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

DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 1001 posts

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#441

Post by Y_Y »

infotainment wrote: post #395
Ekaros wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Splitting monopolies is good. On other hand splitting "free" product is somewhat questionable. When the competitor don't have exactly viable business model. Pushing for something that will clearly in not too distant future kill the split product is not helpful.

This exactly. An independent Chrome’s best path toward financial sustainability is closing down the source code and selling everyone’s browsing data to the highest bidder. We all like to have a high minded ideal of some kind of wonderful fully independent for-the-good-of-society entity stewarding Chrome, but history has shown us that’s not what will happen.

Chrome is already closed-source. The chromium project can't be closed because it's already free and released.

The new Chrome company could stop contributing back to Chromium if they wanted, but it would mean they'd diverge from the other browsers backed by the OSS project which is one of their big advantages.

I'm not saying they wouldn't do that or it wouldn't work out, but it's not an obvious win.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#442

Post by ulrikrasmussen »

Finally! My only concern is that this should have been done much sooner, in particular before the recent anti-trust ruling that basically forced Google's hands to pull the rug under Mozilla.

Google's sole business is to make people look at content they don't want to look at (ads), and I find it deeply problematic that they not only control the operating system and software distribution platform for a large fraction of devices, but now also the browser and by extension the standards of what used to be the open web.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#443

Post by SpEd3Y »

sho_hn wrote: post #433
SpEd3Y wrote: post #417

Arguably out of the big 4 (Google, Microsoft, Apple, Amazon) Google gave the most back to humanity: Android, Chromium, Kubernetes, Google Office suite, the Go programming language, Tensor Flow, Alpha Fold (and Google DeepMind), donating to Linux, etc. All these are things everyone has access to precisely because Google is such a big player and can afford to lose money on innovation that fails. What did Microsoft and…

Google Office suite isn't open source, is it?

It's not but it is free to use.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#444

Post by hamilyon2 »

infotainment wrote: post #395
Ekaros wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Splitting monopolies is good. On other hand splitting "free" product is somewhat questionable. When the competitor don't have exactly viable business model. Pushing for something that will clearly in not too distant future kill the split product is not helpful.

This exactly. An independent Chrome’s best path toward financial sustainability is closing down the source code and selling everyone’s browsing data to the highest bidder. We all like to have a high minded ideal of some kind of wonderful fully independent for-the-good-of-society entity stewarding Chrome, but history has shown us that’s not what will happen.

Selling user data to highest bidder wouldn't fly in Europe.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#445

Post by soraminazuki »

SpEd3Y wrote: post #417

Arguably out of the big 4 (Google, Microsoft, Apple, Amazon) Google gave the most back to humanity: Android, Chromium, Kubernetes, Google Office suite, the Go programming language, Tensor Flow, Alpha Fold (and Google DeepMind), donating to Linux, etc. All these are things everyone has access to precisely because Google is such a big player and can afford to lose money on innovation that fails. What did Microsoft and…

By that logic, people should still be at the mercy of AT&T because Bell Labs gave so much back to humanity. Not to mention that multiple items on your list were bought by Google.

The world's biggest ad and surveillance company having control over the most widely used browser on the planet is a recipe for disaster. That's the only thing that matters in this discussion.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#446

Post by addicted »

SpEd3Y wrote: post #417

Arguably out of the big 4 (Google, Microsoft, Apple, Amazon) Google gave the most back to humanity: Android, Chromium, Kubernetes, Google Office suite, the Go programming language, Tensor Flow, Alpha Fold (and Google DeepMind), donating to Linux, etc. All these are things everyone has access to precisely because Google is such a big player and can afford to lose money on innovation that fails. What did Microsoft and…

Google isn’t “getting targeted”.

But to answer your question.

1. Microsoft gets left alone - Really? You may want to ask the closest adult near you about this.

2. Amazon - The government has looked into Amazon multiple times. It’s hard to see where Amazon does anything to illegally use its monopoly (they don’t use their shopping advantage to cross sell AWS in any way, or Vice versa). Amazon is genuinely not a bad monopoly (they have pushed down prices), but they are a terrible monopsony (basically destroying retailers that are not Chinese knockoffs), but monopsony protection laws are weak to non-existent world wide.

3. Apple - Apple is not a monopoly in nearly anything, which makes antitrust action against them very difficult. The EU has better laws around this, which has allowed them to force Apple to do the right thing in many cases (USB-C, opening up the App Store, although Apple complies in the worst ways possible, even though compliance has often been beneficial for them, like in the case of USB-C connectivity), but US laws are far too rigid to be able to really do much with them, as long as they are not monopolies.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#447

Post by Tepix »

elmerfud wrote: post #16

So I understand trying to break up monopolistic companies to provide better competition in the market which is generally better for the consumer as a whole. This strategy of saying Chrome should be sold off seems strange to me because unlike other monopolies Google's monopoly with Chrome is fundamentally different. Since Chrome at its core is the open source chromium browser engine the ability for your competition to…

I disagree. We get things in Chrome that is not in the consumer's interest simply because Google wants to get more data from its users and display more ads.

If Chrome were to be separated from the Ad business, it would be beneficial for privacy.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#448

Post by graycat »

nicoloren wrote: post #322
eru wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is Chrome or Google a monopoly?

I think we can think in terms of market share. Google (the search engine) has a market share of over 85% worldwide. [0] Google therefore controls what can be found on the Internet for 85% of search engine users. Recent updates, or Core Updates, have demonstrated how easy it is for Google to put businesses out of business by removing their visibility. [1] It seems to me that this is a problem. Ditto for Chrome, which…

> update could make a website inaccessible

There are billions of Web browser users and, from a fast Google search, 1.1 billion Web sites, still a large number if count only the ones that still have traffic.

So, billions of listeners and many millions of talkers. Without good, stable, universal standards, we'd have the biggest "Tower of Babel" problem in history.

Hypothetical examples:

(1) Maybe Company A wants to change the standards so that Web sites will have to revise their code. Hmm!!! Many millions of Web site owners will say "no way". Company A just left the party.

(2) Web site B wants to change their Web site so that only certain Web browsers will be able to use that site. Hmm!!! Site B won't get much traffic. Even if that site is Google -- people will use Bing, etc.

(3) Maybe Google announces that as of July 1, 2025 the Google search engine Web site will work only with Google's latest Chrome Web browser. Hmm .... There are billions of people who will want a search engine that works with the old, standard Web browser they already have -- "billions of people"!! Sounds like, with Bing, Microsoft's stock just doubled! And July Google's searches per day fell by 50+%.

E.g., I still like Windows 7 Professional. Occasionally I run Microsoft's Web browser Edge, and when I do there is a message that Windows 7 won't get updates for Edge and I should convert to Windows 10/11. I don't really want an update to Edge -- what I have does work; I don't like it; occasionally I use it to check some issues. Hmm!!!!

Microsoft, one of your most important business assets is that old applications will still run on the latest versions of Windows. So, I run Kedit, Object Rexx, Firefox, VLC media player, PhotoDraw, Media Player, PhotoViewer, Sketchup, Office 20??, IBM's OSL (Optimization Subroutine Library and a certain Watcom Fortran compiler), LINPACK, etc., .NET 3??, and I do not want to lose use of any of those old programs.

(4) Some company tries to have all the Internet ads flowing through their software, servers, etc. Hmm!! Sites have a file ads.txt that usually shows one heck of a long list of Internet ad brokers. Not easy for one company to dominate the ad market or even just the Web site ad market.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#449

Post by kaba0 »

jrflowers wrote: post #317
legitster wrote: post #153

I'm all for competition and increasing consumer choices, but the government is really not making a case that this is supposed to help consumers. The only reason I still use Chrome is because I already use other Google products and they integrate well together. There are many other better options out there otherwise, and they are all free. Breaking out Chrome from Google will not in any way benefit me as a consumer. >…

> DOJ is trying to completely change Google's business model and dictate how they are supposed to make money This is good reasoning. It is overreach for a regulatory body to do something that could impact the business model of a monopoly. Monopolies are bad, unless being a monopoly is part of that monopoly’s business model and an important part of how the monopoly makes money, in which case nothing should be done.

I do mostly agree with grandparent, but not with your take.

What is the problem with government regulating, say, the ingredients that can be used in foods, forbidding addictive drugs from being added to them? Or selling drugs that are completely fake or outright dangerous?

This obsession with small governments (and basically, libertarianism) doesn't really stand on proper grounds.

Why can't the government work for you? Maybe it's an inherent bias given that I'm from Europe, but I think the stereotypical utopia about "big government" is much more true for huge corporations (which have absolutely no safety mechanisms built in to prevent a paper clip factory going overboard in the name of profit) compared to the slow-moving, democratic, slightly corrupt governments. Only one of these have accountability in a humane form, while the only metric for corporate is a single number.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#450

Post by McDyver »

SpEd3Y wrote: post #417

Arguably out of the big 4 (Google, Microsoft, Apple, Amazon) Google gave the most back to humanity: Android, Chromium, Kubernetes, Google Office suite, the Go programming language, Tensor Flow, Alpha Fold (and Google DeepMind), donating to Linux, etc. All these are things everyone has access to precisely because Google is such a big player and can afford to lose money on innovation that fails. What did Microsoft and…

"What have the Romans ever done for us?"

Monopolies are bad, and it's not because some players were not punished that others shouldn't be (they all should).

Maybe this sets a precedent, and they are all targeted.

Post reply on HN