To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
This isn't about Microsoft winning or Google winning, its about the end user losing over a petty pissing match between two companies.
I'm more than certain Google got a sweet volume licensing deal from Microsoft, and as such, this likely doesn't affect their bottom line much. Do you really think a company the size of Google with as many customers as Google really pays per user?
This was politics.
So? Everything in business is politics; the main goal of a publicly traded corporation is to make a profit thus their actions will represent that goal. Google does not want to pay for a volume license, since they have to eat the costs for their non-paying (free) users. And Microsoft does not want to make EAS an open and free technology, since they make a pretty penny off it.
Again, if EAS is such a superior technology this is great news for Microsoft, since they have a clear value proposition for their mobile OS offerings over android.




Member since:
2009-03-17
Google still offers EAS services to those customers who wish to pay for it, they are simply not subsidizing those services for all their non paying customers. Google is looking for their bottom line, just as Microsoft does. I have no clue why Google is under any sort of moral obligation to eat the cost of EAS licensing. If google are being assholes here, so are microsoft for not offering EAS as a free service.
If EAS is such a superior product, then it is great news for Microsoft, since they have the competitive edge. Honestly, you should be cheering not fretting over this.