Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 16th Aug 2013 16:10 UTC
Talk, Rumors, X Versus Y

In the past two months, Microsoft and Google have been bickering over one central issue: HTML5. The Verge has learned that Google is forcing Microsoft to build its YouTube Windows Phone app in HTML5, despite its own Android and iOS versions using superior native code. Although Microsoft has offered to build ad support along with making other tweaks as Google has requested, a full HTML5 app isn't currently possible on the platform.

The difficult thing here is that Google actually has a very good case; it's their API, their service, their rules. On top of that, YouTube publishers - big and small - need to earn money from advertisements too, and incorrect implementations make that harder. Microsoft's mafia practices regarding patents, extorting companies to pay for Android use even though Microsoft has contributed zero code to Android plays a role too. Lastly, Windows Phone is essentially irrelevant with 3% market share - it's not as if Microsoft ever concerned itself with minority platforms.

Still, all this does is hurt consumers, no matter how few Windows Phone users there are. Just work this out, please, you bunch of children.

Thread beginning with comment 569802
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

If Android can feature a native YT app so should be able other OSes, as simple as that.
Of course provided all licensing obligations are obeyed.

Reply Parent Score: 2

tkeith Member since:

Android and iOS have official native Youtube apps made by Google. Google uses different APIs(undocumented) than they make available to everyone else. This makes sense, if you allow a third party to use your internal APIs they can do things like circumvent the ads and download rights(that make Youtube possible). And what do you know? Microsoft did just that. The HTML part is a red herring.

Reply Parent Score: 3

dsmogor Member since:

If Google ran just like video service everybody else they could set whatever restrictions they like.
But the fact is they run a dominant service and give the preferred access to it to their own platform (which by the way is dominant as well).
This is no different from MS giving IE preference on Windows or hiding parts of Win api that made Word faster than WordPerfect.
They doesn't have to give it for free, any reasonable terms would be enough.
Expecting particular AD support and some form of compensation for access is within reasonable.

Reply Parent Score: 4