How does forcing Playstore and Google maps compare to Apple's approach? And btw, google itself is not forcing anyone. Because you can root your google phone without consequences to warranty. Therefore you can remove any undesirable app. All those other manufacturers are practically forcing those apps as rooting those will void warranty. But even then, you can go and install alternative app markets. And let's face it, mentioned "Aptoide" contains modified/hacked APKs. And even viruses in some cases.

How does forcing Playstore and Google maps compare to Apple's approach? And btw, google itself is not forcing anyone. Because you can root your google phone without consequences to warranty. Therefore you can remove any undesirable app.

Yes and no, on Apple store once you get the app you don't need the store to use it and it can run even every security demand is refused. On Google play once you refuse all security demand and without google play 99% of the app doesn't work.(why does a basic tetris game need your position, access to your microphone, camera, photo and music, a link to facebook and tweeter, and google play to work?) Of course this is with vanillia user and out of the box... Once rooted it's better. But despite what you said a rooted device (exept some Lenovo and motorola) is not on warranty anymore, and using unverified app also cut the warranty (despite there is a way to run those app in setting). But of course an Android device is way better rooted (rooted all mine)...

How does forcing Playstore and Google maps compare to Apple's approach? And btw, google itself is not forcing anyone. Because you can root your google phone without consequences to warranty. Therefore you can remove any undesirable app. All those other manufacturers are practically forcing those apps as rooting those will void warranty. But even then, you can go and install alternative app markets. And let's face it, mentioned "Aptoide" contains modified/hacked APKs. And even viruses in some cases.

Wrong: if you root, it leaves a trace that voids your warranty. You can't remove apps at will without google letting you.

Yeah but the warranty void on root is the OEM and not google. Could they force ecosystem partners to uphold the warranty? Maybe - but I don't feel like that should be google's responsibility.

I've sent two rooted devices in to be repaired and both were repaired without any issues. They should only refuse warranty if the rooting bricks the device, which is the users fault.

@Fox2232: Google (just like m$ and other bullies out there) has to learn that aplications CANNOT have a "mandatory status". Each program, tool, app... GOT to be EASILY removable, based on a "no-questions-asked" policy. If I do not want the damn gogleThis or googleThat, I should be free to uninstall them right away, without any hassle of obtaining third party "rooters", uninstallers etc.. That's the point. They charge mountain-high amounts of money for those phones, anyway (which means, google indirectly gets paid for Android, anyway); they are bombing us with whole lot of crappy advertisements all over damn Internet...

dumb discussion. There is no way to tell if bricked phone is rooted or not. No one will even have time or will to check that. Broke your screen? The last thing they are going to check if the phone is rooted. Even if they do, I got superuser admin privileges, so what? Who am I hurting? On the note of google maps -> sure, give me an alternative that has done the same thing google has been doing for years with google street and I might uninstall it. Same goes for the rest of the apps. Why would I want to uninstall them? And for the sake of the argument - I want to remove EU antitrust regulators and put someone else there instead. Oh I can't? They have monopoly? They should fine themselves, those bastards 😀 edit: where was this "EU antitrust regulators" when you bought Nokia and you had to use software that was provided by Nokia? Same goes for other brands. I am talking about the time before first Android phone came. It was all fine then right? Ok. How about BlackBerry? These Vultures are only after the money. And here I thought that the "USA, the land of the lawsuit"....:bang:

This dose not seem to bug me,lets face it i dont think google has all the time in the world to spy on peoples facebook and there are alot of people who do play mobile games that are link with facebook accounts incase of stole lost or damage phone, so you can recover that again without needing to start over and in 7.0 you can easy turn off such settings anyway so whos it really hurting.

Maybe I am misunderstanding the basis of the fine but I prefer to use pre-installed Google app store rather than having those silly amazon app shops, samsung app shop. So if I my next phone is from a different manufacturer I won't have to bother about usability or put any effort to transfer my data to new device, as long as its Android of course.

I think few people here need to realize what is difference between phone manufactured and sold by google, where You Can F* do root, unroot and RMA with 100% warranty guaranteed. Versus phones from dozens of other manufacturers who just happen to use google's OS. Or 3rd party resellers who may and have their own warranty conditions, to which client agrees. Secondly people who walk in this technology know that rooting has some caveats. Which are actually worse than not having warranty from 3rd party. Like no Google pay, Or advanced security. And honestly, When I look at apps in my phone. I see few google's apps I do not use disabled and they take only few kB/MB of space. Then I see preinstalled apps by operator which are marked as system apps, and therefore can't be fully removed too. But those are real trash which gets on my nerves. I need no free women magazine. Or some adware. And I would prefer if samsung's VR apps were optional too. But they are not. So it is hardly fair to sue google while giving every manufacturer of android based cellphone free pass. Because those actual manufacturers have last word on what software phone comes with. And which of that is marked as system app and can't be fully removed. Few here, who used custom build or even Android Emulators know that all that stuff this is about is not mandatory for defect free function of OS.

I've sent two rooted devices in to be repaired and both were repaired without any issues. They should only refuse warranty if the rooting bricks the device, which is the users fault.

I figure phone warranties work a lot like car warranties - whatever modifications you do don't void the warranty until/unless it is deemed to be the source of your product's problems. So for example if you decide to put an aftermarket air intake, that won't void your warranty but if your engine gets damaged due to too much PSI or dirt getting in, then the warranty won't help you. That being said, if you rooted your phone while under warranty and something like the camera stopped working, the company should be able to fix that for you. But if you overclocked the phone and it overheats, then they probably won't help you.

/offtopic Great. That should teach them not to use and remove that ReCaptcha fricking +£%*$/*#*/... That thing is the most annoying and irritating thing I have seen since Spam and Pop-ups. Possibly even worse. E.g: I have to waste 1min to 5min trying to login in my account at my local dealers website just to check an order or place a new one. Not to mention all the other places that's implemented. Geez

The EU has to make the money back from the UK leaving somehow.....

/offtopic Great. That should teach them not to use and remove that ReCaptcha fricking +£%*$/*#*/... That thing is the most annoying thing I have seen since Spam and Popups. Possibly even worse. E.g: I have to waste 1min to 5min trying to login in my account at my local dealers website just to check an order or place a new one. Not to mention all the other places that's implemented. Geez

Why would fining them for abuse of power in android teach them to not use a service for fighting bots? Also the new reCaptcha is literally clicking a button and there is even an invisible option that requires no input at all. Not google's fault that your local companies don't update their site.

What Google do with the Play store is a joke, the fact that the software is so intergrated in to your phone / tablet and is required if you want to actually run the software once downloaded. You then add in that you need an account, even if the software is free, that almost EVERY piece of software you download then asks you to give it access to just about EVERYTHING on your phone, as some else here said why does a free game of Tetris need to now your GPS location and have access to your phone book? Then if you do decide to download an app from elsewhere the software is setup to make you jump through extra hoops just to get it to work, usually requiring you to disable inbuilt security features. I have no real issue with Google bundling Play with their OS but the utter amount of cr*p you have to go through and accept just to download apps is plain stupid, however when I got a new phone I do see the benefit of this hoop jumping, log in to my google account on my new phone and it downloaded, settings, apps and set my new phone up with all the stuff my old phone had, which is awesome and kinda scary and it should 100% be something I can choose to opt in to rather being forced to use from the word go.

The EU has to make the money back from the UK leaving somehow.....

Right now brexit is more like saving money for both part... 🙂

Amazing. Not even a single commenter understand what the case is (or cases are) about. When company's market share goes close to 100% there are certain things in legislation limiting how they can use that power. And Google has been illegally abusing their power, as simple as that. Those rules don't apply to companies having 10% or 30% market share (including Google years back) so comparison to any other company isn't possible.

Amazing. Not even a single commenter understand what the case is (or cases are) about. When company's market share goes close to 100% there are certain things in legislation limiting how they can use that power. And Google has been illegally abusing their power, as simple as that. Those rules don't apply to companies having 10% or 30% market share (including Google years back) so comparison to any other company isn't possible.

How does this have anything to do with the fact that google allows companies to unbundle play services? Which is at least what me and fox are arguing - yet you included us in your "not even a single 'commenter'". You can buy an Android phone without Play Services, those phones exist. No one wants them because the value is in Play Services/Google Store itself. The moment Google says "no android without Play Services" feel free to crucify them - but until then I don't see the issue or what it has to do with them having a large market share. They have such a large share because their product is extremely good and essentially free (privacy aside).

How does this have anything to do with the fact that google allows companies to unbundle play services? Which is at least what me and fox are arguing - yet you included us in your "not even a single 'commenter'". You can buy an Android phone without Play Services, those phones exist. No one wants them because the value is in Play Services/Google Store itself. The moment Google says "no android without Play Services" feel free to crucify them - but until then I don't see the issue or what it has to do with them having a large market share. They have such a large share because their product is extremely good and essentially free (privacy aside).

It has nothing to do with the fact that they allow it. Microsoft allowed IE to be replaced with whatever. The issue is that choices are not offered and therefore the end user just uses what is there just like what Microsoft got nailed for with IE being bundled with windows. They are going to be forced just like Microsoft was to not have any of those apps pre-installed. That way the consumer will install whatever at their own discretion.

It has nothing to do with the fact that they allow it. Microsoft allowed IE to be replaced with whatever. The issue is that choices are not offered and therefore the end user just uses what is there just like what Microsoft got nailed for with IE being bundled with windows. They are going to be forced just like Microsoft was to not have any of those apps pre-installed. That way the consumer will install whatever at their own discretion.

Except there was no variant of Windows being shipped without IE. There are Android phones being shipped without Play Services. The choice is already here, no one wants it because 99.99% the reason why people buy Android phones is Play Services and Google's Ecosystem. It would be insane to me if Google had to add options for Microsoft Store and other competitors when you buy a phone. But I guess that's what the EU wants.