The comments on that article are atrocious. It's like one big fanboy rage orgy. I like Microsoft and all, but Google seems to have a legitimate claim here. All Microsoft needs to do is update the app to comply with the YouTube TOS, which doesn't seem like that big of a deal.
It's kind of funny in a depressing way how everyone seems to think it's perfectly okay for MS to violate the YouTube API's TOS just because Google doesn't want to make an official app.
As a frequent user for rtmpdump, youtube-dl, libdvdcss and adblock plus thinking otherwise would be kind of hypocritical dont you think? Hell, if you've ever blocked a popup then most likely, you too are an evil TOS violator.
Also the iOS fan base in this context. Enemy of my enemy and all that. It's fun being old sometimes -- you get to watch people switch "sides" in these silly arguments over years and decades.
>By 'everyone' you mean the usual Microsoft zelots like recoiledsnake and cooldeal?
Yes, lets lynch and ban the last couple of commenters on HN who don't hate 'M$' so that we can sip coffee at Google IO while using Macbooks to flag Surface Pro review stories and vote up Ruby and Go posts in peace.
What's funny is that in my experience, these denigrating terms came from each system's users, not from "the opposing tribe."
At my school we used the TRS-80, and constantly bemoaned its (many) faults, and dreamed of having Apple IIs ... and then one time we went to a computer show and met some kids from another school which used Apple IIs—who told us how much they hated their Crapples and how they wished they had TRS-80s... ><
Offhand I can list mtgx, rbanffy(who mentions he hates Microsoft in his HN profile page), or Toshio and lots of iOS fans and Google fans and employees and nobody seems to get bothered by them but somehow it's not okay for Microsoft fans to post on here?
How do they update the app if Google doesn't give them access to the API? They need to kill it and millions of Windows Phone users will be left with no legal YouTube app.
Also, if you're referring to the comments on WPCentral, of course, it's "Windows Phone Central" where obviously fans and users of Windows Phone who got frustrated for years with the lack of a quality YouTube app on their phone hang out.
That's not Google's problem. What law says that Google needs to provide an API? This is just embarrassing for Microsoft. Basically google doesn't think it's worth spending the time developing an app for Windows Phone, and Microsoft then tries to hack it together by themselves, illegally.
I haven't ported any of my own apps to Win Phone either - what's the point when nobody is using it? Out of 60,000 visits to our site over a given period, 4000 are iOS, 2000 Android, 50 blackberry and 20 Windows Phone. We haven't bothered with blackberry either (apart from providing an html5 version).
Face it Microsoft: Windows Phone is a dismal failure.
>Face it Microsoft: Windows Phone is a dismal failure.
So did a smart guy say once about Apple. I went from being a hardcore Android fan to just falling in love with my Lumia phone. Everyone I know who has a windows phone has been happy with it. So no I don't think it is a dismal failure.
I have found replacements for most Google services but there doesn't exist or may never exist one for Youtube. I was a user of Youtube before Google was a buyer, so yes it sucks to be given a second class treatment because you made the unpopular choice for your phone. Hope this doesn't repeat, you know with Ubuntu and Firefox phones coming out.
Who ever did is either eating crow for that, or isn't as smart as he claimed.
Microsoft has been in the mobile business for a long time. They have tried to re-invent their offerings at least two times, probably more. There are a lot of OEMs with knives in their backs (e.g.: Sendo, OQO) in the wake.
That they have failed to succeed after blowing such a lead and countless investment dollars is a real organizational character failure on their part. That some in Redmond think they're still winning is even sadder.
Windows Phone is seeing decent numbers, 6 million in the last quarters. The lack of apps like YouTube and Instagram is hurting the platform and they're showing they're serious about fixing that issuee by picking a fight with Google.
You don't get market share overnight when your platform has 100x less apps.
On the same note devs don't want to write apps for WP because it has no market share.
No, whether people like it or not is also part of the point. If you like a product, you are more likely to recommend it to someone, and word of mouth does wonders for adoption. If the actual count for adoption of Windows phone had been going down, then the statement about its failure can be taken into consideration, but its quiet the opposite, it has been rising steadily.
Try finding the Walmart exclusive windows phone Lumia 521 which came about a week ago, you can't, its selling like hot pancakes all across America. Its only a matter of time till Windows Phone becomes a real competitor and the reason why Google is worried.
Uh, when did YouTube get a monopoly on streaming video? Did they force browser manufacturers to display youtube videos only, under penalty of losing access to all other Google sites?
Antitrust is a serious matter, let's not trivialize it.
You don't need a monopoly, just market power. And how the market is defined can be an interesting issue on its own, so I imagine it would be conceivable that YouTube _would_ be found to have a monopoly on "community contributed videos", or something along those lines. Google is obviously trying to leverage YouTube to hurt a competitor's phone ecosystem, so this hardly seems far-fetched.
Well, then, Microsoft is more then welcome to make that claim and go to court, and if the court eventually finds that Google indeed does have such a monopoly - well, then they will be subject to antitrust rules.
Until a court says otherwise, nothing compels Google thus.
Just remember that according to the courts, Google doesn't even have a monopoly on search. It is far fetched that they have a monopoly on "community contributed videos", if that's even a market sector that would be considered for antitrust.
Hell, Google doesn't even allow a significant portion of the online video market to participate on Youtube. They are anything but choking out competition; they are handing their competition a huge feature on a silver platter.
>I haven't ported any of my own apps to Win Phone either - what's the point when nobody is using it?
So Google's complaint is that "nobody" is using the Windows Phone Youtube app and that this is hurting Youtube because "nobody" is watching so many ad-less videos on Youtube that it's robbing Youtube and content creators of all the "no money" gotten from no ad views in the app which used by nobody? Oh, and did I mention nobody can use the Windows Phone Youtube app because nobody is using Windows Phone?!
Google's complaint isn't that "nobody" is using WP, so stop bringing out that strawman to make yourself sound smart.
Google's argument is simply that Microsoft, a company that should know better, is intentionally breaking the Youtube ToS. The lack of native app is because Google has determined that WP users can "live with" watching videos in the browser for the time being.
> How do they update the app if Google doesn't give them
> access to the API? They need to kill it and millions of
> Windows Phone users will be left with no legal YouTube app.
One possible alternative is for Microsoft to release a version of their app that does not violate the YouTube TOS. For example, it wouldn't play videos that the uploader has flagged as being forbidden to mobile devices and wouldn't permit downloading of videos.
There is a public YouTube API, documented at https://developers.google.com/youtube/v3/ , which Microsoft could have used if they were interested in implementing a TOS-compliant app.
To my knowledge the YouTube API doesn't ban users for excessive use of the API, it just throttles them temporarily.
The exact throttling values are not posted publicly, but there are multiple third-party apps using the YouTube APIs successfully, so I expect the limits are high enough for a standard client to work without problems.
