Google offices raided in Korea over antitrust concerns
doesn't require manufacturers using Android to include Google search or Google applications. Heck, why not send the Korea Fair Trade Commission an Amazon Kindle Fire? There recently has been talk of an Android smartphone hitting the market this year without Google applications. In addition to the charges, the KFTC also says that Google has been deleting sensitive documents during the raid. For its part, Google says it will continue to cooperate with the government.
For some reason, Google can't seem to convince overseas regulatory agencies that it doesn't demand the use of Google branded search or apps in order to use Android. For example, Google has until July 2nd to respond to similar charges made by the European Union Competition Commissioner.
source: AllThingsD, CNET
1. Sniggly posted on 30 May 2012, 22:24 9 8
Dumbass government. They're the biggest monopoly of all, and they have GUNS.
3. taco50 (banned) posted on 30 May 2012, 22:34 5 12
You don't think that's anti competitive to manipulate search results?
4. Mxyzptlk posted on 30 May 2012, 22:55 6 11
Google already does it with their Google+ platform. I'm not surprised that they're doing it right now with their Android OS. About time someone called them out for this crap.
6. mas11 posted on 30 May 2012, 23:00 9 2
Hey taco what search engine do you use because Apple chose Google as the default. So are you saying that Apple chose the wrong search engine?
18. taco50 (banned) posted on 30 May 2012, 23:48 5 6
I use google and yahoo for search. The point is Google can do no wrong in some android fans eyes and they attack Apple religiously. Be fair handed. Apple isn't without fault, but Google isn't some benign company that's out to help mankind. They try to make money like everyone else.
21. mas11 posted on 31 May 2012, 00:03 0 0
I agree with you on that point. Google isn't perfect and their goal, like any other corporation, is to make money. One of the things I love about Android is their open-source nature. That's why i'm a fan of their OS, but I will say that iOS is inherently safer because it's locked.
24. taco50 (banned) posted on 31 May 2012, 00:39 2 1
Yes they're open source and that has advantages, but theyre open source because they're after advertising dollars. It benefits them to have more market share. It's a business strategy not because they're "good".
Apple isn't closed because it's "evil". They have a different strategy. The trolling here gets tiresome.
Apple gets attacked for Foxconn when damn near every other tech company uses them. There's a lot of hypocrisy coming from the android camp.
27. mas11 posted on 31 May 2012, 01:07 0 0
What "advertising dollars" are you talking about? From Google Search yes, but both Apple and Google make money from advertising in apps on their devices. And I do agree the whole Foxconn thing. As long as the devices are made in China there probably will be underpaid workers.
31. taco50 (banned) posted on 31 May 2012, 02:05 3 0
Google makes the bulk of their money from advertising. Apple makes the bulk from hardware. Different strategy.
35. mas11 posted on 31 May 2012, 02:49 0 1
Yep about 50% of Apple's revenue comes from the iPhone alone.http://techcrunch.com/2011/04/
Pretty interesting article btw
7. Sniggly posted on 30 May 2012, 23:00 5 3
The investigation is about whether they cripple the ability of other search engines to be featured on Android, which they don't. And really, Android is their OS, and Google works so well as a search engine there is no reason for manufacturers to try to include something else. I mean, remember how pissed everyone got over Bing on the Fascinate?
I'm amazed that you have no issue with Apple's anti competitive and controlling practices but you have a major issue with trumped up bulls**t fear mongering from a government.
15. Mxyzptlk posted on 30 May 2012, 23:32 1 4
Someone can't comment without cussing. Why not relax and come back when you're ready to comment like a civil person.
Google is being anti competitive and they're paying the price for it.
32. taco50 (banned) posted on 31 May 2012, 02:07 3 0
Yea sniggly Apple is anti competitive, but Google is just trumped up charges. They're practically a volunteer group that's here to bring us great services for free.
33. Sniggly posted on 31 May 2012, 02:19 0 2
They're both businesses, and if you're going to get your panties in a wad because manufacturers use the natively optimized search engine over some bulls**t local search engine on Google's operating system, then we reserve the right to get mad when Apple goes to the government to get jailbreaking declared a felony offense, or when Apple makes sure its music player and its music service are only compatible with each other and with absolutely f**kall for anyone else.
Yes, in the grand scheme of things, whatever Google (probably doesnt) do is really light compared to what many other companies pull.
34. taco50 (banned) posted on 31 May 2012, 02:22 3 0
Well I don't have my panties in a wad. The Korean government and European Union have and issue ipwith the way Google does business.
This article is about Google, not Apple.
2. mas11 posted on 30 May 2012, 22:30 3 3
Antitrust?! Have they ever heard of Microsoft or Apple? Microsoft pretty much has a monopoly on desktop and laptop operating systems and Apple has a monopoly on the mp3 player market.
5. Mxyzptlk posted on 30 May 2012, 22:56 3 3
Really? I see a lot of mp3 players other than iPods. Next.
8. Sniggly posted on 30 May 2012, 23:02 4 0
How well do MP3 players other than iPods work with iTunes? Conversely, how about those anti competitive deals Apple struck with recording studios to shut out competing services?
14. Mxyzptlk posted on 30 May 2012, 23:31 0 5
How about coming up with a better response without looking like you're backpedaling. iTunes is owned by Apple. Of course it won't work as well with other devices.
19. Sniggly posted on 30 May 2012, 23:55 2 1
And Android and Google Search are both owned by Google. So if there's no problem with Apple, why with Google? Your own argument backfires in your f**king face.
Oh. I'm sorry. I forgot that you're not mature enough to handle swearing on the Internet. ;)
36. Mxyzptlk posted on 31 May 2012, 08:28 0 0
Cussing doesn't make you cool.
Google is a freely available search engine that they tend to manipulate from time to time. My argument doesn't backfire.
37. Sniggly posted on 31 May 2012, 10:40 0 1
Where have I made any commentary on the sociological benefits of goddamn swearing? If you have a problem with "vulgarity" you're either young and immature or old and immature. Which are you?
Google is a PRIVATELY OWNED search engine, a SERVICE that Google, a COMPANY, offers. So if Apple gets to exercise compatibility bias over the service THEY offer, why can't Google?
9. JeffdaBeat posted on 30 May 2012, 23:04 1 1
That's not really a great defense. When Microsoft owned the PC market, one could argue that Apple OS and Linux were available, but Windows still had a monopoly.
A better argument against Mas11 would be that Apple is selling less and less MP3 players because they are being replaced with...smartphones. And who has the number one OS by total users? Google! Also Microsoft is still king of PC OS's, but Apple is slowly starting to take customers away...
I don't have enough information to comment too much on this story, but please stop pointing fingers any time something happens with Google. Before I even clicked on the story, I said to myself, "Someone is going to find SOME way to add Apple to this story." Good job Mas11...you proved me correct.
12. mas11 posted on 30 May 2012, 23:20 2 2
Wow way to not notice that I called out Microsoft first. I love how you assume that I was trying to "find SOME way to add Apple to this story," I called out real monopolies. If i was trying to "find SOME way to add Apple to this story," I wouldn't have mentioned Microsoft.
13. Mxyzptlk posted on 30 May 2012, 23:28 0 2
Linux. OSX. Chrome. Unix. You are wrong again.
17. JeffdaBeat posted on 30 May 2012, 23:40 0 0
Really? We are resorting to the order you called them out on? Grow up or find a better argument. Or simply name an actual monopoly like AT&T Corporation. Not today's AT&T, but back when if you had a phone, it was through AT&T. That's an example of one that the government actually broke apart.
But yes, you stretched and tried to refocus blame on two different companies. A better argument would have been that the actual raid was unwarranted. Especially if it was conducted because of misinformation...which it seems like it was.
But...you know...I'm trying to help you concoct a better argument than throwing blame.
26. mas11 posted on 31 May 2012, 00:49 0 2
Just because a company isn't broken up doesn't mean it's not a monopoly. Bill Gates had to defend Microsoft from being broken up for being a monopoly. There are tons of examples of monopolies. If we want to go back in time instead of talking about modern history how about Rockefeller and Standard Oil. That was a monopoly. Do I have to avoid talking about Apple just for you? The point is there are real monopolies out there today and Microsoft and Apple are two of them.
29. Stuntman posted on 31 May 2012, 01:56 1 0
Just because Android has the largest number of smartphones running it, doesn't mean that it has a monopoly. I would think that they would have to have a significant majority before you can consider it a monopoly. I think the latest numbers have Android on a little over 50%. MS had a significantly large portion of the market share of PC OS's. I think it was close to 90%.
10. mas11 posted on 30 May 2012, 23:06 2 2
11/10/04/apple-has-sold-300m-ipods-currently-holds-78-of-the-music-player-market/78% of the market is pretty much a monopoly
16. JeffdaBeat posted on 30 May 2012, 23:37 0 0
Does that include smartphones or standalone MP3 players? Even Apple is transitioning away from the classic iPods to just iPhones or iPod Touch's. Having a monopoly on MP3 players is like having a monopoly on newspapers...and when was the last time you ready one of those?
20. mas11 posted on 30 May 2012, 23:55 0 3
Standalone mp3 players not smartphones. BTW If you had a monopoly on the newspapers you could control the opinions of millions. Newspapers are still considered a more reliable source than television or the internet. I’m a college student and I read the Wall Street Journal every day. Anyways the iPod (Touch) is by no means a dying product.
22. ron1niro posted on 31 May 2012, 00:05 1 1
What is the meaning of monopoly and what is the meaning of freedom? I have a feeling that once a company or an individual become so successful, they start being hated. Look at Microsoft as an example; they dominate the computer market to a large extent and many people call them bullies and hate them for being successful. Do we not have other operating systems? Does Microsoft stop the companies that produce other operating systems like apple from competing? No! Apple and google are both giants and have a lot of money that they can use to compete with Microsoft but their products just don't appeal to the majority, the reverse is true for mobile operating systems where apple and google lead and microsoft is still struggling. Do not blame your failure to woo consumers over to your side on monopoly unless someone is not allowing you to compete. Someone making it hard for you to compete is different from not being allowed to compete. I hate fanboyism because it makes people just spit out without even thinking about it. I will never use an apple phone or a mac because i have had bad experiences with those but when it comes to tablets and portable music devices, there is none better than the ipad and the ipod, I will never use an android device or tablet because it is not my taste, i prefer Windows phone and Nokia phones. Does that mean that IOS and Android are bad? Of course not, they dominate the phone world and there must be a good reason why that is so. Think objectively.
28. mas11 posted on 31 May 2012, 01:29 0 1
Just to let everyone know, I’m not rooting for Android to gain market share. In fact I hope they lose about 10% of it to Windows Phone. I also hope the iPhone loses an equal amount of market share to Windows Phone because I believe competition is good for the consumer and we need a strong 3rd OS in the market. Trust me this will improve Android and iOS devices while giving us more choices at a better price.