EU and Google have lately been locked in a battle over what the former calls Google’s monopolistic practices. According to the European Union, Google is bundling a suite of its own apps on all phones running on its Android software, which in turn diminishes the chances of alternative apps and services. In short, EU is of the view that Google is anti-competitive and is using its position as the Android parent to throttle competition.
While European Union is concerned about Google’s Android dominance in mobile market, Google has been waving off the Union’s worries as baseless.
The company defended itself by stating that apps like Snapchat, Spotify, and Dropbox have enjoyed hundreds of millions of downloads on Android, which is a proof that Google is not suppressing competition. Also, Google has its own messaging, music, and cloud storage services, its mobile platform allows other alternatives which have relatively more popularity, to continue without a problem.
As per Google,
You don’t think we offer choice, but have you seen how little choice iPhone buyers are getting? All the preloaded apps on an iPhone come from Apple. 39 out of 47 preloaded apps on Windows 10 phones come from Microsoft. But less than a third of preloaded apps on Samsung’s Galaxy S7 come from Google. So what’s the big deal?
Google also argued that it’s impossible for Android to have a market monopoly with existence of iPhone.
To ignore competition with Apple, is to miss the defining feature of today’s competitive smartphone landscape.
And of course, if Google, what with the vast amount of freedom you get with Android, is monopolistic — what would the Apple ecosystem be termed as?
Google appeared to be trying to make the EU understand that Android is simply too flexible and gives its users too much power, for it to be titled as anti-competitive. Another valid point that Google made, is that distributing products like Google Search with Google Play lets the company offer their entire suite for free to their users.