Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How did Google get so big?

cbsnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 417 posts

Re: How did Google get so big?

#141

Post by zjaffee »

tills13 wrote: post #93
zjaffee wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not so much they are hurting anyone, since they have made it virtually impossible to compete with them. Say you do a search for a particular location, the first thing that pops up to the the top of the page is a box with some information pulled from wikipedia and a link/image of it on google maps. Search for a band, and you see the same with links to youtube and google music. Search for online storage and you se…

if they're _purposefully_ ranking their own services above competing services, then yes, I agree they should be fined until they stop. _however_, more often than not, their own service is _exactly_ what I'm looking for - be it GPM/YouTube/Maps/etc. It's not really their fault they're head and shoulders above the competition/the de-facto provider for most of the content people search for every day (well, maybe it is t…

We have to think deeper as to why their service is the one that's preferred though.

Part of it is the fact that they had historically been able to subsidize the monetization potential of their other services in order to out compete those who needed their services to make money.

The other half is more speculation, but certainly very possible, that they've been able to play this game for a long enough time that they have been able to use search to build these brands in such a way that makes us think of them first for all of these services. Brand power is a very powerful thing, and considering the fact that they have a subsidized ability to advertise to us (both through promoting things in search, and by not needing to pay themselves for adsense/adwords) is what has made these the more high quality services over time since we have given our data to them.

Re: How did Google get so big?

#142

Post by Pica_soO »

chargingmylaser wrote: post #76
fixermark wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to be an open question whether letting a corp play benevolent dictator for some timeframe, at least, is a useful thing.

Bell Labs was a monopoly (at least for a time period) and yielded countless high-impact, transformative innovations that a company with fewer resources (probably) would not have been able to develop. I think (although I could be wrong) most would agree they were a net benefit to society.

You can sit on great ideas like the phone, because they threaten your gramophon buisness model?

Re: How did Google get so big?

#143

Post by ocdtrekkie »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #100

Stoppelman's Yelp is a bad example. I don't want to visit a page that pesters me to install their app instead of showing me the reviews I came to read . If Yelp's ranking has been lowered, good riddance.

It's funny you mention this: I've discovered that Google is injecting an ad above searches for "mapquest" that leads users who make the mistake of clicking on a Google ad to install a browser hijacker plugin before they can get the directions they're looking for.

This hurts MapQuest's brand, gives people malware, and of course, conveniently, makes Google a lot of money. They've been doing it for at least a number of years. There is no way to report the malicious ad to Google, and I've seen the exact same site over and over again confusing computer illiterate users into believing MapQuest requires they download a plugin.

A significant portion of Google's ad business is malware content, and they put it above legitimate rankings. Which is to say, Google is not downranking bad sites for being bad, Google is downranking sites who don't pay them for the privilege of being on top.

Re: How did Google get so big?

#144

Post by jacksmith21006 »

xg15 wrote: post #58
thekingofh wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's nothing objectively wrong with a large company unless they begin to squash competition with regulatory lock-in. This is what led to the breakup of AT&T/Bell. As far as I can tell, Google doesn't keep others out of the search market through any other means than just being better than the other guys. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I certainly haven't seen any shortage of search engines and alternative cloud servi…

Google doesn't keep others out of the search market through any other means than just being better... They have 98% market share in europe. They also provide the main revenue source (AdWords) and the most important implementation of the web stack (Chrome) - which fitted with mandatory automated updating. If you combine those factors, they are in a position where they can to a large part dictate what the de-facto stan…

But it is not the fault of Google their services are better. Bing is two characters less to type and MS owns the desktop.

Yet Google owns search. Why in Earth would we penalize someone for offering something better?

Re: How did Google get so big?

#145

Post by utopcell »

kimdotcom wrote: post #125
tinbad wrote: post #17

"Some were investigated, but only superficially, the government just really isn't enforcing our antitrust laws. And that's what's happened. None of these acquisitions have been challenged." Behemoths like Google emerge every time new inventions lead to the creation of new markets followed by mass adoption during a relatively short timeframe, when regulations don't exist yet. It has happened in history time and time a…

Why did Google succeed and Yahoo fail?

Google succeeded because Yahoo used it as its default search engine for years alongside their directory. Google got enormous exposure from that at a point when they needed it. Imagine if your little startup had a "How about you try us out ?" on google.com, permanently. Plus, eventually, Google got better at Search.

Re: How did Google get so big?

#146

Post by zjaffee »

bepotts wrote: post #110
tills13 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if they're _purposefully_ ranking their own services above competing services, then yes, I agree they should be fined until they stop. _however_, more often than not, their own service is _exactly_ what I'm looking for - be it GPM/YouTube/Maps/etc. It's not really their fault they're head and shoulders above the competition/the de-facto provider for most of the content people search for every day (well, maybe it is t…

Exactly. I really don't understand why people try and muddy the waters around Google products. I'm not forced to use Google; Google products are just damn good. Having a monopoly in a market due to the fact that your product is just that good isn't a bad thing, and punishing companies for being successful sets an awful precedent (which is why breaking up Google isn't going to happen). From search, maps, email, YouTub…

Why are their products that good? What is it that makes content creators publish on youtube rather than on other platforms. I'd argue that a huge part of this is the fact that youtube gives creators more visibility than other places, and since google is able to leverage search in addition to their advertising business to bring more eyes to youtube is the reason for the platforms success.

I think your confusing googles monopoly not hurting the market with not hurting their consumers. But to suggest that they don't make it near impossible for anyone to compete against them is absolutely them hurting the market. Namely, the equity value of google would be more balanced with other smaller firms, and in turn we'd see more very rich people rather than fewer people with net worths well over 10 billion.

Re: How did Google get so big?

#147

Post by ttul »

IMHO Google should be regulated as a utility. Search is obviously as key to modern life as is electricity, water, highways, etc. Why do we leave this critical infrastructure completely under the control of one corporation, which is itself under the control of just a tiny handful of billionaires?

Now, I mostly agree with Sergey and Larry’s investments, and I love the long term approach and big picture view they take. But Google is still too powerful. The democratic will of the people is being disregarded here, and that is simply wrong.

Re: How did Google get so big?

#148

Post by jacksmith21006 »

nugget wrote: post #34
wilsonnb2 wrote: post #6

So if Google is a monopoly, what should be done about it? Split it up into separate, competing mini-Googles? Keep fining them more and more money until they stop anti-competitive practices? Split off Maps/Android/Drive/etc into separate companies so that Google can't use their search monopoly to dominate those fields? I'm genuinely not sure what the best way to go about this would be.

If you required Google to license either their algorithmic search index or their search ad marketplace to other companies, it would have a dramatic effect on the competitive dynamics of the search market worldwide.

Google has never charged a cent in royalities. They give away much of their IP through papers in the past and now actual software.

Which is what we should hope for and makes zero sense to then penalize Google for simply providing a better product.

Heck Google gave Amazon Android to build the Echo and Dot and show and fire, etc. Amazon even turned around and banned competing Google products from their marrket place.

Re: How did Google get so big?

#149

Post by detaro »

kimdotcom wrote: post #131
philg_jr wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about...Nokia? Seimens? SAP?

Who owns Nokia now?

Nokia is an independent Finnish company. Mobile phones under the label "Nokia" are made by HMD Global, also a Finnish company, which bought some of the remnants of Microsofts smartphone branch, which had previously bought Nokia's smartphone branch.

Re: How did Google get so big?

#150

Post by zjaffee »

c3534l wrote: post #102
zjaffee wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not so much they are hurting anyone, since they have made it virtually impossible to compete with them. Say you do a search for a particular location, the first thing that pops up to the the top of the page is a box with some information pulled from wikipedia and a link/image of it on google maps. Search for a band, and you see the same with links to youtube and google music. Search for online storage and you se…

Bing works just fine, but people don't use it because it's not what they're used to. Rarely does Google have an actual monopoly where new competitors can't enter the field - in fact, for every Google product I can give you a viable alternative. The only difference is that Google is winning.

Outside of search, you should ask why are they winning? Better products don't necessarily have better user numbers due to how much network effects play into a lot of googles products. There's no doubt in my mind that google has been able to leverage their search and advertising businesses, not only as products themselves, but also their knowledge in the space, to push users to, and keep their eyes on said products.

If apple and google traded maps products, it's very likely that web and android users would still largely use the google one more often than apple maps is being used now since they have more power to guide you into using the product. The same applies to them advertising chrome when you open up another browser to google.com.

Post reply on HN