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

911–920 of 1001 posts

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#911

Post by dingnuts »

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…

> Google specifically serves a worse version of Search on Firefox for Mobile. You have to get an extension to get the full experience.

Huh, I wonder if this is why I have perceived a drop in quality from Google Search. What a stupid move from them -- not only have I stopped using Google Search and now pay Kagi (yes I know money still flows from Kagi to Google but even still) and have been evangelizing Kagi as well as taking every opportunity to shit on Google Search.

Great job G, you made the product worse and made me a customer of someone else

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#912

Post by fsflover »

tuetuopay wrote: post #581
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 run the largest advertising network on the planet. As simple as that. Even for the matter of the browser, Apple does not have the same push as Google does. Yes, Safari is the default browser on a phone. But outside of the mobile world, Safari is a rounding error.

> Apple does not run the largest advertising network on the planet.

No, but they're trying to: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42185080

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#913

Post by cue_the_strings »

kernal wrote: post #803
cue_the_strings wrote: post #390

In this thread: Chrome and Chrome-related employees of Google worrying about their future compensation under a smaller company. Don't worry, I'm sure that Chrome / Chromium will be picked up by several big players together, Microsoft is involved via Edge, ... I don't see much changing. I think that government should limit its interference in the market as much as possible, but Chrome is just so monopoly-oriented from…

The sale wouldn't involve Chromium nor the Google employees that work on Chromium or Chrome. But good luck to whoever buys it to keep funding it and acquire the talent to work on it at the speed Google does. Meanwhile, Chromium will go closed source as there's no incentive to keep it open and Google will develop a new closed sourced browser to reclaim its market share.

I would expect them to prevent Google from fielding a browser (any browser, not just Chrome) for some time (several years).

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#914

Post by SSLy »

niutech wrote: post #837
chaosharmonic wrote: post #789

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This isn't an isolated attempt. You can see more of the same thing with Android. Here are more: - (jumping off of your second point...) Play Services does more than just handle stuff you sign into as a user -- it's also a dependency for everything from push notifications to screen casting. This actively poses issues building competing platforms, in that in order to give developers a path to shipping in your ecosyst…

You can root your Android device and replace Google Play Services with microG ( https://microg.org ).

even if you do not root your phone. and keep play services enabled, it'll get rejected by their moatware "play integrity" api. https://grapheneos.org/articles/attestation-compatibility-gu...

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#915

Post by fzzzy »

wrsh07 wrote: post #876
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> only reason I still use Chrome is because I already use other Google products and they integrate well together This is the point. Google's products integrate with Chrome better than non-Google products. Including its ad platform.

I'm failing to see why "this product we built from the ground up integrates better with our other tools" is an anti trust problem Isn't that what we want companies to do? I have two frustrations with this kind of decision: 1. It's not clear to me that the judge has any interest in creating value. 2. It does feel a bit like being punished for success. It's one thing when it's ill-gotten success, eg via coercive contra…

They didn't build it from the ground up

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#916

Post by neodymiumphish »

scarface_74 wrote: post #862
astrodust wrote: post #793

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox has made a mountain of money off of their tiny market share. Chrome as a company would instantly rake in billions.

From making Google the default search engine…

And probably even more if they made Google the only option, assuming it was otherwise perfect for most users.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#917

Post by deanCommie »

chaosharmonic wrote: post #789
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…

> This isn't an isolated attempt. You can see more of the same thing with Android. Here are more: - (jumping off of your second point...) Play Services does more than just handle stuff you sign into as a user -- it's also a dependency for everything from push notifications to screen casting. This actively poses issues building competing platforms, in that in order to give developers a path to shipping in your ecosyst…

> Even the combined resources of Amazon and Microsoft weren't enough to overcome this.

Pedantically, their resources were never combined. They independently tried to compete, and they independently failed.

For what it's worth though, Amazon seems to be doing tidy business with entrypoint tablets and FireOS, which is a fork of Android, but still one they own.

Microsoft's exit of mobile was a short-sighted decision IMO. They have the entire office suite. They have windows and Windows has essentially become an app store model too.

I can easily imagine a future where Microsoft leaned in hard on Microsoft Mobile-exclusives for Word/Outlook/Excel/Teams/etc., bundled it with the rest of Office/Windows subscriptions, and had every office worker in the world carrying a windows phone for their work device.

I know, I know - everyone wanted only an iPhone. But it feels to me like Microsoft didn't try very hard.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#918

Post by est31 »

niutech wrote: post #777
throwaway2037 wrote: post #706

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You raise some very important points. Specifically, this one: > browsers aren't really a self funding product I feel the same. I also feel the same about a modern C library and C compiler (and C++, if you like). They are essential to build any modern system and applications. Yet, those are also (mostly) no longer self-funding products. What do you think will happen if Google is forced to divest Chrome?

Browsers can be profitable, see Opera: https://investor.opera.com/news-releases/news-release-detail... But not everything must be for-profit. Free/Libre/Open Source Software is a prime example. Projects like GNU, Linux, GNOME, KDE, WebKitGTK, LibreOffice are sustainable for a long time.

Opera is not a browser at this point but a chrome skin. Yes, there is some engineering still going on, but they don't run as much engineering as would be needed to build world-class browser software.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#919

Post by Gormo »

Timber-6539 wrote: post #549
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…

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.

> The UX on Chrome is going to take a steep nose dive.

In order to dive any further, it would have to begin excavation.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#920

Post by dbmnt »

wumeow wrote: post #37
curiouscat321 wrote: post #5

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.

ByteDance, or another Chinese company.

Given the current political climate, this is incredibly unlikely. Reference the situation with TikTok and the "Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act" which became US law earlier this year.
Post reply on HN