To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
It amazes me the excuses people will make to give Google a pass, but will condemn MS for similar actions done 10 years ago.
Apple proved that without enough data, writing a useful, safe mapping app is not easy, but hey, Google isn't being anti-competitive, they only have 98% share of mapping usage in mobile.
I gave you the definition of what is anti-competitive and you chose to interpret that as a pass for Google? (You seem to think that any action that harms your competitor in any way is anti-competitive, which is not true)
Microsoft was never condemned for pulling IE from Mac, even though IE had the dominant position as the browser. You know why? Because removing yourself from a market segment is not anti-competitive.
The fact that Apple could write an app that is in direct competition to Google's app only reinforces the claim that Google has done nothing to restrict competition in that market. Therefore is not anti-competitive by definition.
Edited 2013-01-07 14:28 UTC





Member since:
2009-05-19
Anti-competitive means restricting competition. Locking out WP from using a service is not restricting competition in the mapping market. They effectively took themselves out of that market(WP browser based mapping apps), they have not prevented anyone from providing a competing service.