Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 2nd Jan 2013 23:38 UTC
Microsoft Microsoft's legal chief: "We continue to be dogged by an issue we had hoped would be resolved by now: Google continues to prevent Microsoft from offering consumers a fully featured YouTube app for the Windows Phone." Utter nonsense, since MetroTube offers a complete and full YouTube experience on Windows Phone (it's one of the best Windows Phone applications), and YouTube+ on Windows 8. Two fantastically rich applications, built by small ISVs - yet Microsoft can't do the same? Don't make me laugh. Coincidentally, Microsoft is also whining some more about Google's removal of ActiveSync - Redmond again refuses to acknowledge that all it needs to do is implement the open standards CalDAV and CardDAV, just like everyone else has done. Times have changed, Ballmer. You don't get to dictate the industry anymore.
Thread beginning with comment 546965
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Yes...
by Nelson on Thu 3rd Jan 2013 03:07 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Yes..."
Nelson
Member since:
2005-11-29

Now if the shoe was on the other foot, and Microsoft was locking Google and Android out of Skype, or Skydrive, or Outlook. Or if Microsoft blocked Google access to the Microsoft Store or whatever underhanded tactic you could think of, I guarantee that you, and many others would be up in arms and this post would have 200 comments instead of just 25.

There is such a double standard that it is ridiculous.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Not particularly...
by gfolkert on Thu 3rd Jan 2013 05:23 in reply to "RE[3]: Yes..."
gfolkert Member since:
2008-12-15

Not particularly true, since Google isn't the Pink 8,000# over-weight bald-headed Gorilla in the room.

Plus... Microsoft have such such such history its not even funny. I mean Microsoft has done that as a matter of course. And where was the double standard there when it was happening? There wasn't, because nobody dare try it to Micorosoft as they'd be *DEAD* commercially... and they *DID* change APIs all the time at any whim and still do.

Its more like why cry for Microsoft right now, when its seriously getting its comeuppance.

Obviously you've only been in the computer industry for 6 or so years, since they started the decline brought on by their decades long haughtiness and hubris.

Its not at all a double standard... its a more of "About effing time they got what is coming to them!"

I'll never shed a tear for Microsoft, they don't deserve a single one. Maybe they could drink their own Alligator Tears.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: Not particularly...
by Nelson on Thu 3rd Jan 2013 05:29 in reply to "RE[4]: Not particularly..."
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

I get it, Microsoft shit in your cornflakes. They did some terrible, anti-competitive things, but what happened then, is not what is happening today.

Forgiving Google today because of the sins of Microsoft in the past is nonsensical and hypocritical.

I understand full well that you think its some sort of poetic justice, understood, but that doesn't mean what Google is doing is right, or justified, nor does it make it okay for you and others to be so dismissive about their behavior.

Remember, Google's priorities just happen to somewhat align with yours today. They may not tomorrow. So be careful what actions you cheer on.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Yes...
by The1stImmortal on Thu 3rd Jan 2013 11:02 in reply to "RE[3]: Yes..."
The1stImmortal Member since:
2005-10-20

Now if the shoe was on the other foot, and Microsoft was locking Google and Android out of Skype, or Skydrive, or Outlook. Or if Microsoft blocked Google access to the Microsoft Store or whatever underhanded tactic you could think of


Brilliant example!

Actually, Skype's protocol is locked up - ISV's *cannot* build a full featured client around Skype's protocol without the same kind of issues third party YouTube apps face (even more, in fact, due to the nature of the protocol). Additionally, since the Microsoft acquisition of Skype was first announced, there's been a few licensing agreements for the protocol pulled (Skype for Asterisk being the big example)

Also, last I checked, Microsoft's store didn't support clients running Google's Android. Nor should they be forced to.

Likewise Google should not be forced to support clients running on MS's OS. Especially while Google is not the dominant/monopoly Email/Groupware provider, and while MS Phone 8/RT is such a small segment of the market.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Yes...
by Nelson on Thu 3rd Jan 2013 14:30 in reply to "RE[4]: Yes..."
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29


Brilliant example!

Actually, Skype's protocol is locked up - ISV's *cannot* build a full featured client around Skype's protocol without the same kind of issues third party YouTube apps face (even more, in fact, due to the nature of the protocol). Additionally, since the Microsoft acquisition of Skype was first announced, there's been a few licensing agreements for the protocol pulled (Skype for Asterisk being the big example)


I agree that Skype needs to be opened up. I will however give Microsoft a little tiny bit of leeway, the Skype acquisition was relatively recent and who knows the state of that source code. Judging by how terrible the Desktop app was, I wouldn't be surprise if it was an absolute mess.

But again, I agree this is a move they should make. And that's why I think its so unreasonable of people to try to deflect the blame on Google by going after Microsoft.


Also, last I checked, Microsoft's store didn't support clients running Google's Android. Nor should they be forced to.


But Google will soon need to face the reality that to remain relevant on Windows going forward, they need to use the Windows Store.

It would be a completely different story if Microsoft somehow blocked Google from their Store. However when Google does it via their closed API (and not even that, they refuse to even offer NDA'd documentation, the same courtesy they extend other platforms) its somehow alright.


Likewise Google should not be forced to support clients running on MS's OS. Especially while Google is not the dominant/monopoly Email/Groupware provider, and while MS Phone 8/RT is such a small segment of the market.


Google isn't the one writing the client. Microsoft has engineered the YouTube client. Much like they do the Facebook one.

Reply Parent Score: 2