Prevent Google from coordinating with its horizontal competitors with Android and Google Play Services. Every android manufacturer should have their own fork of android free from Google's control.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iOS 17 to Support App Sideloading to Comply With European Regulations
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Preventing a manufacturer from being able to offer its product to other companies may be a tough sell as it could open the door to other cross-manufacturer restriction arguments and take away from potential economies of scale advantages, manufacturer expertise advantages, etc. in various markets.
If Google was restricted from being able to offer Android to phone manufactures does that also mean Apple would be restricted from offering CarPlay to auto manufacturers? Would this also potentially extend to hardware manufacturers?
Can't phone makers already use a basic/stock version of Android without having to be tied to Google services (i.e. be free from Google "control")?
They could. However, they don't because Google leverages the licensing of the Android brand to force its competitors to also license Google Play Services.
Yes, but because Google has so much power, manufacturers basically have to use Google’s flavour of Android. I agree with BaldiMac that making it so GPS can’t be used on non-Google hardware sounds like the most pragmatic solution. We could also regulate that Google can’t tie its apps to GPS so that they can’t gatekeep their apps to their own services layer.
No it would be limited to mobile operating systems (the market where we have the problem).
Still, they could and some do.
The fact that Google may put rules/restrictions on being able to include Google Play Services is a separate matter. Google shouldn't be required to provide those services or apps any more than Apple should be required to provide their App Store, Safari, Pages, etc. for Windows or Android.
Phone makers are already able to use a basic/stock Android for their devices. The fact that Google may put rules/restrictions on being able to include Google Play Services is a separate matter. Google shouldn't be required to provide those services or apps any more than Apple should be required to provide their App Store, Safari, Pages, etc. for Windows or Android.
Regulators would only act on it in markets where the "problem" exists but the law would/could be applicable to all products/industries. I was using CarPlay more as a "what if" hypothetical.
It had nothing to do with being iOS or not. A law created for mobile OS would likely apply to other products/industries i.e., if cross-manufacturer licensing was banned for mobile OS, similar types of laws/bans should be applied to other markets under comparable conditions.
I was using CarPlay more as a hypothetical. If, for example, it was declared that CarPlay and Android Auto were a duopoly in the automotive telematics market comparable to iOS and Android in the mobile OS market, laws that applied to the mobiles OS market would/could also apply to the automotive telematics market and vice versa.
Except now what is the incentive to develop a better port that might lead to USB-D and beyond? Remember if the EU got their way 10 years ago the industry would have settled on Micro-USB.Yep. By doing everyone a massive favour. See also USB-C.
Besides, you guys were late to the party on both occasions.
I see nothing wrong with forcing Google to operate the way we want them to by creating new regulations to do that. They could just leave the market if they don’t want to abide by the rules.
Yes, so the problem market is mobile operating systems, so the regulation needs to happen there.
It's replacing corporate, mostly greed-driven dictatorship ("they created the platform, they can do with it whatever they want") by a form of more democratically legitimised regulation.
It's about as silly as the "use Android instead" (when I/we want more freedom to use our iPhones).
Which is why I said it was a hypothetical example, not an actual one. For example, let's say the automotive telematics market ended up being just CarPlay and Android Auto. Under a law of banning cross-platform licensing, how would CarPlay and Android Auto be handled? Wouldn’t it defeat the purpose/benefits of Android Auto and CarPlay?
My point was that if regulators were to require Google to make their services and apps available then they would have to do the same to other companies under similar circumstances i.e., Apple would be required to make their App Store, Safari, Pages, etc. available for Android.
Just make the regulations apply to mobile operating systems only, not in-car operating systems.
but serious if I make a Hardware and software its my property and my right to set it's rules. software is not politics
its like am making a hospital software and the governments force me to open it up to everyone so they can modify and do whatever they want with it
Google already makes those apps and services available on other platforms, they just wouldn’t be able to deliberately exclude Android forks. Of course they could just choose to not make cross-platform apps but I’m not sure Google would want to make that decision given their business model depends upon it.
Broadly speaking, if you want to be use a horizontal business model to achieve scale, you shouldn’t be able to discriminate again any underlying platform. If you want to use a vertical business model, you do so knowing you will never achieve the same scale.
I don’t think any company should be permitted to have horizontal scale and vertical control. They should have to pick one or the other.
Last edited:
Evidence for these claims? Many of us made the choice of the Apple ecosystem precisely because it is more secure.
If any government wants to regulate something about Apple, it should be to require Apple to provide a warranty about the quality and security of App Store apps. Make Apple earn its fees by doing a better review of submitted apps.
[citation needed]
And, assuming that's true, what's the percentage against all iPhone users? 0.001%? 0.01%? Still, the overwhelming majority doesn't know or care that their iPhone is supposedly more secure because they can't install apps from external sources. Don't believe me? Go ask your mother about the security improvements of the walled garden model. And be sure to report back on her response.
Of course many people will benefit from Apple’s model, even if they don’t know that they are benefitting. The real test will be how much additional harm will happen (not that it really matters since we won’t be able to go back to having nicer things).