• conciselyverbose@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It wouldn’t have 5% of the market without Google, let alone anything resembling 50.

    In a hypothetical world where Google was forcibly divested of the Play Store, the CEO would be fired in less than a week if he said he wanted to keep developing Android.

    • BartsBigBugBag@lemmy.tf
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Play store revenue, while sizable, is less than a quarter of the revenue collected by their advertising business. As I said, much of the data requisite for that advertisement business’ revenue is collected from the 1 billion android devices with Google services installed. You’re saying, Google would give up the data of 1 billion people, which feeds its most profitable division, because of losing the ability to earn less than a quarter of what the advertising portion of their business brings in?

      I guess it’s an irrelevant point anyway, we don’t live in that world, but that’s an interesting perspective, and I don’t think I share it. I think Google could stop charging entirely for all Google play services and they would still develop android because it brings them hundreds of billions of dollars a year. I don’t think they will, mind you, so it’s again, an irrelevant point, but my point is, as I said above, Google Play revenues do not support the development of android, that development is supported by costs to manufacturers in licensing Google services, before a phone ever makes it into the hands of a consumer for them to buy apps in the Google Play store.