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

601–610 of 1001 posts

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#601

Post by madeofpalk »

rkharsan64 wrote: post #510

People here seem to be underestimating the advantages that Google gets just because of Chrome: - When you sign in to Google, you sign in browser-wide. Google now gets all of your browsing data, perfect for advertising. (If you ever doubt it, go check out Google Takeout. You'll be shocked at the amount of data you see there.) - They have special APIs and features that they get to use, and nobody else. Only because the…

I don't disagree, but I'm also not sure what the alternative is.

Who's going to buy Chrome that also doesn't suffer from the same anti-trust problems? Who would want to buy Chrome? Who would want to fund Chrome?

What browser would Android ship? In one view I kind of like the idea that Google would have to shop around and 'buy' a browser for its OS (competition good!), but also that seems ridiculous and easy to fall right back into the same trap.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#602

Post by lesuorac »

moody__ wrote: post #525

A lot of discussion in this thread is pointing out that chromium is a thing and that it would be hard for a company to properly fund a web browser without the backing of a tech giant whose more direct revenue stream is elsewhere. I think this showcases a larger issue with the web as it stands today. Why has building a browser for the "open web" become such a complex piece of software that it requires the graces of a…

> A lot of discussion in this thread is pointing out that chromium is a thing and that it would be hard for a company to properly fund a web browser without the backing of a tech giant whose more direct revenue stream is elsewhere.

This is not an issue though is it?

Like all those magazine subscriptions make their money off ads. The idea that a business can't survive on its own is fine, no?

If it's a singular tech giant then that's a problem but if chrome had contracts with like a dozen+ companies then it sounds really sustainable.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#603

Post by madeofpalk »

water9 wrote: post #574
lofaszvanitt wrote: post #556

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Browsers should be developed by an intercountry nonprofit. Funded by all the countries' governments.

[flagged]

In what way? Google seems like the perfect example of profit obscuring inefficiency.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#604

Post by PittleyDunkin »

niutech wrote: post #555
pjc50 wrote: post #548

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is this: - the browser is undeniably critical as everyone's window through which they view the online world; - the user gains a huge amount of value by a browser being integrated into the OS, webviews in other applications, etc - browsers aren't really a self funding product - having a single for-profit US advertising company control everyone's view of the online world, however slightly (e.g. by obstructi…

How does splitting off Chrome as a separate company solve anything? They would still rely on Google for funding (like Mozilla) and being close friends they would do whatever Alphabet tells them to do. A better solution is to implement a bill like DMA in the EU to enforce competition among web browser vendors and fight monopolies.

Frankly, who cares. The important part is that google doesn't own a browser.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#606

Post by timeon »

madeofpalk wrote: post #601
rkharsan64 wrote: post #510

People here seem to be underestimating the advantages that Google gets just because of Chrome: - When you sign in to Google, you sign in browser-wide. Google now gets all of your browsing data, perfect for advertising. (If you ever doubt it, go check out Google Takeout. You'll be shocked at the amount of data you see there.) - They have special APIs and features that they get to use, and nobody else. Only because the…

I don't disagree, but I'm also not sure what the alternative is. Who's going to buy Chrome that also doesn't suffer from the same anti-trust problems? Who would want to buy Chrome? Who would want to fund Chrome? What browser would Android ship? In one view I kind of like the idea that Google would have to shop around and 'buy' a browser for its OS (competition good!), but also that seems ridiculous and easy to fall r…

> Who would want to buy Chrome? Who would want to fund Chrome?

This is interesting question especially when companies are usually just use Chromium instead of creating new browser (not even making hard fork of Chromium).

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#607

Post by LatteLazy »

Every time these cases come up, I ask the same question: what is this supposed to actually achieve and how will it work?

Who will buy chrome? And how will they make a profit from doing so?

Presumably they will charge google for good to remain the default search engine? But then we will just end up in the same place as now won't we? (Chrome being a popular but not the only browser; Google being the default but not only search engine).

So how will this make the end user or the advertisers (don't forget, they are the consumer here, since they are paying, not the user) richer or happier or whatever else?

People seem stuck on "monopoly bad" and that something has to be done. But are not clear on what the harm is here, or how to prevent that harm. Instead, this is something and something has to be done...

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#608

Post by PittleyDunkin »

sunaookami wrote: post #563
Timber-6539 wrote: post #549

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything here you accuse Google of doing, Apple is running circles on. Ultimately, if this case goes through Google are right about one thing. The UX on Chrome is going to take a steep nose dive.

Apple does not have a monopoly.

There's nothing inherently illegal about monopolies, just anti-competitive behavior. While Apple is engaging in clear anti-competitive behavior (eg shoving the app store down customers throats), they've reined in restrictions of competing browsers so that they're actually worth using now.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#609

Post by moody__ »

lesuorac wrote: post #602
moody__ wrote: post #525

A lot of discussion in this thread is pointing out that chromium is a thing and that it would be hard for a company to properly fund a web browser without the backing of a tech giant whose more direct revenue stream is elsewhere. I think this showcases a larger issue with the web as it stands today. Why has building a browser for the "open web" become such a complex piece of software that it requires the graces of a…

> A lot of discussion in this thread is pointing out that chromium is a thing and that it would be hard for a company to properly fund a web browser without the backing of a tech giant whose more direct revenue stream is elsewhere. This is not an issue though is it? Like all those magazine subscriptions make their money off ads. The idea that a business can't survive on its own is fine, no? If it's a singular tech gi…

> Like all those magazine subscriptions make their money off ads. The idea that a business can't survive on its own is fine, no?

This is not quite the same, if a single magazine starts to become more ads than decent content it is not insurmountable for another company to start a competitor. It's not ad income itself that is bad, it's that in the case of a web browser it is insurmountable for a company to start up a competitor from scratch. It wasn't always the case, but because google has dumped so much engineering in to chrome they've effectively pulled up the ladder behind them.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#610

Post by crabmusket »

dijit wrote: post #338
MichaelCharles wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Monopolies are bad. Splitting up monopolies is good for the consumer. That doesn't mean this makes any sense. How are they going to separate Chrome from Chromium? If they do, what incentive does Google have to keep maintaining Chromium? Can Google make another new fork of Chromium and start yet another browser? Or are they now banned from making browsers? What company has the resources to maintain Chrome's massive co…

in general, I find a little bit distasteful that the only way to build a browser is as a loss leading project for the largest advertising company on the planet No wonder nobody can compete, loss leaders tend to kill competition as they can be maintained without direct business revenue at all. The same issue plagues domesticated cats, they don’t need to hunt for food since they have an abundance at home so instead wit…

> loss leaders tend to kill competition as they can be maintained without direct business revenue at all

Ding ding ding. This is a classic monopolist strategy. It poisons the market for any other potential competitors by removing all possibility of profit from the category.

It's kind of eyebrow-raising that more people in this thread don't notice this. And instead just assume of COURSE browsers can't be funded except by a monopolist using it to shore up their surveillance business.

Post reply on HN