Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google To Devs: Use Our Payment System Or Be Dropped

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the company-store dept.

Businesses 305

Meshach writes "Google has been pressuring applications and mobile game developers to use its costlier in-house payment service, Google Wallet for quite some time. Now Google warned several developers in recent months that if they continued to use other payment methods — such as PayPal, Zong and Boku — their apps would be removed from Google Play. The move is seen as a way to cut costs for Google by using their own system."

cancel ×

305 comments

Open (-1, Redundant)

kthreadd (1558445) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298439)

It will be interesting to see what comes out of this.

Re:Open (3, Funny)

busyqth (2566075) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298455)

This is awesome because Google is awesome.
If Google says it's the right way to go, it's gotta be the best.

Re:Open (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39298523)

Goooogle-dooby doo!

Google Wallet vs PayPal (5, Insightful)

Taco Cowboy (5327) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298811)

I've used both Google Wallet and I've used PayPal

And I've used other online payment services

I find Google Wallet a little bit more "friendly" to the user. PayPal, which I've used for years and years, has become more and more, how should I say - arrogant

Re:Google Wallet vs PayPal (2, Insightful)

shiftless (410350) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298903)

I find Google Wallet a little bit more "friendly" to the user. PayPal, which I've used for years and years, has become more and more, how should I say - arrogant

Yes--arrogant in exactly the same way as Google is being right now.

Google is evil.

Re:Google Wallet vs PayPal (5, Informative)

Taco Cowboy (5327) | more than 2 years ago | (#39299139)

I find Google Wallet a little bit more "friendly" to the user. PayPal, which I've used for years and years, has become more and more, how should I say - arrogant

Yes--arrogant in exactly the same way as Google is being right now

First of all, let me state it here that I do not work for Google

In the case that we are talking about, Google is basically telling the devs that if they want to remain listed on Google Play they should at least accept Google Wallet as one of the payment options

While I do find it kinda arrogant, I do understand where Google is coming from - after all, Google, being the host, ought to have a chance to get something out of hosting all those apps

In other words, Google's arrogance is still within the acceptable range

On the other hand, PayPal has, on more than one occasion, being extremely arrogant, to the extent to being, shall I say, rude

There have been cases where PayPal shuts down accounts of entities that they do not agree with

If those entities engaged in illegal activities, such as supporting terrorist organizations, or selling cocaine to the minor, then I would have no qualm for PayPal shutting down their accounts

But there are other cases where PayPal shutting down the accounts belong to groups which do not see eye to eye with the government of America - such as WikiLeaks

I am not saying that WikiLeaks is an angle or something - but PayPal's shut down of WikiLeaks account mean that they are not allowing PayPal users like me to contribute ***OUR OWN MONEY*** to organizations that we think are doing a good job

That, my friend, is TRUE arrogance

Re:Google Wallet vs PayPal (4, Interesting)

sixtyeight (844265) | more than 2 years ago | (#39299125)

PayPal is in the middle of their third class-action lawsuit for making it easy to start using their service, then freezing your account, demanding all sorts of identifying info they'd never said up-front they'd need (a utility bill that "must be in your name"? I don't get one.) and demanding that you justify to them all the transactions you've been involved with. Meanwhile, they're earning interest off of all the funds that have been frozen.

A California court ruled ages ago that they cannot include the term in their EULA stipulating that customers agree not to have access to a real court, and must instead seek resolution through an internal Dispute Resolution Team comprised of PayPal's employees, whose word is "final". The term remains in their EULA despite the court decision that it would mislead customers into thinking they didn't have access to a real court anymore.

Google has major connections with In-Q-Tel, the CIA's corporate investment arm. When the CIA wants to market technologies it has developed with taxpayer money, it puts them on the private market through In-Q-Tel. The CIA's Keyhole technology became known to us as... Google Earth. Facebook also has serious In-Q-Tel connections. There appears to be a lot of these companies working with the Information Awareness Office, who openly states its efforts to compile online information online on citizens in a centralized government database. Note that Google has placed itself as the free information service leader. Put your contacts list, your spreadsheets, and anything else you've got on Google's various free services. How convenient.

Google's "Don't be evil." slogan hearkens back to the Bohemian Grove's ("Weaving spiders come not here") as well as a rich, ancient tradition of invoking evil and other dark, malevolent symbols by attaching the concept of "not" to them and calling it good. This has been done for centuries in magickal lore and storytelling, using charms against various nasty things as a means of invoking that specific thing in a socially-acceptable way. Magickally, you call upon something by invoking the concept - and specifying "not [this]" is as much an invocation as saying "[this]". Among those who use this convention, it becomes a subtle form of calling card and social identifier to one another. It's been used for centuries.

mod +1, actually quoted the correct slogan (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39299277)

BTW,

"Among those who use this convention, it becomes a subtle form of calling card and social identifier to one another. It's been used for centuries."

Does this mean Christine O`Donnell really is a witch?

Re:Open (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39298747)

Apart from obvious irony here, will they punish those who use bicoins for selling products too?

Re:Open (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39298771)

People who accept bitcoins punish themselves.

Re:Open (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39299079)

No, Google feels they are allready punishing themselves enough.

Re:Open (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39298459)

If it leads to an alternative to paypal, then I'm all for it.

Re:Open (2, Insightful)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298571)

The alternative was already there.
If the alternative were better, you'd have already known this.

Re:Open (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39298613)

The only advantage PayPal had over Google was that it's global. Unless Google can get the services licensed as widely as PayPal, it's not going to be able to compete with PayPal.

But, I don't think this is going to be an issue as Google Play isn't globally available.

Re:Open (3, Informative)

kdemetter (965669) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298853)

The main reason I use Paypal , is because it that allows bank transfers. I don't have a credit card.
All the other systems I've seen ( including Google Wallet from what I've seen ) require a credit card.

Re:Open (0)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298887)

That's what virtual CCs are for. Doesn't your bank offer them?

Re:Open (2)

Vernes (720223) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298629)

This is not true.
If something is better, eventually you would already know this.
People in Marketing can explain this better then me.

Re:Open (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39298825)

LIke Beta, for instance.

Re:Open (1)

outsider007 (115534) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298685)

Exactly. This isn't about alternatives, it's about blocking alternatives. Also wth is a Zong or a Boku? Is it like a Flooz?

Re:Open (1, Insightful)

philip.paradis (2580427) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298617)

It will be interesting to see what comes out of this.

With the subject "Open" no less. Honestly, your post contributed absolutely nothing of value to the conversation, and one can only surmise that you're trolling for points for mods who are suffering from chronic sleep deprivation. I sincerely hope any mods viewing this will mod the OP into oblivion.

Re:Open (0)

kthreadd (1558445) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298671)

Ehm, ok.

I still think however that it will be interesting to follow the outcome of this since Android is marketed as being open with more or less no control or involvement from its authors. If Google starts enforcing control over third party applications then what will the next step be? Android is open at its core but it could be that Android as a whole is going toward being somewhat locked-down.

Re:Open (4, Informative)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298843)

Android is open. Google Play (formerly Android Market) isn't, and never was. But no one is forced to use their market to provide and install apps.

Re:Open (0)

kthreadd (1558445) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298933)

So basically "Android" is open but almost no one actually uses it, in it's true sense.

Re:Open (4, Insightful)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298977)

I don't think the market you use has anything to do with whether Android is open or not, as long as you're not locked to that market. I mean, is Debian not open because I can't force them to put applications that don't comply with the DFSG on the main repository?

Re:Open (0)

kthreadd (1558445) | more than 2 years ago | (#39299001)

Good point!

Re:Open (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39299043)

Maybe kthreadd really meant to say... "So, It has come to this."

Not everyone can use it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39298445)

AFAIK developers from Poland can't link their dev accounts with ad words (or whatever) nor with wallet. Sometimes topics about that pop here and there where devs cry about this. Google of course doesn't give shit about them and now this? Weird.

Re:Not everyone can use it (3, Interesting)

Serpents (1831432) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298491)

Not only that but it's likely to violate EU competition laws.

Re:Not everyone can use it (0)

Nerdfest (867930) | more than 2 years ago | (#39299099)

And iTunes doesn't? Strange that they've gotten away with it for this long when Google allows alternative markets and Apple doesn't.

Re:Not everyone can use it (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | more than 2 years ago | (#39299131)

My apologies, I forgot about the "doesn't work in Poland" part. It does seem silly to force them to switch to a payment system that they can't use, but I still doubt it would be considered ant-competitive. It's basically telling developers from some countries that we don't want or need your software in our store. Common, and perhaps stupid, but not anti-competitive.

Where voluntary isn't voluntary. (2, Insightful)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298449)

While you're free to make an app with any payment system you want, using anything but Google's own results in you being cut off from nearly all of the Android audience.

If there's a clear example of "force by practicality", here is one front and center.

Re:Where voluntary isn't voluntary. (5, Informative)

thegarbz (1787294) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298759)

False. You're cut off from no-one.

I have yet to see an Android phone (in my country anyway) which doesn't feature a simple checkbox that allows you to install apps that didn't come from the market.
I have seen several Android phones out of the box which feature more than one market installed on the system (though admittedly they somewhat suck).
I have seen several alternative markets (Amazon included here) which are incredibly capable as almost a complete replacement of the Google Market, or Play or whatever they've changed it to.

Admittedly practicality here may be the key argument, but hey you are going to a 3rd party to host, advertise, collect feedback, and manage updates for your apps it's not such a hard rule to abide by.

Also as someone who vehemently hates PayPal, anything that works against it gets the thumbs up from me :-)

Re:Where voluntary isn't voluntary. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39298789)

I fail to see how this is any different to Apples payment system? Surely they also charge devs a percentage for distributing an app on the market?

Does anyone make money with Google? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39298935)

My experience of Google market is that only free-apps works there, and the only free apps making money are like 'Dynamite Dan'. DD has you tapping all over the screen and occasionally it places an advert up, so you tap it by mistake. That's how I think it makes money by making a free game that teaches you to tap adverts as part of the game, then placing adverts up when your in tap-tap mode.

I tried Samsung App Store, which is great right now because apps are vetted and competition is limited, but its only for a few markets like the UK. People buy because the apps are likely to have a minimum quality, and there's a trust of Samsung because they bought the handset from them.

Amazon sounds like a rip off for app developers, but I may try it out of desperation.

I think people want to be in Google market, but when you actually look at the money, I bet few of them are making any worthwhile money from it.

Google's payment options (4, Interesting)

sixtyeight (844265) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298453)

For all the good that Google is supposedly trying to do, this begs a question I've been wondering for quite a while.

Why don't they implement a Payment API for developers? People could then use all sorts of services, from PayPal to BitCoin to pay to Google, and be paid by them. Google doesn't implement all the extant services out there because if it implemented a few of them, it would be considered responsible for implementing all of them. But it would make sense to enable developers to do so, and customers to use them.

Or so it seemed. They appear to be more interested in restricting payment types in order to increase their margins. If this is so, it will diminish their user-base as this sort of thing comes out. Granted, they've found innovative economies of scale that have allowed them to do things it would be difficult for others to do as cheaply - which appears to be something they're now leveraging to put unfair leverage on the marketplace. A lack of effective competition becomes a monopolization.

Re:Google's payment options (1)

emurphy42 (631808) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298487)

According to TFA, it's because "how do you want to pay for this?" is one more opportunity for the user to stop and think "meh, I don't, really". (But this could be mitigated by letting you set up a default method.)

Re:Google's payment options (1)

sixtyeight (844265) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298527)

Yeah, it's such an odd mentality: Refuse to make it easy for people to pay, in an effort to make their services an impulse aisle.

Do the majority of people really think like this? Money just flies out of their pockets because they habitually purchase things they don't actually want? I can get how that would disturb companies like Google, or site owners for that matter, but only if they fear that what they have isn't really of value. Seems to be costing them sales.

bull.. (3, Insightful)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298567)

It's just about getting a cut of the sales.
That's the ONLY thing this is about.

it can be wrapped in 7 layers of bullshit, but that's still what this is about in the end.

sure, it's an attack on paypal, on facebook credits etc. but that's only means to an end which is getting a cut of your purchases.

I'm pretty sure they won't extend this to banking apps though!

Re:Google's payment options (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39298513)

For all the good that Google is supposedly trying to do, this begs a question I've been wondering for quite a while.

Raises a question

Re:Google's payment options (1)

sixtyeight (844265) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298663)

Ah. Thank you. [wikipedia.org]

Re:Google's payment options (0)

flimflammer (956759) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298583)

It doesn't beg a question at all.

Re:Google's payment options (2)

sixtyeight (844265) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298643)

It doesn't beg a question at all.

Why is that? We have a theory, and we see them deliberately attempting to emulate Apple's [financial] success by locking in their customer base. We may think we know, but for most people it's still an open question.

They might think differently if they knew of Google's close association with In-Q-Tel, the CIA's corporate investment arm. But they don't, and it's more civilized to ask a question than rush to infer someone's intentional guilt.

Re:Google's payment options (1)

flimflammer (956759) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298653)

Grammar nuance. It raises a question; it doesn't beg a question. http://begthequestion.info/ [begthequestion.info]

Re:Google's payment options (0)

Racemaniac (1099281) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298751)

i'd say welcome to the fact that languages evolve...

Re:Google's payment options (0)

VortexCortex (1117377) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298823)

i'd say welcome to the fact that languages evolve...

On the contrary. I'd say it's just proof that people hear phrases then use them later without actually knowing what they mean. Ergo: de-evolution via ignorance.

Re:Google's payment options (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39299263)

That's actually how language has always evolved.

Re:Google's payment options (1)

outsider007 (115534) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298831)

And I'd reply welcome to the fact that grammar trolls do not...

Re:Google's payment options (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39298877)

Every instance of someone getting grammar wrong doesn't mean the language just evolved to make it acceptable. Begging the question being used as raising the question is wrong no matter which way you spin it. Same with phrases like "could care less". It's not remotely the same thing as the word "gay" changing meanings. People are just wrong on the internet.

Re:Google's payment options (2)

Racemaniac (1099281) | more than 2 years ago | (#39299071)

to me it seems that "begging the question" can just have another interpretation, which is now used as an alternative to raising the question.
you're right that it's (currently) not correct, but if enough people think it's logical, and keep on using it, it can very well become a new meaning of "begging the question"
So i'm not so sure on this one, i'm not a native english speaker, so it's hard for me too judge, and while it is a wrong usage, it seems logical from where i stand :p. wrong or not, i could very well see it become mainstream :).

Re:Google's payment options (1)

kenshin33 (1694322) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298899)

Not to be pedant or anything, but did you mean semantic nuance?

Re:Google's payment options (1)

Ornedan (1093745) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298705)

It raises the question. To beg a question is a different thing.

Re:Google's payment options (1)

nyctopterus (717502) | more than 2 years ago | (#39299087)

Yes it does, pedants insistence on a poor translation of a confusing latin phrase notwithstanding. Give up.

Whatever works (1)

MrDoh! (71235) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298463)

As much as it'd be good to have the choice, I've had nothing but trouble using non-Google methods. Paypal's been an absolute bust getting an in app purchase working, 4 purchases, not worked once. At least it's tied together and easier (now) to get refunds from Google if there are problems.

How am I supposed to feel about this? (1)

Elbereth (58257) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298469)

The lack of editorializing has left me confused on how I'm supposed to feel about this story. If only Timothy had posted this story, with some kind of snarky one-liner that clearly told me whether this was a good thing or bad thing!

Seriously, I've written a few posts critical of Google in the past year, as my own patience with them has waned. I've even been called an anti-Google shill. But I can not understand why I'm supposed to care about the minutiae of the inner workings of the behind-the-scenes operations of Google Wallet / Google Play.

Re:How am I supposed to feel about this? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39298473)

Linux rocks!
Android is Linux, therefore Android rocks!
Google also rocks!
Apple EVIL!
Did I say that Linux rocks?

Re:How am I supposed to feel about this? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39298543)

Linux rocks!

Windows sucks.
Bill Gates is a borg
Don't ever forget or forgive the Halloween Documents
Did I mention that Linux rocks? No?! Well, that too.

Re:How am I supposed to feel about this? (1, Insightful)

stephanruby (542433) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298713)

If only Timothy had posted this story, with some kind of snarky one-liner that clearly told me whether this was a good thing or bad thing!

Forget about Tim, I'll do it.

It's official. Google is evil now (they're not even going to try to hide it anymore).

It's part of their new branding strategy.

Re:How am I supposed to feel about this? (2)

Black Parrot (19622) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298855)

It's part of their new branding strategy.

I always spin off evil operations as a subsidiary, so the masses will still think I'm the good guy.

Usually an overseas subsidiary, so I can get evil on the cheap.

Re:How am I supposed to feel about this? (1)

alex67500 (1609333) | more than 2 years ago | (#39299007)

You anti-Google shill!

Choice is good (1)

Trahloc (842734) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298475)

If an app wants to lose out on "conversion" they should be allowed to. I'm a die hard google supporter but this is just lame. Google's forcing devs to pay higher rates and trying to pawn it off as being for the developers own good instead of google's own wallet. I don't want to start hating google as they've done lots of good but this is dancing with evil.

Re:Choice is good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39298535)

Devs can use another market/their own homepage that allows it, their choice.

I was wondering when they were going to do this, that they didn't do this from the start was odd to me as apple already did this.

Re:Choice is good (0)

peppepz (1311345) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298737)

Devs can use another market/their own homepage that allows it, their choice.

You're conveniently omitting to consider the consequences of their "choice".

Honestly, (1)

tehlinux (896034) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298493)

Google's biggest advantage right now is their market share. Android isn't too much better than the competition, and with stunts like this, I wouldn't be surprised if their share starts to slip.

Mod up (1)

shiftless (410350) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298949)

Insightful

All the market is waiting for right now is a company to come along with something better than Android (which isn't hard), and they will sweep up the "open" phone segment.

What about for non-US people? (4, Insightful)

inflex (123318) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298531)

I would have loved to have jumped on board with Googles payment system in place of PayPal... but there was a slight problem... it was "US Only". It would seem that if I look at the dominant players in various fields, they are players that embrace the fact that the internet and more importantly, consumers, exist well beyond the US alone.

Soon as Google lets us buy/sell stuff using their PayPal-replacment across the bulk of the world, I'll be interested.

Re:What about for non-US people? (1, Insightful)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298839)

How about making your own? Seriously. Nobody's forcing anyone to use Google or any other service. If you don't like it, change. If you don't like the other choices, start your own. It's really that simple. According to your own analysis, there is a huge underserved market out there waiting for a player to enter the game.

Re:What about for non-US people? (4, Insightful)

aaaaaaargh! (1150173) | more than 2 years ago | (#39299047)

They will sue you for infringement of 100+ patents if you're successful with it.

Re:What about for non-US people? (2)

hpoul (219387) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298885)

huh? since when is googles in app billing system US Only? i live in austria and have used it without any problems..
http://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=150324 [google.com] it doesn't really support all countries, but far from "US only"

Re:What about for non-US people? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39298921)

This is 29 countries and this list hasn't changed for years. It's just like the list was made so US supporters have enough time to dominate the market and then they will enable the rest of the world to publish.

I'm from Poland, not a software super power so I kind of understand they missed us. But why isn't there India on the list? China? Somebody's afraid of competition here.

Re:What about for non-US people? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39299069)

From Spain it works too, so sure it isn't US-Only, what is US-Only is the payment in store using the NFC antenna of the phone.

Cut cost? (1)

thsths (31372) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298549)

How does this cut cost? They have work contacting the developers, extra work for processing payments - in every way costs are bound to go up.

This is a move to increase revenue, not to cut cost.

Really, I wonder whether slashdot is going for the most pathetic, misinterpreted, contentious or plain wrong submission, in order to provoke negative responses. A shadow of its former self.

They should do that only when... (5, Informative)

gaspyy (514539) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298561)

They should do that only when Wallet is available in all countries. Google Wallet is not available in my country, I cannot receive payments so I HAVE TO rely on Paypal for this.

My app is available on Apple's AppStore, Blackberry's AppWorld, Amazon, Intel AppUp and Samsung's store and they all can send payments. It's just Google who doesn't. Even stranger is that they DO make payments to my country in the AdSense program, I just don't understand why they don't do this for apps on the Chrome Webstore or Google Play.

Re:They should do that only when... (2)

houghi (78078) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298719)

No, they should not do that at all. What they do is abusing their power. You should be able to use whatever you think is best.
If you select something else, they should improve of what they have so that your are willing to select them.

Re:They should do that only when... (1)

Pieroxy (222434) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298915)

Google is trying to become like Apple margin-wise. But with all the fragmentation and lack of normalization of their platforms, you can expect a lot more decisions like this one.

Re:They should do that only when... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39299241)

What country?

Good luck with that developers (3, Funny)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298563)

I tried to pay for conference registration using google payment... after going through too many badly designed data collection screens, I eventually reached an error page that claimed I could resolve it by going to the page I was on...

I gave up and sent a check.

Is this legal? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39298577)

Is this legal? Does anyone know if that sort of action violates the law?

So much for Google's policy of "Don't be evil". en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don't_be_evil

Re:Is this legal? (1)

MadKeithV (102058) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298619)

Is this legal? Does anyone know if that sort of action violates the law?

I have no idea about the actual legally, but have a strong feeling that right now Google doesn't really have to care a lot about whether this is legal - as long as it is "grey area" enough to drag the process out until most developers have complied anyway. At which point Google Wallet will be a de-facto standard for Google Play.

Re:Is this legal? (1)

MadKeithV (102058) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298625)

legally -> legality. Bloody friday mornings before sufficient caffeine intake. Me fail english? That's unpossible!

JPMorganChase did this to Cisco (0)

vilain (127070) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298589)

The same thing happened when Cisco was trying to sell new routers to Chase for their datacenters. They would buy the equipment if Cisco moved all their employee's 401Ks to JPMorgan Securities. A client hates not having his 401K under his control in Fidelity. I hate big banks.

Google like Ebay and Paypal? (3, Insightful)

Wowsers (1151731) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298627)

So what? Ebay also did this with Paypal. Before Ebay ruined itself, you could have a choice of payment processor including the one they most liked you to use - but was NOT compulsory to use their payment processor (which was NOT Paypal).

Then one day, Ebay decides to make it compulsory to have Paypay as a payment option. Around about that time I gave two fingers to Ebay. You WILL NOT force me to use a 100% unethical bent company to sell my no longer needed stuff, and have not used Ebay since.

And so Google are going the same way. Oh well.

Re:Google like Ebay and Paypal? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39298841)

Dear Wowsers,

Nobody here on eBay is missing your store.

Signed,
the Rest of the World.

Re:Google like Ebay and Paypal? (1)

Wowsers (1151731) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298931)

I was selling stuff I no longer need, I was not a "store."

Mod parent up (1)

shiftless (410350) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298957)

I agree 100%

Re:Google like Ebay and Paypal? (1)

Rennt (582550) | more than 2 years ago | (#39299003)

That didn't work in Australia thanks to our competition watchdog. The best ebay could manage was to require all sellers offer paypal as an option (previously you could elect not to offer paypal at all). I wonder if the same will apply to Google?

Damn, Google's going downhill. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39298647)

Who's next in being the nice guy?

Don't be evil (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39298739)

Come on Google, we know you're evil. Stop pretending, it's nauseating.

What the hell is wrong with Google now? (1)

Jezisheck (2558157) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298749)

What the hell is wrong with Google now? I happened to REALLY like Google since I got net access, but in last months, Google seem to me like every other giant company abusing his position on the market. What happened to Google's motto, "Don't be evil?"

Here's what (1)

shiftless (410350) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298963)

Like our politicians with the Constitution, they wiped their asses with it when the scent of money wafted through.

Google's own sovereign currency: Quatloos! (1)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298757)

Google should just issue its own sovereign currency, called Quatloos, and mandate that as the only currency for any of their or their partners business. Google can not be forced to accept USD as a form of payment, as long as, according to US law "no debt has incurred." Quatloos can be exchanged for USD through licensed Google Quatloo Dealers . . . who are owned by Google. The exchange rate will be set . . . by Google. Google employees will be paid in . . . Google Quatloos.

Students of US history might remember that mining companies issued their own currencies during the late 1800's.

Reader of The Economist might recognize the value of having issuing debt that must be paid in a sovereign currency that you control. Google can inflate or deflate their currency as it suits them.

It seems like a win-win all around!

For Google.

Don't be Evil (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39298761)

Guess the motto "Don't be Evil" isn't valid anymore.

And Bill Gates is more and more a hero (4, Interesting)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298787)

The Bill Gates/MS icon on Slashdot (is/was) that of a borg version of the Dorky One... the idea being that MS wanted to assimilate you into the collective. Turns out it was a hippy collective indeed with about as many rules as Fight Club with no enforcement.

It has often been remarked that MS dominance was obtained not so much through the success of MS but through the failure of everyone else. Read Apple, IBM and the various home computer makers whose names are lost in the mists of time only remembered by the senile elders.

And through their failure, we gained the Wintel platform which now turns out to have been insanely open. Imagine MS telling Windows developers how to collect payment, if at all. Does MS tell Blizzard how to collect its pound of flesh of the enslaved? How shareware should be payed for?

Does MS dictate which version of MS you should run on Dell hardware? Does Dell stop you from upgrading the OS?

It is not as if MS never tried but it failed so often nobody took them to serious and so the evil that might have happened, never happened. It is like a brutal dictator whose brutality ends up as a kind of cute outburst with throwing chairs instead of the millions dead with efficient dictators. A dictator who fails at being terrible sounds a lot better then a dictator who succeeds... and Apple and Google are certainly trying hard enough.

It is kinda sad that companies keep trying to get total control when the PC did so well without it.

I can see upsides to this (3, Interesting)

Zorque (894011) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298807)

For one, any in-app purchases made will be tied to your account now. I've seen people lose out on DLC-type purchases they'd made because they switched to a new phone, and the developer of the program used a different payment service. Hopefully this will keep that from happening in the future.

Don't be evil (1)

tgv (254536) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298857)

... Be greedy!

Anti Trust Suit (4, Insightful)

rioki (1328185) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298893)

Do is sense an anti trust suit? Yes I do!

It's OK (1)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298941)

They'll be dropped in an open way.

Faststpring (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39298987)

I'm not affiliated with them but as a user I can wholeheartedly recommend them. I've also been using Kagi for many years without problems.

Just stay clear of the big ones like Paypal (shudder) or GoogleWallet, Amazon, etc. unless you don't mind becoming the victim of extortion, arbitrary EULA and pricing changes, or having your earnings locked away for indefinite time.

Don't be e... (1)

Pf0tzenpfritz (1402005) | more than 2 years ago | (#39298997)

...Bay!

good luck with customer service (1)

versak (2591763) | more than 2 years ago | (#39299019)

on the 28th i tried to buy an album in the market, on my phone. i got a generic error that it couldn't complete the order, so i tried the computer. i got an error that my card on file was expired. i updated my new card, plus added a new gift card as well. i was never redirected back to the market online, so i went there and bought the album. i choose one of the cards from the wallet drop down. then, i was charged twice, once on each card. i have sent 2 emails daily since to get a reply back and a refund and have heard nothing. there was a number to call, but after 10 minutes navigating menus, they say that there is "no live customer support" and all i can do is use the email forms. this has become infuriating.

Wallet Merchant accounts not available to all (1)

Slackus (598508) | more than 2 years ago | (#39299247)

How will this work for countries where Google Wallet merchant accounts are not available? Last time I checked (admittedly a couple of years ago) Google Wallet merchant account was not available in my home country South Africa.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...