back to article Surprising no one, Google to appeal against European Commission's €4.34bn Android fine

Google will appeal the €4.34bn fine imposed in July by the European Commission, according to a report. In July, the Commission determined that Google illegally used Android to maintain its search monopoly. It requested Google provide remedies. Companies have the right to appeal against competition judgements to the General …

  1. MiguelC Silver badge

    uninstalling (as opposed to "removing")

    "uninstalling" is not opposed to "removing"; the only thing Google allows for it's apps is "disabling" them and that's very different from removing (or uninstalling)

  2. Gene Cash Silver badge

    Re: uninstalling (as opposed to "removing")

    And if you disable the Google search app itself, then the phone will not boot!

  3. Dan 55 Silver badge

    Re: uninstalling (as opposed to "removing")

    Which phone is that again? Just to avoid buying it.

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Re: uninstalling (as opposed to "removing")

    Which phone is that again? Just to avoid buying it.

    There is no such phone.

  5. DougS Silver badge

    Re: uninstalling (as opposed to "removing")

    What difference does it make? You can complain about wasting a little space, but phones these days are not exactly low on storage so why do you need to actually remove an app?

    Of all the reasons to complain about how Google operates Android, this is WAY down in the noise.

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    'Which phone is that again? Just to avoid buying it'

    Been experimenting with cheap phones (<50 euro) you can 'seemingly' purge google / facebook from. Alacatel U3 seems ok. Still using Netguard to lock everything down. Firefox-Klar to replace Chrome. Signal to replace all messengers. ProtonMail to replace gmail / hotmail / outlook / facebook mail...

  7. Dan 55 Silver badge

    Re: uninstalling (as opposed to "removing")

    Well people have hosed their Nexus 5 and OnePlus 2 doing it. link

  8. JassMan Silver badge
    Linux

    Re: uninstalling (as opposed to "removing")

    I solved the google problem on my Nexus5 simply by installing UBPorts UbuntuTouch.

    It is still a bit raw as a user experience but getting better every week and if you make sensible comments at least someone will listen to them. The process is supposedly reversible but I have found that Touch works well enough that I am not tempted to go back to Android and revealing all my personal info to Google. If they ever get Halium working I may even be able to make use of all the sensors such as barometer, compass etc.

  9. big_D Silver badge

    Re: uninstalling (as opposed to "removing")

    And the biggest problem for manufacturers is, if they build a phone without Google Services (i.e. AOSP), they cannot sell any phones with Google services. So the user cannot decide, whether he wants, say, a Samsung phone with only Samsung services or a Samsung phone wiht Google services.

  10. big_D Silver badge

    Re: uninstalling (as opposed to "removing")

    @DougS the problem is, if you don't use any Google services, the phone still phones home.

  11. overunder

    Just call it...

    "9bn...an expense few new startup search engines would be able to afford."

    A few? Name even 1. Just state the truth, no "startup" search engine can afford that. I can't even think of 1 so called startup engine, period.

    The term "startup" implies a time frame, for instance the startup time of a daemon or automobile. I know it's more of a post-trendy marketing term, but even by the marketing term I can't think of 1 new search engine that isn't close to a decade old, if not older.

  12. Duncan Macdonald Silver badge

    New search engine ???

    To provide a search function as good as Bing let alone Google requires a huge expense and a lot of time to populate the search engine. No new startup can hope to compete as a general search engine.

    All that the court cases can do is to decide if Google or Bing is the dominant search engine. (My firm preference is for Google.)

    Perhaps what Google should have done is to explicitly say that Android is not free but is paid for by the inclusion of the Google apps.

  13. RyokuMas Silver badge
    Childcatcher

    Re: New search engine ???

    "All that the court cases can do is to decide if Google or Bing is the dominant search engine."

    I would say that the ruling against Microsoft for browser tying should set precedent here: upon first trying to search the web, the end user be presented with a series of search engines (in random order), and choose the one they want.

    In an ideal world, there would be rankings for categories such as "quality of results" and "privacy" displayed for each as well...

    ... ah well, I can dream. Until then, I'll use DuckDuckGo...

  14. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Re: New search engine ???

    > upon first trying to search the web, the end user be presented with a series of search engines (in random order), and choose the one they want.

    Maybe with a search function to let you find the search engine you want?

  15. Ucalegon
    Flame

    Re: New search engine ???

    "... ah well, I can dream. Until then, I'll use DuckDuckGo..."

    The school, where I work, has just blocked DuckDuckGo as it's been branded "malicious". I now have to use Google or Bing. This decision has struck me as slightly obtuse and now perhaps from an educational perspective even more so.

  16. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Google may reportedly pay Apple $9bn to ensure it is the default search engine in the iPhone, or $12.85 per device, according to a research note from Goldman Sachs – an expense few new startup search engines would be able to afford.

    Hmmm, so Apple sold their metrics data to Google in effect because that's what Google is after so it can advertise to Apple users. Blame Apple for whoring it's users, not Google.

    Let's be honest here how many companies could actually fulfil a proper requirement for search as it requires huge back end processing and bandwidth. It costs a lot to build such infrastructure and the size of the investment would make the deepest pocketed VC wince.

    Where is the European competition in these tech markets to compete with Facebook, Google, Apple, Microsoft, Samsung, Lenovo etc ?

  17. Dan 55 Silver badge

    How did you get from Google paying Apple to be the default search engine on iPhones to Apple selling its metrics data to Google?

  18. Ledswinger Silver badge

    Can't speak for the OP, but that $12.85 per user is remarkably little, and shows how little Apple actually value the privacy of their customers. Admittedly most would be using Google anyway, but as a point of principle it seems deeply unethical for Apple to tout their walled garden as secure and private, so much better than Android, and then they go and hold the gate open for Google in return for a paltry few shekels.

    This will be that supply chain schmuck's doing.

  19. Tromos

    Don't pay the fine...

    ...just Gooxit.

  20. ivan5

    EU SSR

    All the original case and fine is the EUSSR's way of getting more money because they are running out of Europeans money. Like all good socialist regimes the EUSSR relies on spending other peoples money - never that of the Commissars and with the loss of the UK taxpayers money they have to fine someone else with deep pockets they can dip into.

  21. MrDamage

    Re: EU SSR

    As opposed to capitalist regimes that spend everyone else's money?

    No government owns any money. They all function based on what they can take from the people they claim (and often fail to) represent.

  22. Intractable Potsherd

    Re: EU SSR Ivan5

    Hey look - Jeremy Hunt has a new pseudonym!

  23. John Smith 19 Gold badge
    Unhappy

    "Google may reportedly pay Apple $9bn to ensure it is the default search engine in the iPhone"

    Using revenue from an effective monopoly to suppress competition less well funded competitors could never match.

    Wow, straight out of the MS playbook.

    What a surprise.

  24. ratfox Silver badge

    Re: "Google may reportedly pay Apple $9bn to ensure it is the default search engine in the iPhone"

    When you compare the fine to the yearly bill they get from Apple, it starts to look as just the cost of doing business...

  25. John Lilburne Silver badge

    Re: "Google may reportedly pay Apple $9bn to ensure it is the default search engine in the iPhone"

    Hey if the Google search engine was that much better than the rest they wouldn't need to be paying $9 billion to have it set as the default.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018