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

DOJ filed paperwork to US District Court to force Google to spin off Chrome [pdf]

storage.courtlistener.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 129 posts

Re: DOJ filed paperwork to US District Court to force Google to spin off Chrome [pdf]

#91

Post by tsimionescu »

josephg wrote: post #34
tsimionescu wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The most likely answer is that it will take the Linux model, with a foundation put together to fund Chrome's development. Then all of the parties interested in people having access to the Web, including Google, will have an incentive to fund this without requiring it to push their specific products.

Chrome currently has far more paid full time engineers than the linux kernel does. I struggle to see how they get paid - except again, by charging search engines to be the default browser or something.

That may be, but Firefox certainly doesn't, and it's not that far from Chrome in terms of feature set, particularly in terms of supported web standards, or security. So I don't feel that a smaller Chrome team would be a catastrophe for Chrome.

Re: DOJ filed paperwork to US District Court to force Google to spin off Chrome [pdf]

#92

Post by viraptor »

bad_user wrote: post #75
viraptor wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chrome does a lot of things. I know there are downsides and many people don't agree, but I think overall the browser/internet experience would benefit from simpler browsers that don't move so fast.

IMO, Chrome does not move fast enough . The fact of the matter is that the web has been dying because people have moved to mobile devices, where they prefer native apps. If you're advocating for slower development of browsers, you're also advocating for the death of the open web.

A significant number of my "native apps" on mobile are just webview wrappers. Some are really fancy and slick, but still. I think the mobile OS handling web apps in a more integrated way would help here more than making browsers more complex.

Re: DOJ filed paperwork to US District Court to force Google to spin off Chrome [pdf]

#93

Post by viraptor »

jeswin wrote: post #81
viraptor wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chrome does a lot of things. I know there are downsides and many people don't agree, but I think overall the browser/internet experience would benefit from simpler browsers that don't move so fast.

> I think overall the browser/internet experience would benefit from simpler browsers that don't move so fast. I wish browsers moved faster so that I don't have to download so many native apps. Native mobile apps are monitoring me continuously, and way more opaquely than web apps. More importantly, they can't be thwarted by plugins. As a mobile Firefox and Desktop Chrome user, I wish browsers (especially FF) moved fa…

I'm not sure browser improvements would help here. App authors need discoverability and a sales channel. Android and iOS could provide that for web apps without wrappers, but they don't. So developers don't have any incentive to go with browsers. This is a business/social issue, not a browser tech one.

Re: DOJ filed paperwork to US District Court to force Google to spin off Chrome [pdf]

#94

Post by timschmidt »

tsimionescu wrote: post #31
timschmidt wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One minor nit, it will be all parties interested in influence over future web standards and their eventual implementation.

Right, those would have the biggest incentive. But I'm sure good fundraisers will be bale to even get some large companies that aren't engaging in the standards at any level to throw some money to support a standard web browser, if they can convince everyone that without this there won't be a good way for people to access their web sites.

I suspect that the leading reason browsers require so much investment and development effort is the ongoing effort to engineer them into heavily surveilled application delivery platforms.

Most of the browsers in this list were developed by the open source community without major funding: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_web_browsers

Though the same browsers tend not to support many of the newer standards.

I kind of miss SGML, myself, and wonder if a slower pace of browser development and associated code churn might actually be more benefit than harm.

Re: DOJ filed paperwork to US District Court to force Google to spin off Chrome [pdf]

#95

Post by modeless »

KennyBlanken wrote: post #68
modeless wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously, first Apple's App Store is declared not a monopoly while the Play Store is, despite Android allowing alternative stores while iOS doesn't. Now Google is forbidden from developing web browsers while Apple is free to continue monopolizing browser engines on iOS and holding back the web from competing with native apps?

> Seriously, first Apple's App Store is declared not a monopoly while the Play Store is, despite Android allowing alternative stores while iOS doesn't. 1)Because Apple didn't conspire with (potential) competitors to Google Play - both cellular providers and device manufacturers - bribing them with payments and revenue sharing agreements on condition they not pre-load their own app stores, thus maintaining a monopoly…

> Apple didn't conspire with (potential) competitors

Of course not, instead Apple forbade competition by fiat! The fact that antitrust law rewarded this behavior is perverse. The whole point of antitrust law is to promote competition, after all.

> you can't figure out why

Your assumption of ignorance is incorrect. I know exactly why. Nothing in your post is news to me and none of it contradicts what I said in the slightest. It's all completely irrelevant to my point. Apple dodged being ruled a monopoly by forbidding a market to exist at all, while Google was ruled a monopoly because they allowed a market to exist. (Note that whether or how they exploited the monopoly is irrelevant to the question of whether a monopoly exists).

Also, frankly, your tone violates the HN guidelines. Do better.

Re: DOJ filed paperwork to US District Court to force Google to spin off Chrome [pdf]

#96

Post by XajniN »

ZuBB wrote: post #44
inopinatus wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's always the Opera model: attempt to sell inserted ads, fail, sell it to a Chinese holding company, and have future development funded by the Russians. What could possibly go wrong?

Can you please share a details about the part related to Russians? I used to be big fan of Opera browser, but don't follow theirs recent news

Opera has always been relatively very popular in Eastern Europe. I don’t know if there is any clandestine Russian operation behind it (unlikely), there are just many comments and reviews about Opera and its extensions in Russian language.

Re: DOJ filed paperwork to US District Court to force Google to spin off Chrome [pdf]

#97

Post by Trompair »

Personally I'd rather just see users given a choice. Ban the ability to pay to be the default search engine, and throw up a search engine selection screen when a user first launches the browser.

If people still choose to use Google then so be it.

Re: DOJ filed paperwork to US District Court to force Google to spin off Chrome [pdf]

#98

Post by arresin »

knuckleheads wrote: post #7

Page 12 is also very interesting to me personally, as it contains orders mandating the opening of Google’s search index to their competitors. I had been wondering if that would make it in there and am happy to see it land.

That is the only thing that makes sense then. The chrome thing doesn’t. It’s like the worst possible way of dealing with this very serious problem.

Re: DOJ filed paperwork to US District Court to force Google to spin off Chrome [pdf]

#99

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

viraptor wrote: post #56
josephg wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chrome currently has far more paid full time engineers than the linux kernel does. I struggle to see how they get paid - except again, by charging search engines to be the default browser or something.

Chrome does a lot of things. I know there are downsides and many people don't agree, but I think overall the browser/internet experience would benefit from simpler browsers that don't move so fast.

I agree. They jam everything but the kitchen sink into the damn browser these days. Chrome being so well staffed and fast moving means everyone else gets to play catch up and it's bullshit.

Re: DOJ filed paperwork to US District Court to force Google to spin off Chrome [pdf]

#100

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

m4r1k wrote: post #25

Chrome is not the problem. Chrome is not even a symptom. The problem is that the world's largest search engine is also the world's largest ad distributor. Chopping off tentacles like Android or Chrome does nothing to slay the two-headed beast.

Have you read the document? They explain why Chrome and Android are clean cut-points for remedy.
Post reply on HN