4 ms·

Google doesn't have to make a YouTube app for every platform, especially when people can still use YouTube via the browser on the phone. The Platform Vendor ma

Google doesn't have to make a YouTube app for every platform, especially when people can still use YouTube via the browser on the phone. The Platform Vendor making the app ignored the rules for using that API and got blocked. Instead of changing it, they spend time deciding not to change it, release it again with only some of the issues fixed, and are then surprised when it gets rejected due to the outstanding issues already mentioned.

badman_ting 13y ago
So we are in agreement then, this issue is indeed about Google. Cool.
pionar 13y ago
They did change it, except for the one thing the provider of the so-called "open" API doesn't even do - HTML5. Why should Google hold MSFT to that standard when it doesn't even do it itself? I smell the same anti-trust bullying that MSFT did in the 90s and early 00s.
- dkuntz2 13y ago
  Because it's their product. They're permitted to do whatever they want with it. They decided that they wanted a set of rules for when other people play with their toys. If Microsoft had followed the rules, instead of ignoring them, after saying they were going to follow the rules, it's their problem, not Google's.
  - improv32 13y ago
    > Because it's their product. They're permitted to do whatever they want with it. No, they're not. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_antitrust_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_antitrust_law
    - sounds 13y ago
      Yes, they are. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viacom_International_Inc._v._YouTube,_Inc http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viacom_International_Inc._v._Yo....
    - dkuntz2 13y ago
      I don't believe that antitrust law applies here. There's no collusion, there's not cartels, the monopolization aspects don't really come into play. Yes, they can't literally do whatever they want, but in this instance, it's their code, their servers, their data (in a sense), they're permitted to define how others may use it, and use it in a separate way themselves.

badman_ting 13y ago

So we are in agreement then, this issue is indeed about Google. Cool.

pionar 13y ago

They did change it, except for the one thing the provider of the so-called "open" API doesn't even do - HTML5. Why should Google hold MSFT to that standard when it doesn't even do it itself? I smell the same anti-trust bullying that MSFT did in the 90s and early 00s.

dkuntz2 13y ago
Because it's their product. They're permitted to do whatever they want with it. They decided that they wanted a set of rules for when other people play with their toys. If Microsoft had followed the rules, instead of ignoring them, after saying they were going to follow the rules, it's their problem, not Google's.
- improv32 13y ago
  > Because it's their product. They're permitted to do whatever they want with it. No, they're not. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_antitrust_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_antitrust_law
  - sounds 13y ago
    Yes, they are. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viacom_International_Inc._v._YouTube,_Inc http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viacom_International_Inc._v._Yo....
  - dkuntz2 13y ago
    I don't believe that antitrust law applies here. There's no collusion, there's not cartels, the monopolization aspects don't really come into play. Yes, they can't literally do whatever they want, but in this instance, it's their code, their servers, their data (in a sense), they're permitted to define how others may use it, and use it in a separate way themselves.