|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 09 2013 @ 06:01 PM EDT |
I never said that anything prevented Microsoft from downloading Android. I said
that Microsoft couldn't compete with it. As evidence, I offer Windows Phone.
They can't sell it. Why not? Well, partly because it's less than Android, and
partly because it's more expensive than Android - that is, not free. Android is
making it hard for Microsoft to get paid for phone operating systems.
Now, apparently I was too subtle or vague in my previous post, so let me be very
clear: So far, THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT. The world (and Google) don't
owe Microsoft a living.
But, if I understand correctly, if Google were judged to be a monopolist, then
it becomes illegal for them to use the profits of a business where they have a
monopoly (search, say) in order to sell goods (the Android OS, say) below cost
in order to gain market share in another market. That is not the state of
affairs today; Google is (correctly) not currently considered to be a monopolist
in the eyes of the law. But their behavior in Android, which I applaud rather
than condemn, is in fact the kind of behavior that gets monopolists in trouble.
MSS2[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
