Google Is Pulling YouTube Off the Fire TV and Echo Show as Feud With Amazon Grows (theverge.com) 238
An anonymous reader shares a report: Three months ago, YouTube pulled its programming from Amazon's Echo Show device -- the first skirmish in what is apparently an ongoing war. Shortly after, Amazon stopped selling the Nest E Thermostat, Nest's Camera IQ, and the Nest Secure alarm system. Two weeks ago, Amazon got YouTube back on the Echo Show by simply directing users to the web version, a workaround that left a lot to be desired. But even that version won't be available after today. In a statement, Google said it has been trying to reach an agreement with Amazon to provide customers with access to each other's products and services. But, Google said, Amazon doesn't carry Google products like Chromecast and Google Home, doesn't make Prime Video available for Google Cast users, and last month stopped selling some of Nest's latest products. "Given this lack of reciprocity, we are no longer supporting YouTube on Echo Show and FireTV. We hope we can reach an agreement to resolve these issues soon."
And as usual (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:And as usual (Score:4, Informative)
I agree, though in this instance it does look like Amazon started it.
There's no good reason for Amazon not to sell things like Chromecasts or Google Home devices other than they don't want to concede any market-share to Google. To then want Google services on their own devices is a bit rich.
The consumer wins when there's competition. A marketplace for smart devices that doesn't end up with 95% being Echos, or 95% being homes is one that will spur innovation. It's also one that will give greater incentive for security and privacy. If/when there's a hugely dominant vendor, all incentives to improve are gone and all we're left with is how to monetize the users.
Re: (Score:3)
It appears that Google and Amazon haven't learned to compartmentalize their businesses yet.
Just look at Apple and Samsung for example. Apple is Samsung #1 competitor and one of their major customers at the same time. Because their Smart Phone Market is in competition, but Apple buys their components.
Amazon and Google can Complete against each other while at the same time sell each others services and work with them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
It sounds like Amazon is abusing their dominant market position in one market to lock out competitors in another.
Blocking Youtube is the nice way, complaints to EU/US government would cost Amazon a LOT more.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:And as usual (Score:5, Insightful)
Intentionally disabling your services on a competitors device is a dickweed move, and probably hurts Google in the long term too. How many affected consumers will be willing to purchase anything from a Google owned company after this short sighted, childish move ?
So, you are unhappy that Google will not allow Amazon devices to use Youtube, but you have no complaints that for the last several years, Amazon has not allowed Prime Video to be viewed on Chromecasts and has not sold any Chromecasts or Nests? That's rather one-sided of you.
"Intentionally disabling your services on a competitors device" is EXACTLY what Amazon has been doing for multiple years, but you only have a problem when Google does it?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I dunno, there might be some entertainment value.
Fight! Fight! Fight!
Re: (Score:2)
I keep reading about the advances in autonomous weapons platforms, and how the world's going to be over-run by swarms of 'killer robots', yet even with the resources of Google and Amazon, their idea of a turf war is 'directing users to the web version'.
Man-up guys, I want to see the home entertainment system equivalent of Robot Wars, right in my front room. Partner with DARPA, weaponize those babys up, give them some tank-trac
Re: (Score:3)
Sure, but Amazon is bullshit. Get on that website, search for a Google Home, and they offer to sell you an Alexa.
Re: (Score:2)
Nice!, just looked and the only google home stuff is a book, some mounts, and a Google WiFi range extender.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You mean the people that can't figure out how to pirate?
Re: (Score:2)
No consumers aren't harmed, because they'll just pick an ecosystem and that ecosystem is Google since Google's services are more important than Amazon's services.
That's what Google did to Windows Phone. They blocked YouTube, Gmail and Google Maps so people who were otherwise interested in Windows Phone just switched back to Android.
Amazon loses in this instance. Very few people care about prime video. Nearly everybody cares about YouTube. The consumers are fine because they won't buy an Echo Show, they'
Re: (Score:2)
Cough, cough but if you are getting hurt being caught in the middle, simply step to one side and let the morons go at it, who cares. Amazon want to be dicks, simply stop using them. Google want to be control freaks than https://duckduckgo.com/?q=amaz... [duckduckgo.com] or https://duckduckgo.com/?q=ebay... [duckduckgo.com].
The only sound consumer response, what to control freak dicks, fine, fuck off and use some one else. Sure maybe takes a little getting used to swapping to say https://duckduckgo.com/?q=duck... [duckduckgo.com] but it works well enough an
Re: And as usual (Score:5, Insightful)
A Chromecast is the google equivalent of your fire stick thingy.
I have a Chromecast, and I have Amazon prime. But I never actually watch anything on Prime Video because their damn app won't cast to the Chromecast.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Oh man, don't get me started on the Amazon Prime Video app. I use a Roku, and the app for Amazon Prime Video is one of the worst interfaces I have ever seen for any application on any platform. It doesn't respond to most keypresses, the pause and fast forward are broken, it crashes the Roku at least once a week and you have to set subtitles separately for eac
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
I have a Roku 4 HD. All the other video apps work fine. What's wrong with Amazon. Also, it's not the hardware's problem that Amazon doesn't retain my subtitle settings from episode to episode in the same show.
But I will try resetting my Roku again to see if I can get it performing better. Since yesterday, it no longer shows any of the thumbnails in the Amazon Prime app.
Re: And as usual (Score:2)
It's hit and miss; my mother has one of those set-top android boxes, so I installed the Prime Video app on it for her with my credentials. Seems to work just fine that way; she gets plenty of use out of it, so at least one of us gets to enjoy it.
Maybe it's just the casting on it that's problematic.
Re: And as usual (Score:2)
I'm aware of those possibilities, but they're such horrible workarounds that I feel dirty just contemplating the idea. If Amazon is deliberately going to keep their service incompatible with Google products, I don't feel any great desire to use them. I can always just grab their content from torrent sites.
Re: (Score:2)
Google want Amazon to sell their Chromecast [google.com] which allows users to stream video/audio to televisions/speakers. A bit like the Fire Stick, but without any build-in applications. You "cast' from your phone/laptop and, under typical use, once cast it no longer requires any input from that device.
Re: (Score:2)
I ended up getting the FireTV boxes....the sticks just weren't powerful enough.
I mostly get my "cable channels" thought Playstation VUE, and on older Roku, or firesticks, they just couldn't seem to handle the guide that PS VUE has for scanning channel guide and seeing what all is one for hours, etc.
I couldn't imagine that the chrome stick would be a powerful enough processor....
But yeah, I can't see why A
Re: (Score:2)
it is like a FireTV stick, but you use your phone as a remote with the chromecast thing...?
Yes. When paired with Plex [www.plex.tv], it's a good way to watch downloaded video.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm wanting to figure how to build my own Linux Plex server, but I only really want it to keep my high end FLAC rips so I can stream lossless audio to my living room stereo.
Re: (Score:2)
FireTV wasn't a thing when I got my Chromecast. I bought it on Amazon. I can't defend it against the alternatives; since it meets all my needs I've never looked further. I'm fortunate enough not no need lossless audio; I'm not good enough to tell the difference after I've compressed down to 192kbs.
Re: (Score:2)
I *love* my chromecast's
Every HDMI enabled device has one in my house.
Ultimately I caved and bought a FireStick for Prime video because I couldn't cast Prime to Chromecast. I felt dirty doing it because I knew I was enabling this petty-assed war, but damnit I wanted to see GT on my TV easily.
All that said, Amazon started this feud, and hopefully Google prevails. I honestly believe that Google should allow Youtube to FireTV devices, but set all the ads to unskippable *and* make sure there is a 15 second ad
Plex... meh (Score:2)
I tried Plex, didn't like it and stayed with serviio. [serviio.org]
It has some annoyances, but has been working for me for years. We mainly stream videos from my server to computers and TVs via Rokus. Works like a charm.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Hmm..so, it is like a FireTV stick, but you use your phone as a remote with the chromecast thing...?
The Chromecast offers a significantly inferior user experience (in my opinion) when compared to the FireTV stick.
When you control your FireTV stick with the remote control, you're navigating a UI and have full control. You might even find that your TV remote can control actions such as pause, play, next and back.
With the Chromecast, there is no UI and there is no remote control. You use compatible apps on your phone/tablet, such as YouTube/Netflix etc, to find content. Then you press a button to 'cast' to t
Re: (Score:2)
I get why you're calling it inferior, but I would argue it's such an orthogonal design that it isn't the same class.
Chromecast offers what has to be the most minimalist interface possible. Dead simple, pretty darn reliable, and *very* feature light.
FireTV devices offer a more STB type experience, and try to be feature rich.
I like them both, depending on the user and desired interaction level. Expect lots of pause and resume? FireTV. Launch the stream and not planning on pausing, even if I need to do some
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:And as usual (Score:5, Insightful)
Roku is the perfect example of a content delivery platform that is NOT compromised by also being a content provider. It is also why we need Net Neutrality. If ISPs can also be content providers, this whole Amazon-Google spat will affect everything you ever want to see based on who your ISP is.
Re: (Score:2)
Except if you are in Canada. We just got Prime Video a year ago. Amazon WILL NOT release a Roku app in Canada (it's not Roku, it's Amazon that provides the app). So, no Chromecast support, no Roku support. It seems Amazon doesn't want me to watch their service. Fine.
I'm not buying a FireTV device.
Not sure I can support Amazon Prime anymore.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree that the Roku is a good investment.
But I'm secretly hoping that Amazon and Google both obliterate each other and take Facebook down with them. Then we can start fresh.
Re: (Score:2)
Get a Roku. It gets YouTube. It gets Amazon Prime. It gets HBO, Starz, Hulu, etc. Anything you have a subscription to already.
One thing I can't see, can it play network content from a NAS? The website seems to focus mainly on streaming aspects.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
For two years I was denied access of my Ultraviolet collection on the FireTV because Vudo wasnt allowed on the FireTV and eventually Flixster (streaming in SD) was removed from the lineup as well. It wasn't until October, when Disney's Movies Anywhere ecosystem took off and I can now see my entire digital movies collection with their app (and amazingly enough it also shows up in my amazon video library too). So I don't think they care about disrupting anyone's ecosystem. Now I find myself; once again, turni
Re: (Score:2)
This is exactly the kind of nonsense with "packages" that got people wanting to cut the cord in the first place. This show is only in the FireTV package, but that one is only in the Chromecast package. Soon, your TV looks like a porcupine with all those things sticking out of it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: There's a difference.. (Score:3)
Remember that this began with Amazon banning the sale of hardware devices that competed with its own products, including Apple TV.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Though since Amazon has Amazon Kindle and (years late) Prime Video on Android, that theory seems unlikely.
Re: (Score:2)
Too bad YouTube is a separate entity (YouTube LLC) that does not sell hardware products. It's almost as if this is an antitrust violating "contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States," rather than independent decision of one organization to boycott another...
Re: (Score:2)
You're thinking Copperweld [justia.com] inability to conspire. The problem is, Eastman Kodak [justia.com] violations are a section 1 violation, the separate and independent nature is relevant to impermissible product tying, and the attempted conspiracy is between the intra-enterprise actor (Google/YouTube) and the unwilling target (Amazon).
Thanks for playing "I did not study antritrust law and it shows."
Re: (Score:2)
.. between not supporting and actively blocking. If Google intentionally changed their code specifically to block Amazon's hardware, that is not okay.
They seemingly did it to Microsoft without people raising a stink.
Re: (Score:2)
you mean like Amazon intentionally blocking their Prime TV app on all android TV/Cast devices but no other Android devices?
Can't install, can't sideload, nothing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A chance to screw over two blue states... he will compromise.
Re: (Score:2)
the fact that these products are part of a different line of business but the anti-competition behavior is being waged on an entirely different business (amazon store, kindle app store, etc) goes far and long in support of the criteria of a Trust. This pissing match proves, without a shadow of a doubt, that they are using their enormous power base to harm consumers for their own financial gains.
Re: (Score:2)
Anti-consumer (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Anti-consumer (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think it's really anti-consumer (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
f you successful do that on your HTPC google will take what steps they can to prevent you from getting the content they host.
YouTube has ads?
Re: (Score:2)
Came here to say this. I just use an old laptop: Netflix, Amazon, and YouTube all work. However, Netflix is on my shit list because they won't stream 4K to the browser, only to the stupid proprietary boxes. Anyone have a work-around?
Let the balkanzation begin. (Score:2)
Amazon took Twitch off of Roku, Everyone wants their own exclusive outlet.
Ajit must be thrilled.
Re: (Score:2)
I can see it now...
"Welcome to Amazon Video for Chromecast! You can now start watching all your favorite Amazon shows, ad free, with your low subscription price of $9.99/month*.
Want even more value? Add a subscription to Amazon for iPhone or Roku! We offer attractive multi-device discounts - the more devices, the greater the savings! You can watch Amazon Video on three different platforms for the low, low price of $25.99/month. Four devices is only $31.99 monthly!
Thank you for being an Amazon Video customer
Their loss. (Score:2)
We can always sideload, but for regular consumers, this means less Amazon Fire TV sales, less reasons to get an Echo Show, and more complaints thrown at both companies.
I... just don't care. Saw this shit coming ages ago with Google's problems with making Windows Mobile apps. I also noticed inherent limitations of casting dongles and just decided to pull a cable from the desktop directly to the living room TV.
As for Echo Show... heh, that's something I'll never buy, so.
Re: (Score:2)
Build the walls! (Score:2)
These gardens wont segregate themselves.
Re: (Score:2)
Monopoly and anti-competitive? (Score:2)
A service I can see freely on any PC and nearly any device is now being blocked on certain devices from a certain company. So much for an open internet, we're moving to vertical stack monopolies and soon into internet isolationism.
Everybody is focused on net neutrality (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, you can't fight City Hall, ya know!
I'm not really into YouTube much (Score:2)
I'll just say my two cents here. I'm not sure how many people are like me here but YouTube doesn't really appeal to me much anymore. I just don't see it having "good" content. Maybe CGP Grey and Kurzgesagt but that's about the end of it. Even then those two aren't regular publishers and leaving them alone for a year and then coming back, I can watch everything they've done in the in between in one sitting.
There's not really much a point to trying to "discover" anything on YouTube, because the vast major
Re: (Score:2)
Nah, things like Colbert, Daily Show, Morning Show, etc, are all on YouTube if you can stand to watch with a little delay. I always start out the night with Youtube to catch up the days news and commentary, and the previous nights laughs. Then I might go looking for something interesting on Netflix. If there's nothing there, I then need decide whether I want to look for something on Amazon and stay in the living room thanks to the Roku, or check out Apples offerings on their little black box in my bedroom.
I
Re: (Score:2)
For me, it's about music. We listen (not watch) to tons of music via YouTube through a Roku.
And, having 7 year olds, we watch fucking cat videos. For the record we have two cats and they are pretty awesome.
Shameless self promotion, here's a cool time lapse dash cam video I put together with a basic guitar bit I wrote, sunrise during a rural-to-urban drive:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
That's what I use it for. Also have the videos of a band practice from the early 90s out there, nostalgic. Shotgun ag
Re: (Score:2)
Simple Obvious Solution (Score:2)
Right now, since Roku is not a content provider, merely content delivery, they manage to deliver pretty much any content you have a paid subscription for. For example, both YouTube and Amazon Prime. And HBO, Starz, Hulu, etc.
Changing "channels" will be using the input selector to select which "stick" or "box" to use. Disg
Not net neutrality, but an indicator of effects (Score:3)
Though not a net neutrality battle, this is similar and, sadly, allowed by regulations to proceed.
Amazon is the overwhelming leader in the online retail market. They have chosen to become a provider of devices that they sell, thus competing with the retailers who use them to reach a large portion of the market. Google is the closest competitor to some of their devices, so they took advantage of their position and locked them out.
How is this different in nature from what can happen when ISPs that are regional monopolies merge with content providers and there is no net neutrality regulation in place? Do we really think the ISPs' content providers won't be given a leg up on other content providers? How long before the first competitor is blocked by an ISP?
At least when Amazon flexes muscle, we can go to Walmart or some other online retailer. In my area, we only have alleged competition to Spectrum.
The details of the actual feud (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Also the CEO Susan is the most under-qualified person to run a giant company in the entirety of the US, including non-english speakers, the mentally unstable, and non-human animals.
Careful, no matter how accurate your comments are the SJWs will automatically lump you in the sexist category and harass you in the name of the greater good.
Only one thing to say (Score:4, Funny)
Begun, the Tube Wars have.
Problem is vertical integration (Score:5, Insightful)
In the 1980s Microsoft had no presence in the productivity suite market (word processor, spreadsheet, etc). They used their dominance of the PC operating system market to steer the dominant companies (WordPerfect, Lotus) towards creating OS/2 versions in preparation for phasing out DOS, all the while assuring them that OS/2 was the future. Meanwhile they secretly worked their own productivity apps (Word and Excel) to run on what became Windows. Then suddenly they announced they were dissolving their relationship with IBM, pulling support from OS/2, and Windows was the future. WordPerfect and Lotus were caught flat-footed, but Microsoft said not to worry - you can buy our productivity apps which will work with Windows.
Later they repeated this with Stacker (automatic file compression) and Internet Explorer, packaging those with Windows to drive the competition (Stacker and Netscape) out of business so they could dominate those markets.
Today we're suffering from it with the data transport companies (Internet and cellular data service providers) (ab)using their position to influence other markets that they don't dominate (having to buy cell phone from branded or authorized stores to be sure it'll work with your carrier, holding up Android updates so they can "customize" it to their satisfaction, cable set-top boxes before the government mandated Cable Cards, Internet fast lanes, etc).
In all cases, it's just companies trying to leverage their dominant position in one market to a dominant in another. This is more of the same. Amazon using its dominant position as online retailer to influence how you use the products you buy (whether they be FireTV or Chromecast). Google using its dominant position in user-created video content (YouTube) to as leverage to try to get Amazon to behave.
The whole thing would be a lot simpler if companies were prohibited from certain types of vertical integration. If Microsoft had been split into an OS company and software company, both Windows and Office would've had to compete on their own merits. (In fact they refused to release Office apps for Android/iOS until it was clear that Windows Phone was a failure. Likewise if ISPs weren't allowed to sell or provide media services (and likewise Cable companies weren't allowed to provide Internet service - only sell access to other companies which provided Internet service), then none of this net neutrality/Internet fast lanes BS would be happening. And if Amazon were only allowed to act as an online store, their primary goal would be to support all hardware platforms without bias or prejudice and this problem would never be happening.
Oh geez (Score:3)
All I want is a box to plug into my TV to watch my media. I don't want to have to worry about who I bought the media from.
Currently, I have an Apple TV. I'm fine if my Music stays apple-only, but since Apple Music is available for Android, I feel like that's portable enough. Which leaves me with video.
I do Netflix, Amazon, and Apple. I used to do Youtube on the Apple TV, and still can (last I checked) by running the app on my phone and streaming THAT to my Apple TV.
There is no combination of devices that allows me to play all 3 vendors' material. Roku might be the closest.
I think these giants are all dropping the ball here, and perhaps they oughtn't not be the ones selling the media. Why can't the studios sell media licenses directly, so that if I buy a WB or Miramax movie, I can play it on ANY device with a WB or Miramax player, which they could then develop for Roku, Apple, Amazon, Google, etc. I guess that's the Model HBO is taking actually. I'm just sick of these disputes, where Company X wants to make money from selling someone elses content, and therefor moves to cripple its competitor by NOT letting it play the same content (even though that content is available for it on another App), etc.
It's just getting beyond frustrating, for us consumers.
I'd say follow Apple's lead and make the money off your hardware, but given that Apple won't let Amazon onto the Apple TV unless they get their slice of in-app purchases, that's not the way either.
These movie studios need to realize that consumers would be happy as hell to buy from them without the middle man, and wind up with media purchases that are portable across platforms. That seems like the only real solution.
Re: (Score:3)
I do Netflix, Amazon, and Apple. I used to do Youtube on the Apple TV, and still can (last I checked) by running the app on my phone and streaming THAT to my Apple TV.
What? I have an Apple TV 3 and Apple TV 4. Youtube is a built-in app, you don't need to stream it from the phone. You do need to stream the Amazon Video from the iPhone to Apple TV until Amazon releases their app (which Amazon promised will be this year, hahahaha).
Ironic (Score:2)
The irony of Google telling us we need net neutrality. Isn't this almost exactly what Google is saying internet providers should be forbidden from doing?
Good for Competition (Score:2)
There is a long history here.... (Score:2)
Amazon at one point entered the search engine business.....google started to cancel some of the ads that Amazon used to buy for paid search.
Than Amazon wanted to create its own version of android and app store, but google told app developers they would be penalized if they uploaded their apps to both the Amazon appstore and Google's playstore. Now, every amazon tablet has to be hacked to run google play in order to have decent apps. Amazon's still pissed about that as it ruined a lot of their hardware pl
Re: (Score:3)
Amazon is not an ISP and Google is not using their ISP unit, Google Fiber, to block Amazon. This has nothing to do with Net Neutrality.
Re: (Score:2)
They're both for Net Neutrality. But they're also both for the DCMA act, which allows them to pull this stuff.
Let's not forget, both Amazon and Google don't have their applications on Apple TV. Which is incredibly lame, since they both have free downloads for iOS, which is what Apple TV runs, a variant of it at least. But they both said "F the customers". They have no problem offering their apps on the iPhone, but won't offer the same exact apps for Apple TV unless they can get different terms. It's only us
Re: (Score:3)
I've heard many times that this war was over.... we'll see.
No end in sight [theverge.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Two monopolies?
You Keep Using That Word, I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means...
Re: (Score:2)
Well I'm not sure Amazon's search is really a major player. (actually I can't even find the site to put a link, have they been shut down?)
Re: (Score:2)
Google has monopolistic control of search, and has also effectively has a monopoly on cat videos if the latest video stats are anything to go by.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, Amazon on the other hand, is now the overwhelmingly dominant force in retail, not just crushing all other online retailers, but are being fingered for the steady decline of meatspace retail as well.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not buying a Google device. Although I much prefer having youtube than not, I already have small libraries in both Amazon and Apple, I'm not about to add a third entity.
Re: (Score:3)
There's a caucophany of others.
It's like the early '2000's all over again, when Microsoft was pushing its own "standards" and "services" (that it was wholly in control of).
The only difference is now, it's Google creating the "standard", and instead of paying for licenses, companies have to give up their right to sue for IP violations (on their own patents).
Google is great at making something "open source", and then making any community (or external) involvement pointless. Take AoSP, where it's "open source"
Re: (Score:2)
Welcome to Y2K!
The players have changed, but the game has not!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: How is this even possible? (Score:2)
Just how many virgins girls are you going to exsanguinate to live that long?