Microsoft claims Google blocked its access to YouTube data on WP7

[giga Veteran]

hmmm... i'm sure Open Source guys spend all the their time writing code without being paid just so that Worlds No 1 and No 3 companies with a combined market cap of of $500 billion+ can sit there lift their code :rolleyes:

but for these open source guys. Google and Apple would have had to come up with their OS,Browser etc from scratch like MS had to.

Darwin and WebKit today are nowhere near what it was when Apple forked them from their respective projects. The amount of code and improvements they've shared with the community is immeasurable.

[Growled Member]

Unfortunately, Google has refused to allow Microsoft?s new Windows Phones to access this YouTube metadata in the same way that Android phones and iPhones do. As a result, Microsoft?s YouTube ?app? on Windows Phones is basically just a browser displaying YouTube?s mobile Web site, without the rich functionality offered on competing phones. Microsoft is ready to release a high quality YouTube app for Windows Phone. We just need permission to access YouTube in the way that other phones already do, permission Google has refused to provide.

I have a feeling that is illegal. If not, it should be.

[George P Global Moderator]

Let's not turn this into a Open vs closed fight, but as far as Google and it's services goes, it seems that aside from search (of which Bing is getting better as time passes and is even better than google right now when it comes to specific things), they just have maps and gmail. Gmail vs Hotmail is up to personal taste as far as UI goes, I use both though I access both through IMAP using Outlook 2k7, so the UI I don't much care about. The rest is minor nitpickings and the Hotmail team has been adding some good stuff these last few months.

That just leaves MAPs, everyone brings up Google Maps outside of the US, honestly in my little part of the world here in Greece Google maps isn't that great either. I can understand if you're in some of the bigger more central cities then sure, but start to work your way out to the smaller areas and they're both pretty fail IMO. The Bing Maps shortcomings are being addressed with the NOkia deal though, so once that's off of the table and not a factor anymore then the argument for sticking with google just goes back to the difference in search and what does random searches better.

You have to look at the trend, Bing IS getting better and IS gaining share. Once maps and other localized services for non-US areas kick into effect you'll really need to nitpick it to find a reason to stay with Google. Of course you could just play the brand fan card, that's another matter.

[articuno1au]

funnier thing is open source guys dont seem to realize Google and to some extent Apple are essentially ripping them off. getting stuff for free and making huge profits / PR off it.

stealing data seemed like genuine mistake from Google but privacy stuff is real scary..

- The search terms reveal a lot more about you than any facebook update you one can ever make.

- Unique handles for Chrome identifying individual installations and browsing habits is essentially a privacy breech

- Buzz privacy fiasco

forget opensource guys, i'm wondering wtf are govt agencies doing about these things

not to mention

- Android lockdown "open" remember :rolleyes:

- Locking out MS - anti trust ?

anyway, all this proves that there is nothing free, personally i'd rather pay for services and software - either by money or adtime, rather than companies like Google hawking our personal info.

yeah, i wish MS was run like there was no Windows or Office divisions. that'd get some of the folks here off their behind and unlock the huge potential that exists here.. glimpses of which we see in those research videos and concepts from time to time..

It's always the legal department dude.

We wrote slides for an internal presentation, they were vetted by legal.

You should have seen the proposed Windows 7 launch ads. They laid the smack down on Apple something hardcore, then legal got them and it was like they never existed D:

I use an HTC Hero, but i don't use the Google Services built in, the privacy situation that Google has created bothers me no end, so it's no suprise to read that the company is trying to reign in it's Android platform whether it's an open source platform or not.

Google is scared of the competition and rightly so, Bing is creeping in and taking more and more market share, times are changing but how long can Google remain relevant and how long will it be before HTC the companies primary phone partner, jumps off the Google band wagon and reduces the number of Android handsets and restructures it's portfolio?.

Is it a surprise that Microsoft have submitted an Antitrust complaint or that complaints have been made the American Department of Justice, i think these sort of things will happen more and more.

I'm not surprised at all. I had been waiting for it for years. It's going to get nastier too. MS have habit of sitting on stuff until they are ready to slam someone with it..

in what possible way....

and IE 9 arguably has better "extension" support than chrome ever will.

I don't agree with that. IE9 has decent addon support, but nothing like the power or flexibility that Chrome's extension framework offers.

Let's not turn this into a Open vs closed fight, but as far as Google and it's services goes, it seems that aside from search (of which Bing is getting better as time passes and is even better than google right now when it comes to specific things), they just have maps and gmail. Gmail vs Hotmail is up to personal taste as far as UI goes, I use both though I access both through IMAP using Outlook 2k7, so the UI I don't much care about. The rest is minor nitpickings and the Hotmail team has been adding some good stuff these last few months.

That just leaves MAPs, everyone brings up Google Maps outside of the US, honestly in my little part of the world here in Greece Google maps isn't that great either. I can understand if you're in some of the bigger more central cities then sure, but start to work your way out to the smaller areas and they're both pretty fail IMO. The Bing Maps shortcomings are being addressed with the NOkia deal though, so once that's off of the table and not a factor anymore then the argument for sticking with google just goes back to the difference in search and what does random searches better.

You have to look at the trend, Bing IS getting better and IS gaining share. Once maps and other localized services for non-US areas kick into effect you'll really need to nitpick it to find a reason to stay with Google. Of course you could just play the brand fan card, that's another matter.

Ironically, in my experience Bing Maps is better in Australia then Google Maps.

Pity my phone doesn't have voice enabled turn by turn :\

[ichi]

hmmm... i'm sure Open Source guys spend all the their time writing code without being paid just so that Worlds No 1 and No 3 companies with a combined market cap of of $500 billion+ can sit there lift their code :rolleyes:

but for these open source guys. Google and Apple would have had to come up with their OS,Browser etc from scratch like MS had to.

Some "open source guys" get paid, some don't, but the point is they are all willingly releasing their code under a specific license, knowingly granting everyone (corps included) permission to use it as they see fit as long as they stay under the license terms.

Usually big corps like Google and Apple contribute back (although you might argue that not proportionally) but even if they didn't they would still be abiding by the license. I you don't agree with that then choose a different, less permissive license (eg. GPL instead of BSD, or some kind of "free for non commercial use", or whatever).

It's funny when people go about how corporations take advantage of poor unpaid FOSS devs as if those devs were unaware of the permissions being granted by their license of choice (let alone that most of the mainstream FOSS code comes from paid developers from corporations).

[George P Global Moderator]

SuperTube hits v1.1, adds YouTube login.

My link

[guru]

Darwin and WebKit today are nowhere near what it was when Apple forked them from their respective projects. The amount of code and improvements they've shared with the community is immeasurable.

care to post any evidence to support your claim of "immeasurable" contribution apple has made to open source?

[guru]

Some "open source guys" get paid, some don't, but the point is they are all willingly releasing their code under a specific license, knowingly granting everyone (corps included) permission to use it as they see fit as long as they stay under the license terms.

Usually big corps like Google and Apple contribute back (although you might argue that not proportionally) but even if they didn't they would still be abiding by the license. I you don't agree with that then choose a different, less permissive license (eg. GPL instead of BSD, or some kind of "free for non commercial use", or whatever).

It's funny when people go about how corporations take advantage of poor unpaid FOSS devs as if those devs were unaware of the permissions being granted by their license of choice (let alone that most of the mainstream FOSS code comes from paid developers from corporations).

open source dev's that get paid for their open source work is minuscule to the billions MS pays out every year to developers not to mention its ecosystem that generates more billions for Devs.

yeah, you may say that Devs were aware that they are giving permissions away including to mega tech corps to generate profits but iimo it reeks of exploitation

[giga Veteran]

care to post any evidence to support your claim of "immeasurable" contribution apple has made to open source?

You're free to view the progression of changes that WebCore and JavaScriptCore (now SquirrelFish Extreme/Nitro) has had in WebKit in their source browser: http://trac.webkit.org/browser

I used the term immeasurable because of the uptake that the project has had by other companies and developers. It's now used in Chrome, Android, Symbian, Kindle, AIR, WebOS, Steam, and many other products. KHTML played an integral part in the development of Safari and WebKit, but the fork has made significant advances that has benefited the entire community.

[Flawed]

but for these open source guys. Google and Apple would have had to come up with their OS,Browser etc from scratch like MS had to.

Microsoft never made anything from scratch. They bought DOS for $50,000 which all their subsequent OS's are based on. Windows networking is based on BSD (yes, open source) code. Microsoft's Hypervisor uses Xen's open source technology. And finally, IE was based on the Mosaic project via Spyglass; infact Microsoft had to pay Spyglass off because they ripped off their code. But if you sleep easier at night thinking that Microsoft wrote everything from scratch, then go ahead :)

[guru]

Microsoft never made anything from scratch. They bought DOS for $50,000 which all their subsequent OS's are based on. Windows networking is based on BSD (yes, open source) code. Microsoft's Hypervisor uses Xen's open source technology. And finally, IE was based on the Mosaic project via Spyglass; infact Microsoft had to pay Spyglass off because they ripped off their code. But if you sleep easier at night thinking that Microsoft wrote everything from scratch, then go ahead :)

you forgot to Mention the author of QDos joined MS as well. Windows Networking based on BSD code is BS

I won't even swear on a stack of bibles that the "new" TCP/IP now shipping in NT/2000/XP and Windows 95/98/Me is completely free of the old code from Spider. Since I don't work there I don't have access to the source code. Certainly some parts of TCP (the checksum calculation comes to mind) are the same everywhere and once someone has written an optimized version, why rewrite it? And once again, this would be perfectly legitimate for Microsoft to do under the license.

But it is certainly misleading of the Wall Street Journal to say that BSD code is used "deep inside" the NT networking code, unless they mean the STREAMS wrapper itself, which I believe is still there in case someone wants to write a transport using it (I think there is an OSI TP4 STREAMS transport lurking somewhere out there, if anyone cares - but I just checked, nobody does). But the TCP/IP in NT certainly doesn't use STREAMS.

And implying that the TCP/IP stack uses BSD code is also false. As I said above there may be small vestiges of it in there, although I doubt it. Anyway the FreeBSD programmers who reported all this to the Wall Street Journal can't see the NT TCP/IP source either, so they can't have been referring to that.

But whatever! It isn't the first time Microsoft has been maligned by the press, and it won't be the last.

http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2001/6/19/05641/7357

MS had its own Hypervisor before it abandoned adopt Xen which had become the standard. and that deal would also allow Linux VM s to be run on Windows hosts. You may have a case with Mosaic but that was between two companies

your examples seem to be peripheral / edge cases vastly different from say Apple's usage of Free BSD code that is an integral part of OS X or Webkit in Chrome /Safari...

[Prince Charming]

Microsoft never made anything from scratch. They bought DOS for $50,000 which all their subsequent OS's are based on. Windows networking is based on BSD (yes, open source) code. Microsoft's Hypervisor uses Xen's open source technology. And finally, IE was based on the Mosaic project via Spyglass; infact Microsoft had to pay Spyglass off because they ripped off their code. But if you sleep easier at night thinking that Microsoft wrote everything from scratch, then go ahead :)

You're not serious...are you? The last 'official' version of DOS was 6.22, circa 1994. Windows XP was the last operating system to have any remnants of DOS (8.0) utilising portions of ME's DOS based bootloader. That's as far as it goes. You might want to update your information, you seem about twenty years behind the times.

[George P Global Moderator]

Microsoft never made anything from scratch. They bought DOS for $50,000 which all their subsequent OS's are based on. Windows networking is based on BSD (yes, open source) code. Microsoft's Hypervisor uses Xen's open source technology. And finally, IE was based on the Mosaic project via Spyglass; infact Microsoft had to pay Spyglass off because they ripped off their code. But if you sleep easier at night thinking that Microsoft wrote everything from scratch, then go ahead :)

You're info's wrong, or outdated, DOS aside, the network stack being based on BSD is wrong, and it's been fully rewriten since XP iirc anyways.. And IE was based on MOsaic up till around v3, it's all MS code since v4 or 5, I'm not sure. And your bit about Hyper-V using Xen's open source code is missleading as well. Microsoft and XenSource ? now a part of Citrix Systems ? embarked on a technology sharing partnership in 2006. Microsoft and XenSource are partners. The two signed a pact in July 2006 to cooperate on technology that would provide interoperability between Linux systems running the Xen hypervisor and Microsoft?s forthcoming Windows Server Virtualization hypervisor. In the deal MS wrote drivers that it submitted to the Linux kernel under GPL that added support for linux OS's to run on hyper-v. Stop making it sound like MS stole everything from OSS and get a clue for once. But on the other hand if you want to sleep easeier at night thinking MS copied everything from OSS then go ahead though.

[Prince Charming]

Just going to throw this link in as well. http://www.microsoft.com/interop/osp/default.mspx

[guru]

You're free to view the progression of changes that WebCore and JavaScriptCore (now SquirrelFish Extreme/Nitro) has had in WebKit in their source browser: http://trac.webkit.org/browser

wait, they are writing code to develop their product in Apple's case Safari used in iPhone,Macs and Windows version of iTunes. that is shared because open source license that force them to. Do you think they are doing it because they are angels? especially when the company in question produces walled garden products and ecosystems

I used the term immeasurable because of the uptake that the project has had by other companies and developers. It's now used in Chrome, Android, Symbian, Kindle, AIR, WebOS, Steam, and many other products. KHTML played an integral part in the development of Safari and WebKit, but the fork has made significant advances that has benefited the entire community.

you making it as though Apple did a favor to webkit by copying their code. It isn't like there was no alternative. It was either slow gecko or build one from scratch. Even years after Webkit is still the only other option..even for the likes of Google,Adobe and Amazon.

in contrast MS had to develop its own...

"Chakra is a JScript engine developed by Microsoft for its Internet Explorer 9 (IE9) web browser. A distinctive feature of the 32-bit version of the engine is that it "JIT compiles scripts on a separate CPU core, parallel to the web browser.[1][2] The engine is also able to access the computer's graphics processing unit (GPU), in particular for 3D graphics and video.[3]"

/sorry for the off topic posts guys

[ichi]

open source dev's that get paid for their open source work is minuscule to the billions MS pays out every year to developers not to mention its ecosystem that generates more billions for Devs.

I don't have any numbers about that but even if we were to assume that it was true, what's your point anyway?

yeah, you may say that Devs were aware that they are giving permissions away including to mega tech corps to generate profits but iimo it reeks of exploitation

Again: you aren't being exploited when someone uses the code you release under a permisive license. If devs didn't want corporations to use and profit from their code they would have choosen a license that didn't allow that.

[giga Veteran]

you making it as though Apple did a favor to webkit by copying their code. It isn't like there was no alternative. It was either slow gecko or build one from scratch. Even years after Webkit is still the only other option..even for the likes of Google,Adobe and Amazon.

in contrast MS had to develop its own...

"Chakra is a JScript engine developed by Microsoft for its Internet Explorer 9 (IE9) web browser. A distinctive feature of the 32-bit version of the engine is that it "JIT compiles scripts on a separate CPU core, parallel to the web browser.[1][2] The engine is also able to access the computer's graphics processing unit (GPU), in particular for 3D graphics and video.[3]"

/sorry for the off topic posts guys

Not sure what argument you're trying to make here. I was originally responding to your claim that Apple didn't create their own browser from scratch and that open source developers didn't benefit because of it. I stated that WebKit had made huge strides since its fork from KHTML, so it's not exactly a fair statement to say that Safari/WebKit is basically ripped code from open source developers.

Chakra was developed by Microsoft. SquirrelFish was developed by Apple (and the rest of the community). So what? If open source developers didn't want their code to be used by others, they wouldn't license it that way. That's their philosophical choice. The community has actually flourished because WebKit's development and code is completely open for others to use and profit off of if they wish as well.

[Flawed]

Just going to throw this link in as well. http://www.microsoft.com/interop/osp/default.mspx

I feel safer already...

http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2008/osp-gpl.html

[George P Global Moderator]

I feel safer already...

http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2008/osp-gpl.html

You know GPL isn't the only open source license out there right? Hell I don't even think it's the best one either.

[articuno1au]

Not sure what argument you're trying to make here. I was originally responding to your claim that Apple didn't create their own browser from scratch and that open source developers didn't benefit because of it. I stated that WebKit had made huge strides since its fork from KHTML, so it's not exactly a fair statement to say that Safari/WebKit is basically ripped code from open source developers.

Chakra was developed by Microsoft. SquirrelFish was developed by Apple (and the rest of the community). So what? If open source developers didn't want their code to be used by others, they wouldn't license it that way. That's their philosophical choice. The community has actually flourished because WebKit's development and code is completely open for others to use and profit off of if they wish as well.

Giga is correct here. Apple made contributions to the code base that were well ahead of where the engine appeared to be heading before it was "apple-ized".

That said, I don't think a single project makes apple a significant open source contributor :\

[jakem1]

Microsoft never made anything from scratch. They bought DOS for $50,000 which all their subsequent OS's are based on. Windows networking is based on BSD (yes, open source) code. Microsoft's Hypervisor uses Xen's open source technology. And finally, IE was based on the Mosaic project via Spyglass; infact Microsoft had to pay Spyglass off because they ripped off their code. But if you sleep easier at night thinking that Microsoft wrote everything from scratch, then go ahead :)

That's a strange argument to start in a thread about MS vs Google considering that fact that Google bought every product they offer except for search ;)

[neoxphuse]

Google search has become ridiculously bad lately. All the bloated search results have made it almost unbearable. I'm binging about a third of my searches now.

[guru]

https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/995562-apple-withholds-ios-lgpl-webkit-source-code/