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

Microsoft CEO testifies that Google’s power in search is ubiquitous

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 236 posts

Re: Microsoft CEO testifies that Google’s power in search is ubiquitous

#181

Post by l33tman »

fractalb wrote: post #149
treve wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have. It was quite a big deal at the time: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor... .

Thanks. I didn't know it. Microsoft is still a monopoly on desktop OS, even after this anti-trust investigation. To me, that's weird. Anti-trust didn't work?

Just having the most popular product doesn't mean you're liable in an anti-trust case, you have to abuse the position as well (IANAL though). There are no viable competitors for a PC desktop OS for them to abuse and haven't been since the 80-90's I guess.

A bit off topic, but to me it's interesting that they couldn't extend their desktop OS dominance to the mobile world when they launched Windows Phone with a huge war chest. That must have demonstrated how huge the disjunction is between desktop and mobile use-cases in general, or the strategy should have worked (and could have re-fuelled the anti-trust aspects)

Re: Microsoft CEO testifies that Google’s power in search is ubiquitous

#182

Post by l33tman »

magicalhippo wrote: post #161
charles_f wrote: post #125

I donno, I've been using only duckduckgo for a few years and I don't feel any worse than on google

I've been using primarily DuckDuckGo for over a year now, and while I agree that for most things it's on par with Google, it's much worse on obscure stuff and on regional stuff (Norway in my case). That said, I think the parity on most searches is partially due to Google sucking more than it did. Often the thing I'm looking for isn't in the top 10 hits in either.

Yes, I came to the same conclusion. DDG doesn't feel as good as Google once was, but Google is almost unusable now, the entire first screen is almost always 5 paid placements and 5 SEO scam sites.

Re: Microsoft CEO testifies that Google’s power in search is ubiquitous

#183

Post by JopV »

jodrellblank wrote: post #123
cptskippy wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Google as a search engine is far better than Bing and that’s just a fact. I have been using DDG for several years now and honestly can't stand Google's results anymore. It seems like you can no longer search for an exact term and at every opportunity they try to slip in a merchant selling something as a result.

I have been using DDG for a few years, and most of the time end up doing !g to go to Google and get good answers. Nothing specific comes to mind right now, but the pattern is like this: me: Who's that guy with a big hat? DDG: showing results for bug hat IN UNITED KINGDOM: 1) Daily Mail woman wearing ladybird hat absolutely destroys woke liberal you won't believe. 2) Best hair cuts for guys who wear hats - generic-seo…

Google Maps is for finding your way around where you are. Google Earth is for seeing the world.

I like the combined approach of Apple Maps.

Re: Microsoft CEO testifies that Google’s power in search is ubiquitous

#184

Post by sph »

jiggawatts wrote: post #3

One way Google maintains their monopoly is that many websites block all bots except for the Google indexing bot. This makes it literally impossible for anyone to make a competing search engine because millions of doors are slammed in their face. There is no practical way to negotiate access at this scale either leaving no options for small startups — e.g.: AI-based search! One possible anti-monopoly measure would be…

> One way Google maintains their monopoly is that many websites block all bots except for the Google indexing bot.

No, I don't think that's true. I am writing a web crawler, not for search purposes, and I haven't seen preferential treatment for GoogleBot compared to others. Sure, some might be banned outright (though bad crawlers just ignore robots.txt and do whatever they want), but in most cases new bots have the same access rights than GoogleBot.

Also, your sentence doesn't pass the sniff test: you claim Google has better access than all other crawlers; but robots.txt is solely in the hands of the webmaster. How does Google coerce most website owners to block other bots? There is no conspiracy at play here.

Re: Microsoft CEO testifies that Google’s power in search is ubiquitous

#186

Post by nubela »

sph wrote: post #184
jiggawatts wrote: post #3

One way Google maintains their monopoly is that many websites block all bots except for the Google indexing bot. This makes it literally impossible for anyone to make a competing search engine because millions of doors are slammed in their face. There is no practical way to negotiate access at this scale either leaving no options for small startups — e.g.: AI-based search! One possible anti-monopoly measure would be…

> One way Google maintains their monopoly is that many websites block all bots except for the Google indexing bot. No, I don't think that's true. I am writing a web crawler, not for search purposes, and I haven't seen preferential treatment for GoogleBot compared to others. Sure, some might be banned outright (though bad crawlers just ignore robots.txt and do whatever they want), but in most cases new bots have the s…

Try LinkedIn, or Facebook, or Twitter, or Crunchbase.

Re: Microsoft CEO testifies that Google’s power in search is ubiquitous

#187

Post by grvdrm »

havnagiggle wrote: post #30
bettercallsalad wrote: post #27

I am not following these testimonies in anti-trust cases where they have a competitor of Google testify against Google. Isn’t testifying all about presenting evidence? If I am accused of theft in a criminal court and my arch rival is brought for testimony against me, it doesn’t sound like a fair process to me. Of course if it’s a substantiated material it would make sense but otherwise it doesn’t just makes sense at…

I am with you on this one. What the hell is this? Why is DOJ peddling for other trillion dollar companies? Microsft CEO is concerned for _Google's shareholders_? Are you serious? I don't believe a word of this guy. I'll just add, Bingbot has the same crawling opportunities as Googlebot. Nobody is stopping Bing from driving traffic to their website. It's also been 20+ years: Windows OS is constantly manipulating defau…

> Nobody is stopping Bing from driving traffic to their website

I know your comment is about the bot, but the other side is, yes - Google is absolutely stopping Bing from driving traffic to their website. Not Google's bot, but Google's default deals on iOS, browsers, etc.

Even if Bing's index was measurably better, most folks wouldn't think to switch given how easy it already is to stick with Google.

Otherwise, re: Microsoft - you're absolutely right. The latest examples for me: - Teams as a crappy default - In Windows 11 I can't move my taskbar to another part of my window anymore? What the f. 10+ years of user-preference destroyed with one update.

Re: Microsoft CEO testifies that Google’s power in search is ubiquitous

#188

Post by sylware »

nova22033 wrote: post #40
sylware wrote: post #23

lol, their significant share holders are big tech one: vanguard and blackrock. Same guys...

mutual funds and asset managers owning a vast swathe of the index isn't the big conspiracy you think it is...

And expecting that to have zero impact is no better than believing in conspiracies.

Re: Microsoft CEO testifies that Google’s power in search is ubiquitous

#189

Post by robertlagrant »

JopV wrote: post #179
robertlagrant wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use DDG exclusively and have done for years.

DuckDuckGo is just a proxy for Bing, the results are the same. Kagi and Brave are actual competitors.

We're talking about competitors to Google. Why doesn't DDG count as a competitor to Google?

Re: Microsoft CEO testifies that Google’s power in search is ubiquitous

#190

Post by jppittma »

anon25783 wrote: post #64
0xDEF wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's funny how eager Americans are to break up the Big Tech companies that happen to be the only reason the US economy is not a complete dumpster fire. Look at GDP growth for the US vs. the Eurozone since 2008. The high level of integration, both horizontal and vertical, is what makes the US Big Tech companies so economically productive and valuable. But sure. Kill your software industry. Does the US even know how to…

> the only reason the US economy is not a complete dumpster fire. The US economy is a complete dumpster fire for those of us worth less than seven figures. Big tech monopolization does not strengthen our productive capacity, and breaking up the big tech companies won't weaken it. If anything, it will strengthen the economy by making it more viable to found a tech startup without the explicit goal of being bought out.…

Idk. This makes me super nervous. Look at what the bell breakup did for innovation in software. The transistor was literally invented there before it was broken up. Likewise, I think it's probable that if Google is broken up, you'll not see anything as innovative as the transformer models, GFS, or Spanner anymore. I think quality of life for employees will likely go down, as it did when bell labs was broken up.
Post reply on HN