241–250 of 702 posts
Google's flagship product is the Google search engine, which provides search results to consumers, who pay for the service with their data. anyone else finding the plainness of that last sentence to be staggering? ...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As stated in the press release, the fine has been calculated on the basis of the value of Google's revenue from its comparison shopping service in the 13 EEA countries concerned, taking into account the "duration and gravity" of the infringement. What the commission is asking is simply equal treatment between rival comparison shopping services and its own.
When I visit rivalshoppingservice.com then I would expect to see that rival shopping service. When I visit google, I would expect to see google. Are the rivals going to be required to show google results now or is this really not about choice but about crippling google or is it about extracting an easy multi-billion dollar payday? When I go to the SNCF (French rail) website, are they showing me flight and bus options…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anecdotal experience: I switched browsers on android because android's default browser kept opening map links in google map. Firefox mobile didn't seem to suffer from that issue. While google's tight integration lead to a positive experience for you, it lead to a very poor experience for myself or others who want to use something not google. I'm not asking for the EUC to fine google, I'm asking for choice.
Not 100% but I thought that android asks you the first time you click on a maps/wiki etc link would you rather use browser or app and whether you want to do it once or always. I agree with you that choice is good. That is kinda why I proposed my very simplistic solution of Google offering two ways of searching. One stream which tightly integrates with the Google Ecosystem which would be a plus for many people (like m…
The OP may have been using the Google search results which directly rendered a Google Maps instead of a address link. Not 100% sure either.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because it works for you, it doesn't mean it works for everyone else. Of all Google's services I don't care about: - Google Shopping, I never saw a reason to use it and I never did, I prefer to use local shops or Amazon - Google Maps, I actually prefer Open Street Maps. The amount of detail on OSM is staggering and in many ways, I think the data is much more complete than Google Maps - Google reviews about restaurant…
On operating systems you set preferences for which service/program to open when a certain extension is clicked. Similarly Google should be forced to allow you to set your preferences through your browser, i.e. not forcing you to login, on where you want to go when you type certain types of queries, like for instance directions or products. That would improve competition and give other service providers at least a goo…
Google should be forced to allow you to set your
preferences through your browser, i.e. not forcing
you to login ...
Google posted a response blog post: https://www.blog.google/topics/google-europe/european-commis... It's mostly just fluff, but they do make a good point about the role of Amazon and eBay in product searches. I remember one of the early criticisms of the EU in this case being that they defined the "market" to exclude Amazon and eBay. Anyone know what the EUs reasoning for that is?
From Google's piece: > When you shop online, you want to find the products you’re looking for quickly and easily. And advertisers want to promote those same products. That's why Google shows shopping ads, connecting our users with thousands of advertisers, large and small, in ways that are useful for both. The problem is that when you are shopping for something, you don't want advertisers to be influencing what you s…
Visting google is 100% voloutary and there are alternatives. The EU should not interfere, its unnecessary and I think its an abuse of power from their side.
Google giving an advantage to its shopping service is peanuts. The way Chrome was promoted (not only through search, but other Google services as well) is the real abuse.
If that's the case then they way Microsoft promoted IE before Chrome was the work of Satan himself.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As stated in the press release, the fine has been calculated on the basis of the value of Google's revenue from its comparison shopping service in the 13 EEA countries concerned, taking into account the "duration and gravity" of the infringement. What the commission is asking is simply equal treatment between rival comparison shopping services and its own.
When I visit rivalshoppingservice.com then I would expect to see that rival shopping service. When I visit google, I would expect to see google. Are the rivals going to be required to show google results now or is this really not about choice but about crippling google or is it about extracting an easy multi-billion dollar payday? When I go to the SNCF (French rail) website, are they showing me flight and bus options…
What actually happened was that Google removed the need to compete with anyone, by always listing its own other businesses up-front in search results. Since Google has the dominant position in the search market, this guarantees a steady stream of customers to the other businesses, even if they're not as good as other companies' products/services, and means they don't face competitive pressure. Without competitive pressure, quality doesn't get driven up and prices don't get driven down.
Since we want competitive markets to drive quality up and prices down, we have laws which don't allow a company that dominates one type of product/service to use that as a way to achieve dominance in other products/services by avoiding the need to compete.
Google giving an advantage to its shopping service is peanuts. The way Chrome was promoted (not only through search, but other Google services as well) is the real abuse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When I visit rivalshoppingservice.com then I would expect to see that rival shopping service. When I visit google, I would expect to see google. Are the rivals going to be required to show google results now or is this really not about choice but about crippling google or is it about extracting an easy multi-billion dollar payday? When I go to the SNCF (French rail) website, are they showing me flight and bus options…
Except that Google is not a shopping service. Using a dominant position in one market to acquire one in a different market is not allowed.