4 ms·
The problem in the Microsoft case was use of near-monopoly in one market (operating systems) to gain unfair advantage in another market (browsers), though even
by georgemcbay 11y ago
The problem in the Microsoft case was use of near-monopoly in one market (operating systems) to gain unfair advantage in another market (browsers), though even that seems a bit outdated already since the idea of shipping an OS without a browser built-in seems ludicrous today.
In any case, that concept of using monopoly power in one market to bolster power in another doesn't really apply here with Google.
I share a lot of the unease many people have with the amount of power Google has been able to amass as the de factor curator of the Internet, but I'm also somewhat amazed they are in the position they are in and have been as (mostly) benevolent as they have been. I suspect it is actually pretty hard work just to remain somewhat close to neutral when you are sitting on that much power.
- TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago> since the idea of shipping an OS without a browser built-in seems ludicrous today. Windows 7 in Europe.
- kuschku 11y agoThis applies directly to Google. Remember them pushing Chrome on you? having ads directly on Google.com? To this day forcing you to use Chrome for Hangouts? And so on? Do you seriously think Chrome would have caught on if it weren’t for this push of advertisements? This is direct abuse of near-monopoly in one market (search engines) to gain unfair advantage in another market (browsers).
- plonh 11y agoChrome originally caught in for the same reason Firefox: when it came out it was the best browser by far. People forget how bad IE used to be and later how bad Firefox got.
- kuschku 11y agoAre you so sure about that? Because no one knew about it until Google started this massive ad campaign, where for weeks literally every single ad on the web was "INSTALL CHROME NOW".
- bduerst 11y agoChrome didn't catch on at first - they had to advertise the shit out of it on TV because nobody knew what a browser was. Seriously, look up "Dear Sophie" to see how many awards it won. Google doesn't do TV, so that's not a monopoly.
- kuschku 11y agoTheir TV ads were mostly ignored, but most people ended up accidentally clicking one of the Chrome ads, and then actually tried it out. There were days where every single YouTube preroll ad was for Chrome, every side ad was for chrome, every ad in the bottom of the video was for Chrome, every single ad served by AdWords was for Chrome, on Google.com were ads for Chrome in the top right with an animated arrow, there were ads for Chrome below and above the search box, etc. It was horrible, and I really believe this was unfair competition. Especially as people using AdSense complained that they got paid next to nothing or nothing for people viewing and clicking Chrome ads.
- bduerst 11y agoAnd you know this how? When they launched chrome, the browser wars had long since been won. Everyone who knew what a browser was had installed firefox, and everyone else thought IE was the internet. Just because you ignored the ads doesn't mean the general public did. It sounds like you're being biased. If you're going to attribute Chrome's growth to "accidental clicks on ad manipulation" instead of the massive awareness campaign, you're going to need to provide proof.