Funtime said:
You seem to be fairly in-the-know regarding this topic so I'm hopng you can answer something for me about it. As someone who doesn't know much about competition law this fine does seem unfair to me, but only because it appears as though MS in particular is getting picked on. As an example, why does MS have to promote Google's browser on Windows when no Android device on the planet has to promote Bing in any way shape or form? What is it specifically about MS that makes this fine reasonable when no other software giant seems to have to abide by the same rules? I can't remember ever loading up an iPhone for the first time and seeing an option to use any service for downloading songs other than iTunes, either. What's up with that? |
That's a very good question, and a very difficult one to answer.
First of all, a major difference is that the iPhone has never had the market share that Windows has. Windows is above 90%, and at the time of the original I.E. bundling I think was close to 95%. iOS peaked at about 25% , and Android is climbing, getting above 70% recently. So maybe they will run into trouble at some stage if their market share continues to climb.
tl;dr duopolies are treated more gently than monopolies.
Secondly, I feel that, at least subconsciously, people hold more complex devices to a higher standard. No-one expects to be able to choose custom firmware for their microwave, yet people are indignant when Sony stops them doing it for their PS3. Microsoft promotes the PC as the device that can do anything, so people expect it to be able to run multiple browsers. Phones however, are making massive progress in terms of features, most people still think of phones having 0 browsers, with 1 being amazing. Again, this may change with time and Android may find itself in trouble.
tl;dr Less choice is more acceptable on phones than PCs.
Thirdly, I think MS make an unconvincing victim (and I make no claims that this is a morally defensible point, I am simply giving my reasons as to why I think it happens.) Who were MS hindering with I.E. bundling? Apple and Google, who are perfectly capable of getting their browser in people's hands, and Mozilla and Opera Soft. 2 victims that you can feel sorry for, 2 that you can't.
Looking back at the market share graph, Google is potentially impacting MS and Apple, but again, no-one will feel sorry for them.
Bada? They don't even compete for the same market.
Rim/Symbian? Those two are in freefall and the blame can be assigned to no-one but themselves.
Google quite simply isn't harming anyone that people care about.
finally, you can get Android phones with Bing preloaded (not Apple, but honestly, 25% market share is too low to even consider Apple for anti competitive behaviour) http://www.businessinsider.com/here-comes-another-android-phone-with-bing-pre-installed-and-this-ones-only-50-2010-11
tl;dr in a legal battle in Australia/Europe, always be David, NEVER Goliath.
After writing all that, I did some Googling. Interestingly enough, American antitrust law will only rear it's head if multiple companies are acting together, or if one company has above 60% - 80% market share. Apple can do whatever they hell they like. Android is probably above 60% in the USA, I assume their market share is higher outside the US, which is quite pro Apple relative to the rest of the world.
