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

Google loses antitrust suit over search deals on phones

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 761 posts

Re: Google loses antitrust suit over search deals on phones

#481

Post by fuzztester »

notatoad wrote: post #457
fuzztester wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how are they a monopoly, as I asked another person in this same thread, here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41166997

>how are they a monopoly they are because a judge just ruled they are. answering questions like this is the reason the courts exist, and they just answered this question. or they might not actually be a monopoly, there's still a possibility of appeal, but there's really no more definitive answer than a judge's ruling. antitrust law is fuzzy, and depends a lot on the courts to interpret it.

as you say, antitrust law is fuzzy.

and judges are human, and therefore fallible.

and that judge's ruling can be overturned by an appeals court. and the appeals court's ruling can again be overturned by an even higher court.

such things have happened many times in the past.

so that means that the courts are no more reliable than Wikipedia.

qed. case dismissed. ;)

Re: Google loses antitrust suit over search deals on phones

#483

Post by ants_everywhere »

ilrwbwrkhv wrote: post #443
cletus wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We forget that there was at least a decade of several "Google killers" a year [1]. It's a graveyeard. That was 2009 too. The volume slowed down but people are still trying (and failing) [2]. Microsoft has of course tried but Bing is only really propped up by Microsoft's deep pockets. It's not a profitable enterprise (AFAIK). And this is with Microsoft using every trick they can to bypass EU and US consent decrees and…

The big difference is that at that point of time Google search used to be really good but now Google search is really bad so if there is a chance for another competitor in the market, that time is now.

Yeah Bing really isn't bad. And LLMs are basically search engines for most use cases.

I think Mozilla should just run an ad auction to choose the search engine. Bing/MS would pay to capture market share, and Google would pay to prevent Bing from gaining ground.

So let them fight it out.

Re: Google loses antitrust suit over search deals on phones

#484

Post by thayne »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #465
hugh_kagi wrote: post #21

We face a number of challenges simply letting our paying customers change their search engine: 1. On iOS the list of allowed search engines is simply baked into OS, we have a fiddly extension that hooks outbound calls to /search and redirects them but I wish we didn't need to. 2. On Chrome, we use an extension to change the default search engine and enable search auto-complete etc, but Google has a policy that such a…

"It is most certainly this difficult by design, that's a lot of revenue to protect." Reading the early history of Microsoft I once came across a quote from someone that the company intentionally made the possibility of booting different operating systems on the PC difficult by design. What I found interesting is that this was before Linux became popular. They were already contemplating the possibility of booting othe…

> Everyone agrees Google search is the best and that's why they use it exclusively.

What a specious argument. Just because it is the best now[1], doesn't mean it is the best possible, and blocking competition can prevent something that is better from gaining traction.

[1]:which is itself debatable, and I question if any search engine can unilaterally be the best since different engines may be better in different situations

Re: Google loses antitrust suit over search deals on phones

#485

Post by _3u10 »

cletus wrote: post #31

I expect this to be bad for everyone except Google if the ruling holds. Why? Mozilla and Apple will lose significant revenue from having Google as the default search engine and Google will no longer have to pay those billions. What's more, no one else can pay to be the default either (eg the short-lived Mozilla Bing deal). So what's going to happen? Most users will probably still use Google, nobody is getting paid an…

I tried to switch to DDG, I even gave myself 90 days. On day 91 I immediately switched back.

Re: Google loses antitrust suit over search deals on phones

#487

Post by Dalewyn »

legitster wrote: post #81
causal wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disagree. People use Google because it's the default, not because they will go out of their way to keep using it. The minute Apple changes the iPhone default, all but a few iPhone users stop using Google.

> People use Google because it's the default, not because they will go out of their way to keep using it. Is this actually true? Microsoft has bent over backwards trying making it inconvenient to get Chrome + Google on any new device. There's even the whole "Edge is the #1 browser to install Chrome" meme. Normies just really like Google.

>Is this actually true?

Yes and no.

Yes, it has been demonstrated time and time again that most people do not go and change the defaults even if they could. Most people actually prefer having less dials, even if they say they want more dials.

No, because Chrome isn't the default in Windows (ChromiumEdge), MacOS (Safari), iOS (Safari), most if not all the Linuxes (Firefox), and most if not all the BSDs (Firefox). Chrome is only the default browser in Android, but Android is a Google operating system so this shouldn't be a surprise. Also, this is one of the most spectacular exceptions to most people not changing defaults.

Re: Google loses antitrust suit over search deals on phones

#488

Post by eviks »

cletus wrote: post #31

I expect this to be bad for everyone except Google if the ruling holds. Why? Mozilla and Apple will lose significant revenue from having Google as the default search engine and Google will no longer have to pay those billions. What's more, no one else can pay to be the default either (eg the short-lived Mozilla Bing deal). So what's going to happen? Most users will probably still use Google, nobody is getting paid an…

If you think nothing changes why did Google waste so much money paying? What were they missing that you don't?

Re: Google loses antitrust suit over search deals on phones

#489

Post by ImJamal »

chadash wrote: post #62
causal wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disagree. People use Google because it's the default, not because they will go out of their way to keep using it. The minute Apple changes the iPhone default, all but a few iPhone users stop using Google.

Chrome is not anyone's default browser, but it still has dominance. People will be bothered a little under some circumstances.

Chrome is the default on Chromebooks which has a decent marketshare.

Re: Google loses antitrust suit over search deals on phones

#490

Post by shagie »

SpacePortKnight wrote: post #216
nabla9 wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So what's going to happen? Apple might make their own search engine. Apple has a team that's been creating a next-generation search engine codenamed Pegasus under John Giannandrea. They already have search engines for App Store, Maps, Apple TV and News and Spotlight. Apple web search development worked as bargaining chip in pricing negotiations with Google. Google paid them $20 billion per year to not compete as mu…

Apple could make a search engine but by the same logic, they wouldn't be able to make it default on their devices.

Creating a search engine without stepping in the patent / licensing minefield that Google and Microsoft have put down for each other is not necessarily a profitable or worthwhile venture.

Sure, they could write their own search engine (they also don't do large compute - so they'd be getting it from someone they'd be paying) but Apple would be paying for compute and licensing ... and not have any revenue from it ... and get in trouble with anti-trust or monopoly issues in Europe to boot.

Writing a search engine isn't likely worth the headaches that it would bring to Apple.

Post reply on HN