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

Google’s Internal Response to Imminent E.U. Charges

recode.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 101 posts

Re: Google’s Internal Response to Imminent E.U. Charges

#11

Post by pliny »

jacquesm wrote: post #5
michaelt wrote: post #2

If those graphs are supposed to show that Google Shopping is an unpopular also-ran that users don't like or use, you have to wonder why they keep putting it in a big box with pictures at the top of search listings, like http://imgur.com/N3aGIVy

According to Google in the early days 'paid inclusion' was one of the original sins, and Google would never stoop that low. I personally think that paid inclusion is actually less evil than promoting your own crap products over the legitimate listings.

Isn't promoting your own crap just dogfooding paid inclusions?

Re: Google’s Internal Response to Imminent E.U. Charges

#13

Post by Jugurtha »

vidarh wrote: post #6

It's fascinating that their memo dismisses their search position so easily, but focuses on graphs for shopping and travel that shows them in a weak position in those areas, as either the memo is hiding their real arguments (which might not be unreasonable - given its audience and the odds it would leak), or they have not thought this through. What the graphs show is that there are a number of strong competitors in th…

Right on..

There are two points:

1. "Recode obtained an internal memo". If I were Google, I'd leak that on purpose. A polished internal memo that is leaked is more powerful than explicit PR, because of its supposed "internal" nature. "They didn't write it thinking others may read it, so it's probably honest and pure."

2. As I read, I thought exactly the same thing as your first paragraph: Search, making themselves look weak. I also remembered something Peter Thiel said in a PandoMonthly.. That non monopolistic companies try to look big and monopolistic, and that truly huge monopolistic companies downplay it to the point you worry about their survival.

He gave the example of Google, of course, and did the exact same thing as in the internal memo (talked about the other markets and how competition is so fierce, nothing is granted).

That was one of the best interviews I've seen, by the way..

Re: Google’s Internal Response to Imminent E.U. Charges

#15

Post by sschueller »

Why is Apple not also in trouble?

The way safari runs on iOS compared to other browser is very similar to how Microsoft shipped explorer with windows. Except windows did not prevent other browser from using the full API and your app didn't have to go through a approval process.

Re: Google’s Internal Response to Imminent E.U. Charges

#16

Post by thirdsun »

sschueller wrote: post #15

Why is Apple not also in trouble? The way safari runs on iOS compared to other browser is very similar to how Microsoft shipped explorer with windows. Except windows did not prevent other browser from using the full API and your app didn't have to go through a approval process.

Market share is the differentiator in both scenarios.

Re: Google’s Internal Response to Imminent E.U. Charges

#17

Post by gtirloni »

gggggggg wrote: post #14

Is it just me or does that memo read like it was meant to be leaked. To the point that it was not at all intended for internal.

There is no such thing as an internal memo anymore. Especially on matters relevant to the public in general. It's a outdated practice of reporters to call it "leaked" but these days it's just to draw some attention. It was probably sent by their legal team themselves to send a message to the EU commission.

Re: Google’s Internal Response to Imminent E.U. Charges

#18

Post by pluma »

sschueller wrote: post #15

Why is Apple not also in trouble? The way safari runs on iOS compared to other browser is very similar to how Microsoft shipped explorer with windows. Except windows did not prevent other browser from using the full API and your app didn't have to go through a approval process.

Because real humans in Europe don't have iPhones?

EDIT: If you read HN, you're probably not a real human. Let's not fool ourselves.

Re: Google’s Internal Response to Imminent E.U. Charges

#19

Post by IBM »

sschueller wrote: post #15

Why is Apple not also in trouble? The way safari runs on iOS compared to other browser is very similar to how Microsoft shipped explorer with windows. Except windows did not prevent other browser from using the full API and your app didn't have to go through a approval process.

From Kantar:

https://gigaom2.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/screen-shot-2015...

Re: Google’s Internal Response to Imminent E.U. Charges

#20

Post by sschueller »

thirdsun wrote: post #16
sschueller wrote: post #15

Why is Apple not also in trouble? The way safari runs on iOS compared to other browser is very similar to how Microsoft shipped explorer with windows. Except windows did not prevent other browser from using the full API and your app didn't have to go through a approval process.

Market share is the differentiator in both scenarios.

So anti-competitive actions/feature/function is only a problem once you reach a certain market share?
Post reply on HN