Google paid Apple $1B bribe

On 1/22/2016 10:38 PM, Rich A wrote:
http://phys.org/news/2016-01-google-...n-iphones.html


So every tenant pays the landlord a bribe.
I am not an Appleseed, but your anti Apple posting, is a disgusting
misrepresentation of a rational business decision.
Candidly, I can't decide whether you or nospam have the greater need for
attention.

--
PeterN

On 1/23/2016 1:11 PM, RichA wrote:
On Friday, 22 January 2016 22:57:19 UTC-5, peterN wrote:
On 1/22/2016 10:38 PM, Rich A wrote:
http://phys.org/news/2016-01-google-...n-iphones.html


So every tenant pays the landlord a bribe.
I am not an Appleseed, but your anti Apple posting, is a disgusting
misrepresentation of a rational business decision.
Candidly, I can't decide whether you or nospam have the greater need for
attention.

--
PeterN

And yet Microsoft had numerous court challenges brought against it just for having its own browser exclusive to Windows.

And your point is?
You were talking about Apple. Stick to the point.

--
PeterN

On 1/23/16 12:11 PM, in article
, "RichA"
wrote:

On Friday, 22 January 2016 22:57:19 UTC-5, peterN wrote:
On 1/22/2016 10:38 PM, Rich A wrote:
http://phys.org/news/2016-01-google-...n-iphones.html


So every tenant pays the landlord a bribe.
I am not an Appleseed, but your anti Apple posting, is a disgusting
misrepresentation of a rational business decision.
Candidly, I can't decide whether you or nospam have the greater need for
attention.

--
PeterN

And yet Microsoft had numerous court challenges brought against it just for
having its own browser exclusive to Windows.

Because it was such a piece of **** no one else wanted it.

On 2016-01-23 21:24:10 +0000, RichA said:

On Saturday, 23 January 2016 14:09:24 UTC-5, peterN wrote:
On 1/23/2016 1:11 PM, RichA wrote:
On Friday, 22 January 2016 22:57:19 UTC-5, peterN wrote:
On 1/22/2016 10:38 PM, Rich A wrote:
http://phys.org/news/2016-01-google-...n-iphones.html


So every tenant pays the landlord a bribe.
I am not an Appleseed, but your anti Apple posting, is a disgusting
misrepresentation of a rational business decision.
Candidly, I can't decide whether you or nospam have the greater need for
attention.

--
PeterN

And yet Microsoft had numerous court challenges brought against it just
for having its own browser exclusive to Windows.

And your point is?
You were talking about Apple. Stick to the point.

--
PeterN

It's the same thing, attempting to restrict or heavily influence user's
choice of browser.

Then bypass the deal and just use Chrome.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 10:11:10 -0800 (PST), RichA
wrote:

On Friday, 22 January 2016 22:57:19 UTC-5, peterN wrote:
On 1/22/2016 10:38 PM, Rich A wrote:
http://phys.org/news/2016-01-google-...n-iphones.html


So every tenant pays the landlord a bribe.
I am not an Appleseed, but your anti Apple posting, is a disgusting
misrepresentation of a rational business decision.
Candidly, I can't decide whether you or nospam have the greater need for
attention.

--
PeterN

And yet Microsoft had numerous court challenges brought against it just for having its own browser exclusive to Windows.

That wasn't at all why they were taken to court.

They were taken to court for making the browser as an integral part of
the Windows operating system and effectively selling it for nothing.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

And yet Microsoft had numerous court challenges brought against it just for
having its own browser exclusive to Windows.

That wasn't at all why they were taken to court.

They were taken to court for making the browser as an integral part of
the Windows operating system and effectively selling it for nothing.

they were taken to court for abuse of their monopoly position.

bundling and giving away a browser that's tightly tied to microsoft's
own server software fits that description.

On 1/23/16 PDT 6:13 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 10:11:10 -0800 (PST), RichA
wrote:

On Friday, 22 January 2016 22:57:19 UTC-5, peterN wrote:
On 1/22/2016 10:38 PM, Rich A wrote:
http://phys.org/news/2016-01-google-...n-iphones.html


So every tenant pays the landlord a bribe.
I am not an Appleseed, but your anti Apple posting, is a disgusting
misrepresentation of a rational business decision.
Candidly, I can't decide whether you or nospam have the greater need for
attention.

--
PeterN

And yet Microsoft had numerous court challenges brought against it just for having its own browser exclusive to Windows.

That wasn't at all why they were taken to court.

They were taken to court for making the browser as an integral part of
the Windows operating system and effectively selling it for nothing.

Not to mention scewing around with the OS to make other browsers seem to
misbehave.