Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 2nd Jan 2013 23:38 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 547001
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Well, Google really have no obligation to support Microsoft's protocols and it's none of Microsoft's business what Google does.
It might be smart of them to do it but that's a different matter. If users really need this feature it will either a) be re-introduced or b) they'll get a different phone.
What, you think Microsoft cares about how this affect users? No, they care about how it affects the company.
It might be smart of them to do it but that's a different matter. If users really need this feature it will either a) be re-introduced or b) they'll get a different phone.
What, you think Microsoft cares about how this affect users? No, they care about how it affects the company.
Let's swap roles "Microsoft really have no obligation to support Google's protocols" .
Except I think in these very comments you lambast Microsoft for doing just that.
Pot, Kettle.
Except I think in these very comments you lambast Microsoft for doing just that.
Say what? For doing just what? Not supporting Google's protocols? Uh....
I said that Microsoft is still anti-competitive and monopolistic which isn't at all the same thing as Google not supporting EAS.
I also agreed that Google's isn't exactly a saint either.





Member since:
2005-08-18
Well, Google really have no obligation to support Microsoft's protocols and it's none of Microsoft's business what Google does.
It might be smart of them to do it but that's a different matter. If users really need this feature it will either a) be re-introduced or b) they'll get a different phone.
What, you think Microsoft cares about how this affect users? No, they care about how it affects the company.