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

551–560 of 718 posts

Re: The DOJ still wants Google to sell off Chrome

#551

Post by timeflex »

makeitdouble wrote: post #350
timeflex wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On Windows 11, Edge is preinstalled and can't simply be removed either. Furthermore, it constantly bugs you about if you're sure you don't want to enable their recommended settings, which ends up re-enabling all the analytics/rewards/etc.

What it would take to get them punished again... The edge situation is a mess for sure, and Microsoft seems to have such a perfect understanding of the current judiciary climate that they can't dance around the lines without any consequences.

> have such a perfect understanding of the current judiciary climate that they can't dance around the lines without any consequences

More like they have their hands in creating the current judiciary climate. Kind of hard to file suit against someone who is intertwined with the agencies that would investigate them.

Re: The DOJ still wants Google to sell off Chrome

#552

Post by SQueeeeeL »

eastbound wrote: post #540
jimnotgym wrote: post #517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Before Edge, everyone had to install Chrome because the web wouldn't work with IE. It is still the case that some major sites don't work with Firefox either. Edge is as close to a de-Googled Chrome as you can get to work properly. Unfortunately de-Googling meant re-Microsofting

The web wouldn’t work with IE just because Microsoft had this unique strategy of deviating from standards, having non-working APIs and providing an awful experience to developers. It’s unique. Firefox compliance is another story, but very mild compared to IE. Chrome also had to deal with compatibility issues when Firefox was the leader, but Mozilla relinquished their leadership position because it was very important…

Yeah, I really feel like Brenden pretty much screwed over the entire browser scene by going all political and not doing his heavy lifting of reading the mid 00s political zeitgeist better. Feels like he doomed us all to live under Google's boot for his poorly timed performative activism.

Re: The DOJ still wants Google to sell off Chrome

#553

Post by leetnewb »

HexPhantom wrote: post #530
kweingar wrote: post #320

Here's something I don't understand. If you want to switch your search engine for Safari on iOS, you open Settings, tap Safari, tap Search Engine, and tap your preferred search engine. Not many users do this, and the conclusion is that the default has an unfair advantage. If you want to make Chrome your desktop browser, you open the default browser, search for Chrome, click the correct result, download the installer,…

The real question is whether Chrome's dominance comes from unfair practices (bundling, aggressive prompts, discouraging competition, etc.) or simply being a product people want to use.

I don't think those are either/or scenarios.

Re: The DOJ still wants Google to sell off Chrome

#554

Post by bad_user »

jimnotgym wrote: post #517
magicalist wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's a common misconception that tons of users manually install Chrome, but Google just pays PC makers to make Chrome the default browser Maybe 10 years ago, but which ones do it now? thinkpads and HP machines, at least, ship with Edge as the default. Dell or something? Windows is also _hyper_ aggressive about pushing Edge now too. Like it's nuts how hard it pushes it, to the point that it embarrasses people who do…

Before Edge, everyone had to install Chrome because the web wouldn't work with IE. It is still the case that some major sites don't work with Firefox either. Edge is as close to a de-Googled Chrome as you can get to work properly. Unfortunately de-Googling meant re-Microsofting

> Unfortunately de-Googling meant re-Microsofting

That's an understatement. Microsoft Edge is, in fact, a more privacy invasive browser than Chrome. And that was a pretty high bar.

In the EU, straight from the get-go, Edge presents users with the IAB interstitial, informing them that Edge is going to share their data with the entire advertising industry. Note that Chrome doesn't do this, as Google only wants you to share data with them, and it's not the browser that asks for consent. Edge's IAB interstitial is filled with dark patterns as well, such as legitimate interests being unlawfully declared.

Edge is also filled with Microsoft's telemetry, which you can't turn off. Every browser instance, of course, comes with a unique ID that's reported to Bing Ads. Using Edge without Bing is fairly difficult. And end-to-end encryption for its synchronization feature isn't supported.

I entirely understand why people want to degoogleify, but picking Bing in that process is fairly stupid.

Re: The DOJ still wants Google to sell off Chrome

#555

Post by wazoox »

kweingar wrote: post #320

Here's something I don't understand. If you want to switch your search engine for Safari on iOS, you open Settings, tap Safari, tap Search Engine, and tap your preferred search engine. Not many users do this, and the conclusion is that the default has an unfair advantage. If you want to make Chrome your desktop browser, you open the default browser, search for Chrome, click the correct result, download the installer,…

That's not how it works. As Google is the default search engine for most browsers (Safari, Firefox), as soon as you hit Google it begs you to use Chrome instead of whatever you're using right now. You don't have to search for Chrome, Google nags you until you switch to it, or switch to another search engine.

Re: The DOJ still wants Google to sell off Chrome

#556

Post by mattlondon »

asadotzler wrote: post #278
mattlondon wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So please enlighten us, how will someone make money from the free product that is free and no one pays for because it is free? Selling user browser data obviously won't fly (and note that Google has never explicitly nor directly sold user's browsing data as far as I know, but they do have a huge ad network that utilises cookies...), so what's the plan? Put ads in the browser? "Premium" features? The only thing I can…

Why won't selling data fly? Why not sell premium features? Why not add affiliate codes to links? Why not sell ads on new tab pages? All of these are fine examples of how a not-Google Chrome could make money. They could even get paid by Microsoft or some other not-Google search for that traffic. This isn't hard unless you're trying to make it hard to convince us all we should just give up and let Google continue runni…

Because all of that is super-shady privacy-invading and foisting ads and monetisation in places where it wasn't before. Enshitification at its most user-hostile. How is that a positive to users?

Sounds to me that taking chrome away from Google will be a net-negative for the users.

Re: The DOJ still wants Google to sell off Chrome

#557

Post by BiteCode_dev »

kweingar wrote: post #320

Here's something I don't understand. If you want to switch your search engine for Safari on iOS, you open Settings, tap Safari, tap Search Engine, and tap your preferred search engine. Not many users do this, and the conclusion is that the default has an unfair advantage. If you want to make Chrome your desktop browser, you open the default browser, search for Chrome, click the correct result, download the installer,…

Chrome had been on the biggest and most VIP billboard on the planet:

https://open.substack.com/pub/bitecode/p/web-browsers-and-ou...

Nobody can get it except chrome.

Re: The DOJ still wants Google to sell off Chrome

#558

Post by jpc0 »

soerxpso wrote: post #448
garyfirestorm wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t remember chrome being default anywhere. You always needed to open edge to download chrome and I have installed windows numerous times in past.

I believe the claim was that it's coming default on prebuilt PCs. If you're installing Windows, that's not the situation where Chrome would be the default.

I do a lot of IT support. Edge is the default on every single prebuilt / laptop I have setup for people.

This is ancedotal sure but it's several hundred datapoints from the cheapest student focused budget laptops(running windows not chrome os) to business grade laptops from the big 3 (HP/Dell/Lenovo). Apple ships Safari by default and every linux distro I have used ships firefox or a spinoff of firefox by default.

So in my experience Chrome is actively installed by the local it help (me, things are just plain broken for some use cases on non-chrome). I personally do not use Chrome, that doesn't mean I won't make it the default for every PC I touch for an enduser purely because I get less calls for support when users are using chrome.

It's no secret that I feel like other search engines are worse that Google even though Google's results are nearly unusable.

Google built a mote by having a better product, nobody else tried to compete and now it's become nearly impossible to compete. I actively avoid Chromium based browsers personally but even then I need to have one installed because even in Firefox and Safari derived browsers things are broken or website just plain don't work (https//f1.tv actively does not work on firefox as an example, unless they have since backtracked)

Re: The DOJ still wants Google to sell off Chrome

#559

Post by leetnewb »

Spivak wrote: post #435
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…

Good? I think sucking the air out of the browser ecosystem might be a good thing so they slow their roll. The breakneck speed Chrome adds features and devs adopt them is part of what makes it so damn expensive to keep up.

I think this could be a double edged sword. Slowing down new browser feature/"standards" could allow browser competition, yes. On the other hand, people don't explicitly need a web browser in 2025 like they did in 2015 - many operate mobile-only. Let's say browser features additions fall drastically behind native mobile, and content publishers progressively limit access to native clients only. The web browser market might be more free/open/competitive, but it doesn't mean much if the market just moves beyond the web.

Does the concept of an interoperable world wide web fade into obscurity? In other words, does separating Chrome from Google make the web better, or is Google's investment in the web holding back the death of the web?

Re: The DOJ still wants Google to sell off Chrome

#560

Post by YetAnotherNick »

blackd0g wrote: post #542

Crazy to think that most users never change a single setting. They live in default mode. Which is the issue with how most software works. Even how browsers will try to get set as default.

If the user doesn't change anything they wouldn't have downloaded, installed and set chrome as default browser.
Post reply on HN