31–40 of 153 posts
If they actually knew what they were talking about, they would be voting to decentralize the internet, not break Google up. I don't think trying to break up Microsoft or fine them for bundling internet explorer achieved a whole lot. They are looking at the problem the wrong way.
> I don't think trying to break up Microsoft or fine them for bundling internet explorer achieved a whole lot. I don't know. Is Internet Explorer still the most used webbrowser?
If they actually knew what they were talking about, they would be voting to decentralize the internet, not break Google up. I don't think trying to break up Microsoft or fine them for bundling internet explorer achieved a whole lot. They are looking at the problem the wrong way.
> I don't think trying to break up Microsoft or fine them for bundling internet explorer achieved a whole lot. I don't know. Is Internet Explorer still the most used webbrowser?
Ugh, not this again. The only real monopolies are those which are protected by government regulation or control. Google is out there on the freewheeling internet competing. It has a broad portfolio of products, but their main revenue stream - ads from search engine - has about the lowest switching costs of any product known to man. Google is far from an angel, and the days of 'don't be evil' are a quaint memory. But…
The more interesting question (to me at least) is whether search will be as important going forward as it has been for the past 20 years. As more data and activity moves into apps, more stuff is being silo-ed off from Google. Sure apps might be a blip before stuff moves back to the web but if they're not then Google may remain dominant in search but search itself may become a smaller part of the whole.
I was blocked indefinitely from Adsense by Google's faulty algorithms (without explanation and with appeals rejected without explanation). I lost the revenue I'd earnt that month, and soon realised Google holds a monopoly in this space, and no one else offered a comparable service. I'm all for Google's stronghold to be broken. reply
Ugh, not this again. The only real monopolies are those which are protected by government regulation or control. Google is out there on the freewheeling internet competing. It has a broad portfolio of products, but their main revenue stream - ads from search engine - has about the lowest switching costs of any product known to man. Google is far from an angel, and the days of 'don't be evil' are a quaint memory. But…
Not according to the law. Any one who basically controls the market is a monopoly. Microsoft faced antitrust charges before as well and they were not protected by government regulation or control either.
Monopoly itself is not a crime, though. Abusing the power of monopoly is, which is something the European Union has to prove.
I don't know a lot about the requirements of these operations; how can the European Union guarantee that each Subgoogle does not agree with the rest to provide services to each other that I can't access to? I don't see how they can enforce that any company can be playing a level field against another subgoogle competitor...
That's the real problem; they don't know what to do about it, but they'll rather do anything instead of nothing. Either it's gonna be a lot of hot air or turn out for the worse. What's funny is that Google already operates as separate legal entities in different European countries (though some countries share one HQ and hence legal identity). How they plan to further "break it up" I can't imagine.
I don't know a lot about the requirements of these operations; how can the European Union guarantee that each Subgoogle does not agree with the rest to provide services to each other that I can't access to? I don't see how they can enforce that any company can be playing a level field against another subgoogle competitor...
That's the real problem; they don't know what to do about it, but they'll rather do anything instead of nothing. Either it's gonna be a lot of hot air or turn out for the worse. What's funny is that Google already operates as separate legal entities in different European countries (though some countries share one HQ and hence legal identity). How they plan to further "break it up" I can't imagine.
I can't even begin to imagine the engineering nightmare that would be though, especially now that accounts are unified.
> Google has around 90% market share for search in Europe It's a complete monopoly and the barrier to entry is huge. Might be a good thing to break them up.
I agree that its a monopoly, though I find it funny that serious time & consideration is being given to discuss breaking them up. Google are a company who have a product (search, among many). Their product is successful (many people use search). Competitors obviously find it hard to break into the market, and want to make that easier. Is this not how business works? A company creates a product and tries to make it as…
To use your example – your company makes car types, and has a monopoly. You then branch out, and start making cars as well. And you redesign your tyres such that they're only compatible with your car. Oh, and the roads everywhere only work with your tyres.
That's an abuse of monopoly, and that's what the target is. Look at that fact that Google products are starting to demand Chrome, or to push their other services through their monopoly search engine.
I don't think the problem is that bad yet, but we have to be super vigilant about that stuff or we end up with AT&T, Microsoft, or Standard Oil.
Ugh, not this again. The only real monopolies are those which are protected by government regulation or control. Google is out there on the freewheeling internet competing. It has a broad portfolio of products, but their main revenue stream - ads from search engine - has about the lowest switching costs of any product known to man. Google is far from an angel, and the days of 'don't be evil' are a quaint memory. But…
The only real monopolies are those which are protected by government regulation or control. This is utter, objective nonsense. Look at Microsoft as a case in point, which had a near 100% market share of desktop operating systems. Nobody would claim that wasn't a monopoly. Google is out there on the freewheeling internet competing. It has a broad portfolio of products, but their main revenue stream - ads from search e…
> Google has around 90% market share for search in Europe It's a complete monopoly and the barrier to entry is huge. Might be a good thing to break them up.
I agree that its a monopoly, though I find it funny that serious time & consideration is being given to discuss breaking them up. Google are a company who have a product (search, among many). Their product is successful (many people use search). Competitors obviously find it hard to break into the market, and want to make that easier. Is this not how business works? A company creates a product and tries to make it as…
Let's assume you do both sell tires and BMW. And whether your clients would ask a quote for BWMs, details or services - you would always advise them to buy your tires.
And if they would explicitly ask, what else tires I could buy, you would hesitate to admit (e.g. 30 minute length discussion over the phone wire or 30 emails back and forth) what there are any you could recommend / satisfy specs / requirements. That would be quite the same: e.g. people have to redefine their search queries to get non google results, or scroll down, or go to second page results etc..
What gives?