Google and Android concerns

[Seadog]

There are several issues which make me start feeling anti-Google lately. It started when I found out that Verizon may not be able to put out a 4G iPhone due to Google lobbying the FCC. Now I hear that they are not going the support H-264 so that they can force people to use their competing format. And there are other things like selling personal information without asking for permission like is Apple's policy.

Now the tech news is about the 21 malware programs they let slip by them and they had to pull them out of their app market. Now we find out that the people who bought the apps have nothing to worry about. Google removed the apps for them, and installed a security program on their devices, all without the anyone knowing about it. I do not know about anyone else, but that is going too far to my liking. The proper thing to do would be to notify everyone of the issue and have the device owners to do a voluntary download to correct the problem.

 

[DaveSt]

There are several issues which make me start feeling anti-Google lately. It started when I found out that Verizon may not be able to put out a 4G iPhone due to Google lobbying the FCC. Now I hear that they are not going the support H-264 so that they can force people to use their competing format. And there are other things like selling personal information without asking for permission like is Apple's policy.

Now the tech news is about the 21 malware programs they let slip by them and they had to pull them out of their app market. Now we find out that the people who bought the apps have nothing to worry about. Google removed the apps for them, and installed a security program on their devices, all without the anyone knowing about it. I do not know about anyone else, but that is going too far to my liking. The proper thing to do would be to notify everyone of the issue and have the device owners to do a voluntary download to correct the problem.

I think Google dropping .H264 is a good decision. Google is supporting two open source standards which are free to use. .H264 is a format that needs to be licensed with royalty fees. This codec battle is part of the reason I think people should be a bit more cautious in proclaiming that HTML5 is the answer to our favorite topic. There isn't even a video standard for HTML5 yet and looking at the size of the companies getting ready to fight it out I would say there won't be a standard for quite some time.

Apple devices have the exact same functionality by the way when it comes to the ability to remove an app from your device. Apple has a "kill switch" built into iOS that can remove malicious apps from your device without your prior approval. It's all in the huge terms of use agreement that we all simply click "OK" on whenever it is updated.

 

[thekarens]

If you're going to accuse Google you should quote reliable sources. You're obviously an Apple fanboy and that's fine, but why even bring it up here? Apple is the first to go with the "my way or the highway" and to do things without anyone's permission whether the consumer likes it or not.

 

[SBHOKC]

He was quoting reliable sources as I read the same sources today and it even made the network news.

 

[Seadog]

I don't mind the kill switch too much, but I think there should be prior notification. It is the fact that they install their security program on devices without notification. To my knowledge, Apple has never done that. They may send out updates, but it is up to the owner to choose to update. And Apple does give information about what the update does.

I do not know all the ins and outs of the different video formats, but H264 is a very popular format and a lot of web sites are using it instead of Flash due to Apple's decision to not support Flash and how buggy it was. Now Google is not supporting the alternative to Flash in order to what? Promote their own format so they can get royalties? Play tit for tat with Apple? Or just because they are arrogant?

I am not getting all screw Google and Android here. I am asking questions about what I consider a disturbing trend. Google is seeming to get more and more aggressive, with a corresponding tendency to trample over people. Those who have dealt with Apple for a period of time, know that they are not aggressive, but focused. They are in business, but they know that they are successful because they do not try to be the only game in town, but work on that part of the public demand that likes their concepts.

 

[DaveSt]

The two formats Google, Mozilla, and Opera are supporting are open source and royalty free. It has nothing whatsoever to do with Apple, it has a lot to do with the fact that Google is a huge supplier of web based video and they don't want to be paying royalties nor do they want everyone else that moves towards HTML5 to have to pay royalties when a perfectly good free alternative is available.

It is a big mistake to say .H264 is "the alternative to Flash". HTML5 is the proposed alternative to Flash, but unlike Flash there are any number of video formats that will work under HTML5. As a few of us have been saying for some time now, HTML5 is in its' infancy. There are virtually NO set standards yet. It is quite possible that we are moving backwards to times when several video codecs were widely used which required people to install numerous plugins and addons. I know lots of people are excited to see Flash exit, but I think the proclamation that HTML5 is the answer is quite a bit premature. When the standard is finalized in 2022 maybe we can say that.

It isn't arrogance, it is business and as we have seen even with Apple recently business isn't always pretty or good for the end user in the short term.

 

[Seadog]

I would suggest reading what the Washington Post had on this. There was a lot of good points, but this sums it up pretty well.

I get the logic of having a fully free and open video format as a lowest-common-denominator standard. But at the same time, H.264 isn't going away--and as previously noted, Google has no problem supporting other closed, proprietary standards. In that context, Google's prior course of action made much more sense. I don't see how its new stance will accomplish anything (i.e., end the need for the Flash plug-in) unless it somehow persuades Apple and Microsoft to add WebM support to their own browsers. Do you have any confidence that will happen?

 

[thekarens]

He was quoting reliable sources as I read the same sources today and it even made the network news.

Saying someone is quoting "reliable sources" means nothing. From everything I've read, and I read a boatload of tech news, it's more opinions than facts.

Regarding another comment, saying Google is aggressive and Apple is focused is just blindness. Google hasn't done anything Apple hasn't done in spades. I'm not saying Google hasn't done wrong things, they have, but not any worse than Apple.

And regarding another comment Microsoft is already behind WebM. They aren't abandoning H264, but they have given their support for WebM.

 

[DontUnderstandMyIpad]

Google removed the apps for them, and installed a security program on their devices, all without the anyone knowing about it. I do not know about anyone else, but that is going too far to my liking. The proper thing to do would be to notify everyone of the issue and have the device owners to do a voluntary download to correct the problem.

I don't have any problem with Google removing infected apps remotely. It does provide for an easy way to get rid of viruses and allows to remove them from all devices at once. Which is much better then what happens with PC's, where it is up to the user to inform themselfs on how to identify and remove treats.

Also, Google has informed every user, who had been infected, when Google
-removed infected apps
-installed the security update.

http://on.mash.to/f4Rg4A