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

601–610 of 761 posts

Re: Google loses antitrust suit over search deals on phones

#601

Post by jjav »

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…

> They simply have a better product and I don't expect anyone to match them anytime soon

This is a strange statement to be honest. Have you used google search in the last decade?

google search was awesome back in the very early 2000s. If you remember those times, you know how good it was.

That started deteriorating in the 2010s and it has become really useless in the last decade. Today google search results are mostly spam sites with autogenerated content along with sales and advertising sites. It can't find any of the actual user-generated honest content anymore.

Re: Google loses antitrust suit over search deals on phones

#602

Post by TeMPOraL »

nytesky wrote: post #497
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…

Search is dead anyways. It’s all SEO nonsense. I would rather have a curated list of validated sights. Like recipes only from actual chefs or publications, news from newspapers and networks, be absolutely sure the address I am looking at is my BANKS website. All the Reddit, twitter, Pinterest, and blog stuff can stay in the Google wasteland and gotcha ad links.

Oh the irony. You know that:

> Like recipes only from actual chefs or publications, news from newspapers and networks

are the first-party garbage on the Internet? It's all content marketing written to push ads. Yes, including "recipes only from actual chefs" - chefs have better things to do than to maintain an on-line presence; if you see one, it's most likely a brand where the chef gets paid for the rights to their name, and any actual writing is done by marketing interns mashing together whatever they can find on social media.

In fact, if you really want authentic recipes from real chefs, your best bet is Reddit - there's bound to be a few bored chefs hanging around relevant subreddits, exchanging ideas and providing expert tips, just because it's a fun thing to do.

So yeah, search is bad and the web is a SEO wasteland, but the brands big and small aren't victims here - they're the ones who caused it, and who perpetuate it, because it's easier money than actually delivering something of value.

Re: Google loses antitrust suit over search deals on phones

#603

Post by archerx »

jjav wrote: post #601
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…

> They simply have a better product and I don't expect anyone to match them anytime soon This is a strange statement to be honest. Have you used google search in the last decade? google search was awesome back in the very early 2000s. If you remember those times, you know how good it was. That started deteriorating in the 2010s and it has become really useless in the last decade. Today google search results are mostl…

It's leaking into Youtube as well, there have been a few times where I have searched for a video using it's exact name and I would have to scroll far down the list to find the correct search result in a sea of irrelevant garbage. You'd think if you search for video "XYZ", video "XYZ" would be the first result and not somewhere at the bottom of the list.

Re: Google loses antitrust suit over search deals on phones

#604

Post by firesteelrain »

ffgjgf1 wrote: post #580
ilrwbwrkhv wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

IMHO that’s mainly because the modern open/public internet kind of sucks. The ratio of content to garbage is extremely bad

Maybe. I recall searching the heck out stuff from 2000-2004 for CompSci looking for solutions to homework problems in code. There were a lot of spam sites.

Re: Google loses antitrust suit over search deals on phones

#605

Post by locallost »

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 that was completely true, Google would not be paying billions for the placement. Google is better than the rest, but for most things the others are good enough. I think a large portion of people don't really need amazing results, but Google needs their eyeballs and clicks.

Re: Google loses antitrust suit over search deals on phones

#606

Post by theshrike79 »

alvah wrote: post #550
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…

"They simply have a better product" I disagree. 100% they had a better product, but they have absolutely mangled it over the last few updates. Honestly, if I wanted the opinion of randomnumbers45123 on Reddit, I'd just search Reddit. Google achieved dominance ~25 years ago by being better than the alternatives, and the other search engines pretty much withered away rapidly. They (Google) are in a very precarious posi…

People always _always_ forget that Google today is an ad company first.

They do search, phones and mobile operating systems as side projects.

Re: Google loses antitrust suit over search deals on phones

#607

Post by firesteelrain »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #602
nytesky wrote: post #497

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Search is dead anyways. It’s all SEO nonsense. I would rather have a curated list of validated sights. Like recipes only from actual chefs or publications, news from newspapers and networks, be absolutely sure the address I am looking at is my BANKS website. All the Reddit, twitter, Pinterest, and blog stuff can stay in the Google wasteland and gotcha ad links.

Oh the irony. You know that: > Like recipes only from actual chefs or publications, news from newspapers and networks are the first-party garbage on the Internet? It's all content marketing written to push ads. Yes, including "recipes only from actual chefs" - chefs have better things to do than to maintain an on-line presence; if you see one, it's most likely a brand where the chef gets paid for the rights to their…

Append reddit to searches is the secret weapon. Use it all the time

Re: Google loses antitrust suit over search deals on phones

#608

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #517
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 expect this to be bad for everyone except Google if the ruling holds." If the decision will not be bad for Google, then why would Google spend so much money and time to defend against it.^1 Why not just stop making the anti-competitive payments and terminate the agreements. Money saved. Problem solved. We can now safely say it is not a defense to claim "Google is the best" and that's why people choose it. Anti-com…

HN commenters defending Apple have stated many times that iOS installations do not comprise a majority share of the "smartphone" market.

Can we assume that if Microsoft paid Apple to be the default search engine in iOS instead of Google then Microsoft would have market share, or some other source of monopoly power, sufficient to allow the DoJ and state AGs to bring essentially the same antitrust case against Microsoft.

There is this ridiculous "argument" from HN commenters I see sometimes, too often, when "developers" or so-called "tech" companies they work for are caught doing something wrong. It goes something like, "If we didn't do it, then someone else would have so don't blame us."

Re: Google loses antitrust suit over search deals on phones

#609

Post by lostlogin »

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…

> They simply have a better product

They had a good product, but have screwed it up. Have you tried Kagi?

I dipped my toes and have never looked back, not once. It’s quick, it’s good, I have some neat customisation. The less-geeky family have joined me. The downside? It’s paid. But it’s worth it.

Re: Google loses antitrust suit over search deals on phones

#610

Post by Corrado »

nytesky wrote: post #497
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…

Search is dead anyways. It’s all SEO nonsense. I would rather have a curated list of validated sights. Like recipes only from actual chefs or publications, news from newspapers and networks, be absolutely sure the address I am looking at is my BANKS website. All the Reddit, twitter, Pinterest, and blog stuff can stay in the Google wasteland and gotcha ad links.

I waiting for someone to reinvent Yahoo! (aka human groomed site lists). In my mind I can see a browser plugin (or something similar) that users can Up/Down vote specific sites. You can then follow users and see what they think is cool/useful.
Post reply on HN