asterix9 · HackerTrans

13 years agodiscuss

>And as Microsoft is still bullying Google's Android partners with patent threats, Google refuses to give Microsoft a preferential treatment. It's so simple. And yet, it seems so hard for many people on this thread to understand.

If that is so, Google should come out and say that instead of hiding behind a façade and playing whack-a-mole with the API, terms that are ambiguous and selectively enforced and making a mockery of the word 'open'.

asterix9

13 years agodiscuss

Even granting your point which I think is a bit of a stretch for "open", I think there are some unreasonable requirements at place here.

>"you can interoperate with me as long as follow my terms and conditions", with those terms being considered reasonable.

I wonder if the HTML5 requirement can considered reasonable. Why does the server's web service API care if the client is HTML5 or not?

Microsoft says this in their post:

>There was one sticking point in the collaboration. Google asked us to transition our app to a new coding language – HTML5. This was an odd request since neither YouTube’s iPhone app nor its Android app are built on HTML5. Nevertheless, we dedicated significant engineering resources to examine the possibility. At the end of the day, experts from both companies recognized that building a YouTube app based on HTML5 would be technically difficult and time consuming, which is why we assume YouTube has not yet made the conversion for its iPhone and Android apps.

Google's statement is totally mum on the matter except for "it violates terms of use". If they want to call themselves open, they should atleast let us know what the HTML5 requirement is about, as it is certainly strange for a web service API. And in my opinion this makes it a 'unreasonable' condition for an open API and Google's silence does not help it. I do think Google is within their rights(absent monopoly concerns) though.

asterix9

13 years agodiscuss

Agreed 100%, but my question is, can Google still [call itself]/[be considered] open and "not evil" ?

asterix9

13 years agodiscuss

One difference is that Microsoft and Nvidia are considered evil and are derided for it and they don't pretend that SMB or graphics drivers are open. While Google has a 'do no evil' official policy which many folks seem to think they comply with. Similarly, with regards to openness.

asterix9

13 years agodiscuss

From http://www.wpcentral.com/official-youtube-windows-phone-app-...

>Google said in a statement that the HTML5-based YouTube app still violates Google's terms of service, and therefore cannot be permitted to remain active.

Google's statement:

  "Microsoft has not made the browser upgrades necessary to enable a fully-featured YouTube experience, and has instead re-released a YouTube app that violates our Terms of Service," says a spokesperson. "It has been disabled. We value our broad developer community and therefore ask everyone to adhere to the same guidelines."

Sounds pretty vague and beating around the bush. Why don't they tell us why they're blocking the new app? After all, if they want to call themselves "open", can't they at least tell us the reason it's blocked?

asterix9

13 years agodiscuss

>I don't think being open means you have to let third parties dictate the terms of their use of your stuff.

Then what does open mean? To me it means to provide an API on an equal footing among the various platforms. If Google is providing access to secret Web service APIs to their Android and iOS Youtube Apps, but not to Windows Phone, how is that open? Requiring to show ads is still understandable, but requiring HTML5? Why do they care if it's HTML5 or something else? It sounds fishy, and Google should come out with a real reason for requiring HTML5 if there is one, after all they call themselves open.

It is probably well within their rights to screw around since it's their stuff, but lets not pretend it's open. Didn't MS get lambasted for private APIs in Windows? Why does Google get a free pass now and get away with calling itself open?

asterix9

13 years agodiscuss

>Miracast on the other hand is drm(big players only) over drm(restricted content) over drm(it will only work with closed source software).Miracast will only live in heads of Balmer worshipers and maniacs, who love to to create long power point presentations with lots of bullet points.

Huh what? Not sure if you're not trolling but from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracast :

> It was created by the Wi-Fi Alliance and billed as an open alternative to Apple's AirPlay Mirroring. It allows users to, for example, echo display from a phone or tablet made by Company A onto a TV made by Company B,

..

>On 29 October 2012, Google announced that Android version 4.2 (updated version of Jelly Bean) will support the Miracast wireless display standard, and by default will have integrated features for it.[11] As of January 8, 2013, the LG Nexus 4 and Sony's Xperia Z, ZL, T and V officially support the function,[12][13] as does HTC One and Samsung in its Galaxy S III and Galaxy Note II under the moniker AllShare Cast. The Galaxy S4 uses Samsung Link for its implementation.[14]

>Microsoft also added support for Miracast in Windows 8.1, and announced this in June 2013. This functionality first became available in the Windows 8.1 Preview, and is available on hardware with supported Miracast drivers from hardware (GPU) manufacturers such as those listed above.

Looks like you should be applauding Microsoft here, not lambasting them.

asterix9

13 years agodiscuss

The so called facts don't tell the full story. Selling more consoles will only make you lose more money unless you can get the players to buy more games.

For example, see the gaming revenues till 2011.

http://www.gamasutra.com/db_area/images/feature/6545/softwar...

That doesn't mean they "own" it, but just the shipped console numbers don't tell the entire story.

asterix9

13 years agodiscuss

That's nothing, see this:

>Guys, this is not a dick-sucking contest. If you want to parse PE binaries, go right ahead. If Red Hat wants to deep-throat Microsoft, that's your issue

https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/2/21/228

comments