Live data from Hacker News

DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

bloomberg.com

671–680 of 1001 posts

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#672
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The full circle of course is MS will end up acquiring it.

This is surely the only real possibility, and puts Edge's shift to Chromium in a new light; could MS have predicted/lobbied for this push?

How is this the only possibility? What about Opera or something?

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#673
post #645

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Fortunately this didn't work out for them but unfortunately that worked out for Google. No, Google was better, then they used Chrome as an extremely powerful moat to protect their situation. Google at first was like magic compared to the Altavista of the time.

Yes but without Chrome, Google wouldn't have 90% search market share that they have today. They are completely dominating the WWW industry.

Surely making deals with companies like Apple and Mozilla to be the default search engine was a big part of building that market share. How many iPhone users bother to set a different search engine in Safari?

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#675

Who would possibly buy Chrome? Letting any of the large tech companies purchase it (the only possible buyers) would just give someone else monopolistic power. Chrome can’t exist as a standalone business without being even more consumer hostile.

Let's hope it won't be Oracle.

ehm... jokes aside. I think a more reasonable way is to setup a foundation, composed of biggest players in tech, also companies like Google, Meta, Microsoft, Mozilla Foundation, Linux Foundation, Apple and EFF. The foundation should steer the further development of Chrome. In that way Chrome will be owned by community just like e.g. Linux Kernel or standards like C++ lang spec.

If Chrome would be bought by a private entity, that entity would probably start milking the current user base straight away. Expect adds in bookmarks bar, more address bar spyware (e.g. sending all phrases to the cloud) and paid extensions web store.

The most used and advanced browser that we have today must stay open source. It is more than a program, it is part of global internet infrastructure. We should not destroy it by a foolish political decision.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#676

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…

> - AOSP (the open source counterpart of Android) is now unusable. It doesn't ship with most essential apps, including a Phone app. In previous versions of Android, all of these were a part of AOSP. This particular example is a bit misleading as those apps are still available; they're just unbundled from the system image: https://source.android.com/docs/automotive/unbundled_apps/re...

Your comment unfortunately implies that Google still maintains them, which is farthest from the truth (as this document shows, it is only maintained for automotive use - it is not usable on a regular phone).

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#677
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…

> browsers aren't really a self funding product Yeah... Because massive companies use them anti-competitively as a moat against other companies, and as a loss leader to enable massive data collection and vendor lock in. "browsers aren't really a self funding product" is a symptom of dysfunction, not the inevitable conclusion of a fair market.

I'm not sure that software entirely obeys normal market theory. So much of it is zero-cost free.

The synergistic effects are so strong that most users would prefer there to be The System, in which everything works together and there's no risk of incompatible choices. They don't necessarily care which system.

The market in things like, say, file explorers is tiny. There's a few shell replacements (free), Midnight Commander and clones, and maybe over in the corner someone making a few thousand dollars a year from an Explorer replacement.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#678
Honestly, on a consumer/public interest level, this would be a great thing to see. Google would have to make sure their sites work well on all browsers, since they wouldn't maintain Chrome anymore (or have control over its functionality), Chrome wouldn't get an extra marketing, since Google wouldn't be able to market it to people using its products or services, and there would be far less of an incentive to do things like change addon APIs if it's not the parent company losing money from blocked ads.

The two big questions however are:

1. Who would buy it?

Because if it's someone like Microsoft, then we're back to square 1. It's another IE6/Chrome situation, with conflicting interests and unfair marketing efforts. Personally I can't see Apple, Meta or Microsoft buying Chrome though (or being allowed to under anti monopoly laws), so lord knows who'd end up with it. Mozilla or an open foundation of sorts would be the best option, but I somehow doubt it'll be those either

2. How is it going to be funded?

You ideally don't want the Firefox 'solution' where Google basically pays them to exist, but you can't really sell a browser either. So how it could be standalone and remain a viable venture is anyone's guess.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#679

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…

AOSP is so useless that I refuse to even call it an "operating system."

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#680
post #645

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Fortunately this didn't work out for them but unfortunately that worked out for Google. No, Google was better, then they used Chrome as an extremely powerful moat to protect their situation. Google at first was like magic compared to the Altavista of the time.

Yes but without Chrome, Google wouldn't have 90% search market share that they have today. They are completely dominating the WWW industry.

I'm not convinced; early on they actually had a better product with better UI and better search results.
Post reply on HN