBerry's marketshare is rapidly declining. Either way, Windows Phone is moving away from its position as a fringe OS.

I also doubt Google's distaste for Microsoft to be related to Bing. Microsoft has powered its own search engine since 2004. Google was initially only known for their search engine, but they've stepped into miscellaneous software and services (some successful, some not). It is in Google's interest to downplay Microsoft whenever possible.

Apple has a somewhat niche audience, and is in some ways left out of this rivalry.

Also, a previous poster mentioned patent fees: Google doesn't pay Microsoft any patent fees, it just happens that some of Google's OEMs do. I'm not sure what the patents are, but given how readily the OEMs pay the royalty fees, I assume they are a bit more substantial than "a tap is a swipe of zero length." That said, Microsoft is in the wrong to not show ads. As a previous poster stated, it really comes down to Google not wanting Windows Phone to succeed.

 

[bearxor]

I'm sure if Google actually gave Microsoft access to the APIs they would implement it properly such that ads are displayed. They are just playing politics here, trying to cripple a rival platform.

This is what upsets me so much. Google always wants to play like they're the good guys. Clearly, Microsoft has taken the time to write the application and it's actually quite good. The "good" way to handle this would have been for Google to send a note to the WP team and say "hey, we see you released an app, we're not really happy with it because it violates our TOS but you put a lot of work in to it, so lets get together and fix it up to make it company as soon as possible." I can't imagine how that would put an unfair burden on Google's resources and sure comes off a hell of a lot better than a C&D.

 

[Dominato3r]

Well if it's blocking Youtube's ads then I think it's fair? Build the app using the API so that the ads are shown and I don't think Google would complain.

That's the problem. Google won't let them have access to those APIs.

I really think this app was released just to stir shit and see how Google would react.

 

[Crono]

Google doesn't mind playing nice with Apple because even though Apple provides services to complement its mobile and desktop products, Apple is primarily a hardware company and isn't as big a data mining competitor to Google as Microsoft is.

Plus Apple was the dominant smartphone manufacturer until recently so it would bigger than just a snub to ignore the entire iOS user base.

But since Microsoft is bringing Office to iOS and Android (though slowly, think it's being released next year), I would hope Google would bring their line of apps to Microsoft. I don't know if there are game theorists working for these companies, but eventually it benefits the top players to support their apps and services on their competitors devices.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

Well played by Microsoft. They are essentially forcing Google's hand into providing them the proper APIs they wanted all along.

It's remarkably hypocritical for Page to go up on stage at Google I/O talking about how we need to avoid negativity in the marketplace when his company is doing shit like this on a regular basis.

Nobody is asking Google to build a Youtube app for WP8. Just provide proper interoperability, it's the right thing to do.

 

[pantsaregood]

"YouTube is consistently one of the top apps downloaded by smartphone users on all platforms, but Google has refused to work with us to develop an app on par with other platforms. Since we updated the YouTube app to ensure our mutual customers a similar YouTube experience, ratings and feedback have been overwhelmingly positive. We'd be more than happy to include advertising but need Google to provide us access to the necessary APIs. In light of Larry Page's comments today calling for more interoperability and less negativity, we look forward to solving this matter together for our mutual customers."

Microsoft just called Google out. Hard.

 

[Crono]

Well played by Microsoft. They are essentially forcing Google's hand into providing them the proper APIs they wanted all along.

It's remarkably hypocritical for Page to go up on stage at Google I/O talking about how we need to avoid negativity in the marketplace when his company is doing shit like this on a regular basis.

Nobody is asking Google to build a Youtube app for WP8. Just provide proper interoperability, it's the right thing to do.

All of these companies are hypocrites. So long as they have legal departments that are constantly suing and countersuing over patents that might be legitimate but not all exactly fair, that's going to be the case. Competition between the big tech companies isn't all that friendly.

 

[Fire&Blood]

Just business as usual. Not a cool move by Google, then again neither is sitting on a failing platform and resorting to patent trolling as means to make up for the money M$ isn't making with WP.

Ultimately the consumer suffers, Apple vs. Google vs. Microsoft results for example in fewer phones with SD slots as OEM's dodge royalty fees for the FAT file system.

 

[Dominato3r]

Microsoft just called Google out. Hard.

Lol:

In light of Larry Page's comments today calling for more interoperability and less negativity, we look forward to solving this matter together for our mutual customers."

So Larry, what's the plan?

 

[Deeko]

Whammy.

 

[Bateluer]

A friend of mine that works at MS as a dev told me that this WP8 app ignores region restrictions, mobile vs non-mobile restrictions, and allows the downloading of Youtube videos. I haven't been able to verify this myself though, but wouldn't ignoring region and content owner set restrictions be illegal? Good for the consumer, definitely, but make MS liable for million in damages from Big Content?

 

[finbarqs]

One of my friends that use to work for M$ that (incidentally) started working for google mentioned that the new WinMoPho platform is built off the exchange tech.

 

[BladeVenom]

It's understandable because, though it isn't growing quickly, Windows Phone is becoming more than a fringe OS in some territories. Worldwide market share is approaching 5%, and it has broken 10% in several areas.

Sorry, but Windows is still a fringe OS. 3.3% world market share LINK, with only 3% market share in the US, LINK.

 

[Aganazer]

Larry Page in the Google IO keynote was playing the victim card. He said something about how sad it is that Google shares all their resources with other platforms but other companies don't. I don't think he called out MS specifically, but it was clearly implied in the context. I'm sure he sees MS as the evil one and from his perspective he may be right.

 

[Deeko]

They're competitors. Of course they're the bad guy in his eyes. That doesn't mean that, in this case, his side coincides with the consumers'