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

The DOJ still wants Google to sell off Chrome

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 718 posts

Re: The DOJ still wants Google to sell off Chrome

#451

Post by Terretta »

ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #152
cubefox wrote: post #130

Google has to sell Chrome, a completely optional browser, and stop supporting Firefox, the best Chrome alternative, while Apple is allowed to completely lock down iOS without allowing installing alternatives to Safari, or any third party app stores. Not to mention that Apple for years exploited its dominant market position in the US by resisting messaging RCS Android compatibility, and pressuring teens into either bu…

The iOS app store monopoly is unreal. Epic's case should have been a slam dunk, they got removed from the app store by offering a discount if people went through their processor instead of Apple's, proving harm to the consumer by simply expecting less than 30% for simply processing a payment. People complain about whataboutism, but the Apple versus almost any other 'monopoly' is insane. You can switch browsers within…

https://setapp.com/for-ios-developers

(Note that SetApp already enables subscribers to use iOS apps.)

Re: The DOJ still wants Google to sell off Chrome

#452

Post by nashashmi »

mrweasel wrote: post #204
nashashmi wrote: post #156

Keep Google Chrome. Separate search. Sell it to private equity. (I bet DoJ didn’t think about that whammy.) And start charging for everything else out there like maps, street view, and browser. And buy cloudflare while at it. Push themselves into everything related to connectivity and internet properties. The search business is the cash flow that is being a thorn in the side of Google. And it doesn’t even make sense…

You sort of make an interesting point. Google search isn't the main product, hasn't been for a decade. Still I don't think Google Ads would do amazing without the traffic from Google Search. But it does solve an important problem: Who in their right mind would buy Chrome? It's not a profitable business to be in, without the surrounding ad business, and in turn the insane amount of traffic from Google Search. Almost b…

I dont think adwords would stay with Google. It would have to be sold with search. The ad network would remain with alphabet.

Re: The DOJ still wants Google to sell off Chrome

#453

Post by soerxpso »

hysan wrote: post #441
Ferret7446 wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Possibly by trying to find a business model that can support Chrome development just like all other Chromium (and non-Chromium) based browsers? There is no such business model. Chromium development is almost entirely funded by Google. Other Chromium based browser rely on this humonguous investment of development resources; they would not have a "business model" without this "free handout", except perhaps Microsoft…

Not sure how Chromium development relates to the order of divesting *Chrome* from Google. AFAICT, Google can continue pouring resources into Chromium. Was this an unintentional mixup in your comment?

Why would Google pour resources into Chromium if they don't profit off of it anymore?

Re: The DOJ still wants Google to sell off Chrome

#454

Post by chrome111 »

bloppe wrote: post #439
bo1024 wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Selling might not make business sense for Google or for Chrome, but it makes a ton of sense for the American public. Google is using Chrome to benefit advertisers, data brokers, and surveillance over users. Exhibit: the manifest v2 / Ublock Origin saga. And this is huge because so many other browsers use Chromium or its engine under the hood. Google can also use Chrome to push user-unfriendly web standards or de-fact…

The problem is that it doesn't make business sense for anybody else to buy Chrome. Bare in mind that 99% of Chrome is the free Chromium open source project, so you're not buying any sort of technological asset. You're just buying a big pre-existing user base, which would be extremely difficult to monetize without making the product much worse, although I'm sure Microsoft or Facebook would be happy to give that a go.…

I'm assuming this is the point - say "just sell it" to satisfy anti-monopolists, while knowing no one will buy it for any reasonable price to satisfy monopolists. Political points across the board with no consequence, why not?

Re: The DOJ still wants Google to sell off Chrome

#455

Post by nashashmi »

nuker wrote: post #273
nashashmi wrote: post #156

Keep Google Chrome. Separate search. Sell it to private equity. (I bet DoJ didn’t think about that whammy.) And start charging for everything else out there like maps, street view, and browser. And buy cloudflare while at it. Push themselves into everything related to connectivity and internet properties. The search business is the cash flow that is being a thorn in the side of Google. And it doesn’t even make sense…

> Keep Google Chrome. Separate search. Sell it to private equity. This. If Search + Google Ads is independent from Android + Chrome + Gmail, it will choke the user-data flow that Google Ads platform is feeding on. This opens doors to new competing search engines! Android + Chrome + Gmail needs to be bundled with hardware purchases, like Apple does with Safari + iCloud. This will create incentive to make them actually…

The doubleclick network would still belong to google. Only search would be kept separate.

Re: The DOJ still wants Google to sell off Chrome

#456

Post by cactusplant7374 »

magicalist wrote: post #433
realitysballs wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Think about difference between Brave and Chrome. Both Chromium browsers but Brave is much less intrusive and exploitative of user data. More Brave and less Chrome would allow average user greater privacy and less reliance on large corporations perhaps

Brave makes a profit because they don't pay for developing the browser.

I really doubt Brave is profitable. They have taken a lot of VC money.

Re: The DOJ still wants Google to sell off Chrome

#458

Post by bpicolo »

rchaud wrote: post #180
crop_rotation wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no foundation with the budget to even maintain a web browser, let alone keep developing. If Google is not footing the bill then Safari will become the torch bearer, and Apple has no incentive to make Safari become more capable to threaten that sweet IAP revenue.

Have there been meaningful changes to the browser spec since ES2015 support was baked in? Chrome, Safari etc. are not developing their browsers for the betterment of the web. One company wants to shove ads in your face, the other wants you out of the web entirely and into their walled garden of apps and ads. From a security standpoint, I'm sure it's more complicated, but UBO and warning dialog boxes about downloading…

Do you all forget the web pre chrome? Google and Chrome forced browser vendors to do better by standards in the first place. Google’s stewardship forced browser vendors to compete like never before.

Re: The DOJ still wants Google to sell off Chrome

#460

Post by geor9e »

scarface_74 wrote: post #392
sneak wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does; Google is the default search in Safari.

I meant browsing history. I don’t care about my search history. Even though these days I use the paid ChatGPT with the web search tool most of the time. Google is becoming more useless every month

Chrome Sync (i.e. saving your history + everything else to the cloud so it syncs to all your devices) is an optional setting. Microsoft Edge has the same thing under another name. Safari does too.
Post reply on HN