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

DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 1001 posts

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#241

Post by michaelt »

graeme wrote: post #230
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> only reason I still use Chrome is because I already use other Google products and they integrate well together This is the point. Google's products integrate with Chrome better than non-Google products. Including its ad platform.

But where is the consumer benefit?

Much better privacy protection and ad blocking.

There's really no rational reason for third-party cookies to still exist. The only reason they're still around is because an advertising company's browser has like 97% market share.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#242

Post by pseudalopex »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #130
ninth_ant wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn’t matter if no one buys it, or if it doesn’t even continue to exist as a standalone business. That’s preferable. The important part is ending the egregious conflict of interest where an advertising behemoth controls access to the internet. Ideal result is that Chrome ceases to exist and Chromium continues as an independent open source project controlled by a nonprofit. Even if Google is one of the contributo…

> TLDR just be like Mozilla Mozilla is rapidly deciding they want to be an advertising and AI company at the expense of their primary product. So, tl;dr: be like Mozilla used to be, not like they are now.

I don't like Mozilla's advertising strategy either. But their primary product can't sustain itself.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#243

Post by hilbert42 »

sangnoir wrote: post #220
hilbert42 wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Who would possibly buy Chrome?" This is illustrates the extent and magnitude of the problem to fix the internet. That regulators failed to give enough oversight of the internet and to regulate its monopolistic players several decades ago when these problems first became obvious has meant that they are now almost insurmountable. Ideally, Google would be forced to divest itself of Chrome and that Chrome would become a…

> Ideally, Google would be forced to divest itself of Chrome and that Chrome would become an open source project a la Linux. Clearly, that's very unlikely to happen. Chrome's upstream (Chromium) is already open source. If Google is forbidden from sponsoring Chromium's development, and that of its proprietary downstream distribution (Chrome) who's going to fund Chromium's development? Even if forced to divest, Google…

If Google were forced to divest itself of Chrome and there were no takers then Chromium would take on an altogether different perspective. That Chromium exists shows there's already an existing infrastructure that would make transitioning to it relatively straightforward.

Incidentally, I don't use Chrome, only Chromium-based and Firefox-based browsers.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#244

Post by DimuP »

A single attempt to separate google and chrome (with all its products) would make the eco-system pointless and swipe away google entirely from the global market.

why not to give Youtube instead tho? (even if the revenue/monetization of every single channel would be heavily impacted)

Android and chrome are necessary for google to live, so Youtube or something else would be better

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#245

Post by alsetmusic »

DimuP wrote: post #244

A single attempt to separate google and chrome (with all its products) would make the eco-system pointless and swipe away google entirely from the global market. why not to give Youtube instead tho? (even if the revenue/monetization of every single channel would be heavily impacted) Android and chrome are necessary for google to live, so Youtube or something else would be better

The point is not to do what is good for Google. The point is to do what is good for users and the market. Separating Chrome from Google's despotic plans such as AMP and blocking ad-blockers so that the browser is independent from their attempts to further control the web would be a good thing.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#246

Post by michaelt »

aeonik wrote: post #113
rty32 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very few companies would be able to manage a gigantic project like Chromium. I happen to be poking around the Chromium codebase the last few days. The size of the codebase itself is at the same level as all of our company's code. Something as important and critical as GPU rendering is only a small part of the entire project. You also have v8, ChromeOS, ANGLE etc to worry about, all requiring experts in those areas. N…

I'll do it, if they agree to sell it to me, I'll run it. I have a few hundred bucks that I'm willing to put into the pie, but based on the financials, it's probably going to go bankrupt pretty quick.

> based on the financials, it's probably going to go bankrupt pretty quick.

Stage 1: Buy Chrome from Google, with its 65% browser market share.

Stage 2: Tell Google you'll keep them as default search provider for $5 billion per year.

Stage 3: Profit

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#247

Post by tssva »

itake wrote: post #198
jascination wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) does it though? It seems like the Google-specific parts of it are pretty ancillary to the whole experience 2) how is it different to Apples integration with Safari?

2) consumers cannot use products like Safari as their exclusive web browser. The web has decided that Chrome is the only browser worth supporting and the world needs to keep Chrome at-the-ready for when the alternative browser eventually breaks. For example, Chrome has replaced IE as the corporate browser, due to the integrations with Workspace accounts and Authentication mechanisms. In order to use the fingerID on m…

I use Safari as my exclusive web browser without issue.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#248

Post by BadHumans »

bogwog wrote: post #196
andrewflnr wrote: post #17

What would that even mean? Chrome doesn't make money. Who would buy it, except maybe someone who plans to do something even more nefarious?

> Who would buy it If the decision drags on into the new administration, then the answer is probably Elon Musk.

This is good guess unfortunately. However, there are second order effects as we've seen with X that will drive people to Firefox so this could end up being a good thing.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#250

Post by philistine »

EMIRELADERO wrote: post #182
legitster wrote: post #153

I'm all for competition and increasing consumer choices, but the government is really not making a case that this is supposed to help consumers. The only reason I still use Chrome is because I already use other Google products and they integrate well together. There are many other better options out there otherwise, and they are all free. Breaking out Chrome from Google will not in any way benefit me as a consumer. >…

> It sounds like the end goal of this is to enrich other companies , not customers. In this case, the "customers" are other companies. Antitrust markets can be defined broadly or narrowly. In this case, the market was "general web search advertising" (among others). Who are the consumers in this market? People and companies that want their ads placed where (and to who) it matters.

Exactly. Everybody thinks they're the consumer, but often times consumers are other companies.
Post reply on HN