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 569856
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Why insist on HTML5?
by cdude on Fri 16th Aug 2013 22:23 UTC in reply to "RE: Why insist on HTML5?"
Member since:

Wait, wait. Its Microsoft part of the story that Google forced them to do a HTML5 app. If that's true, if there where alternate suggestions on the table, if its actually a hybrid-app with a HTML5-layer for the youtube-API only (the video-frame + controls + ad-space), is absolute unclear. It was just not named.

I don't trust or believe Microsoft's lawyers (and lawyers in general), who wrote that blog about enforcing HTML5, a single word. I doubt they have any technical expertise to know about such details but are willing to turn anything often enough around and stretch words to make the point that the Google-enemy is anti-trusting them.

Google's statement is that Microsoft violates youtube ToS and youtube ToS name NOWHERE a HTML5 requirement. Do you believe Microsoft wouldn't fight hard through all courts on this planet if Google forces them to do things to fulfit a TOS that are not required by the TOS? Really? I serious doubt it.

Also read the exact wording. "We worked together with Google ... Google asked us" - That's lawyer-speach, ASKED us and NOT enforced! No requirement, Google asked. Nowhere any enforcements or "if not then". If you read that then I cannot find any line that says that this was a requirement. No line, no word, nothing.

Edited 2013-08-16 22:40 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Why insist on HTML5?
by Nelson on Fri 16th Aug 2013 23:07 in reply to "RE[2]: Why insist on HTML5?"
Nelson Member since:

Private API permission is outside of the discussions on the terms of service of a Public API.

Google's Public API is governed by a ToS which prohibits anyone from doing non-approved things with it.

In order to get access to Google's Private APIs, you need to negotiate with Google, which may have included the need to implement an HTML5 app. Like you said, and which I agree with, lawyers are of dubious technical know how and I'd feel better having a developer chime in.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Why insist on HTML5?
by cdude on Sat 17th Aug 2013 01:39 in reply to "RE[3]: Why insist on HTML5?"
cdude Member since:

Private API permission is outside of the discussions on the terms of service of a Public API

Exactly not. The youtube terms are clear what API's are allowed, what a client can and cannot do. There is even a link to the youtube API pages at the very first sentence and the whoke first chapter is about "API usage". Read it.

In order to get access to Google's Private APIs, you need to negotiate with Google

Google is a company. Pay enough and you can buy youtube, change the ToS or get special deals.

which may

The PUBLIC youtube ToS and APIs, those everyone can use under the same conditions, are visible, clear, public, not private since a long time. A user of the free (as in no money) youtube-services needs to fulfit those. There is no excuse. Take it or leave. Point.

IF Microsoft got into secret negotiations with Google to bypass some of those conditions and IF Google sayed okay but we request you do use HTML5 (all your speculation) then .... then what Microsoft complains about here? That they can't get things for free others never got? That they can't bypass, no dicatete, the rules (that apply to all others too, not only to Microsoft) when using services of others?

I think you may have a point in that Microsoft's actual complain is that they got the same conditions, the same API everybody else has. And WHEN (speculation of yours again) Microsoft got into secret negotiations to get another deal then its a complain that they don't get them for free.

Edited 2013-08-17 01:57 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2