7 ms·

The thing is, personally I prefer getting integrated results from Google's other search services when I do a Google search. I like getting Google Maps results w

The thing is, personally I prefer getting integrated results from Google's other search services when I do a Google search. I like getting Google Maps results when I search for a location, I like getting Google Flights results etc. When I do a Google search I am not just using it as a simple website search. I want it to use it to search the whole Google suite of services. If they are forced to stop doing this it will make my search experience worse for me. Random, maybe silly idea. Maybe they could start providing two search streams. One would just be a simpler website search while the other would be a more involved google services search as well as a general website search. This way search users could explicitly say that they want to see direct integrated results from the whole Google ecosystem.

goodplay 9y ago
Anecdotal experience: I switched browsers on android because android's default browser kept opening map links in google map. Firefox mobile didn't seem to suffer from that issue. While google's tight integration lead to a positive experience for you, it lead to a very poor experience for myself or others who want to use something not google. I'm not asking for the EUC to fine google, I'm asking for choice.
- theBobBob 9y ago
  Not 100% but I thought that android asks you the first time you click on a maps/wiki etc link would you rather use browser or app and whether you want to do it once or always. I agree with you that choice is good. That is kinda why I proposed my very simplistic solution of Google offering two ways of searching. One stream which tightly integrates with the Google Ecosystem which would be a plus for many people (like myself) and another where they just give you the results without any integration.
  - dmix 9y ago
    This is true, Google always asks you which app to open specialized links in. The OP may have been using the Google search results which directly rendered a Google Maps instead of a address link. Not 100% sure either.
- easytiger 9y ago
  > opening map links in google map Clear down the default intent then
- jpttsn 9y ago
  Choice beyond using something other than Google? If I buy all my tech at the Apple Store, am I still entitled to a choice among various manufacturers?
- tripzilch 9y ago
  Additional bonus, Firefox Android has extensions, so you can get uBlock Origin and such :) I have a similar problem with Google Maps. I don't want it tracking my location history to my Google Account (integration I never asked for), but when I disable this it even refuses to remember my search history for addresses and such (no reason that needs cloud storage except Google wanting to get their hands on this info). Therefore I most often use Open Streetmaps with Maps.me. Which has other advantages too, so it's not all bad.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
cyxxon 9y ago
> If they are forced to stop doing this it will make my search experience worse for me. This seems to be the whole point of the fine. Currently Google's services just so damned conveniently integrated that no one uses competitors' services, even if they are better. The thing is, though, I am totally with you here. I don't want to use one of the other services for maps, or flights, or these snippets for information. They are just search results for me. The integration is more important for me than ... better filtering, or whatnot. I can always go to one of those sites, but there really is no need, And frankly, it would really, really suck if I had to now. Edit: From the text: > Google has to apply the same processes and methods to position and display rival comparison shopping services in Google's search results pages as it gives to its own comparison shopping service. What does that even mean? Right now Google has a link for Maps, Images, Shopping, Videos, ... in the top bar. Do they need to change it to Maps, Images, Shooping (Google), Shopping (Idealo), Shopping (yet another service), ...? Embedding results would not work. Have a link called Shopping that does not list results, but points to more shopping sites, maybe with the search term already preappended? Meh...
- patrickaljord 9y ago
  This is basically the EU protecting other corporations even if most of the populations benefit from Google's current practices. Corporatism at its worse.
  - catdog 9y ago
    I wouldn't be so sure if they benefit. Not every Google service which is pushed upwards by their tight integration is top notch.Also the better ones may have room for improvement and innovation which we might not see from a monopoly in a comfortable position.
    - patrickaljord 9y ago
      If they didn't benefit, if using those services were a net loss, then people wouldn't be using them. Also, I like to draw a line between monopolies imposed by force (eg taxi offering horrible services making competitors illegal through licensing) and those used by people voluntarily because they enjoy the services. Google is used voluntarily, because people enjoy it, like Microsoft during the 90's. As I read elsewhere, Microsoft lost relevance to tech because OSS took servers, web took applications and mobile took the client. Antitrust didn't do much. With Google, the only thing the EU is doing right now is forcing Google to offer a lower quality service. What should make Google less useful should be innovators making them less relevant and ubiquitous like the web, OSS and mobile did to Microsoft. iOS and Siri already made Google Search much less relevant on mobile, I'm sure there will be more in the future. Monopolies used voluntarily usually don't last long unless they keep innovating, but if they do keep innovating then forcing them to offer lower quality services seems really bad and it doesn't motivate other people to out-innovate them if the government will just help make Google worse, we all lose. Innovation should be bottom up, not top down.
rayiner 9y ago
I like getting results when I search, not necessarily Google ones. Google Flights/Hotels sucks, for example, I'd rather get Orbitz or Hotwire. Like how Google does it for Uber/Lyft when you pull up a Maps location.
IanCal 9y ago
As a counter, perhaps if it were more open & their shopping results had to compete with other providers in a fair way then your experience would be better. Right now they can be OK but simply more prominent and win.
sweden 9y ago
Because it works for you, it doesn't mean it works for everyone else. Of all Google's services I don't care about: - Google Shopping, I never saw a reason to use it and I never did, I prefer to use local shops or Amazon - Google Maps, I actually prefer Open Street Maps. The amount of detail on OSM is staggering and in many ways, I think the data is much more complete than Google Maps - Google reviews about restaurants and businesses, I prefer to use TripAdvisor - Google Books, I prefer using Amazon and Kobo Store - Google Flights, I was never able to get anything useful out of this service. I usually use Momondo As you can see, the only thing that is interesting to me about Google is the search engine and yet, it keeps throwing to my face all these services I don't use and that I don't care about. Worse, it takes the spotlight from the services I actually use. So yes, this is Microsoft all over again: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish
- devoply 9y ago
  On operating systems you set preferences for which service/program to open when a certain extension is clicked. Similarly Google should be forced to allow you to set your preferences through your browser, i.e. not forcing you to login, on where you want to go when you type certain types of queries, like for instance directions or products. That would improve competition and give other service providers at least a good chance of their services being used instead of Google. And keep the system more competitive. Then Google can go and claim that this is what their users actually prefer. This could work through cookies that the browser always makes available to certain or all sites that indicate preferences of the user.
  - cbr 9y ago
    Google should be forced to allow you to set your preferences through your browser, i.e. not forcing you to login ... I see how this is at least possible in Chrome, but how would this work in browsers Google doesn't control?
    - simias 9y ago
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
fauigerzigerk 9y ago
I think the right way to do what you're asking is to serve Google specific content to users that are logged in to their Google account. This should be easy to justify legally as well.
larma 9y ago
I think it really depends on the product (e.g. having Google Maps integrated is not a bad idea, because that's what you usually want to access if you enter a address in Google). But honestly, I don't know anyone that is happy with the Google Products service in Germany. They don't even show links to Amazon here, although they often have the best total price (because of free shipping). I even know a lot of people that go directly to Amazon or a price comparison site because the results presented by Google are so crappy. As results might be different based on country, region and cookie, here is a screenshot comparing idealo (a large price comparison site) with Google Product search (I just picked this specific product randomly): http://imgur.com/a/MByay http://imgur.com/a/MByay
matt4077 9y ago
It was also more convenient to have Internet Explorer ship with Windows. But it happened to be part of MS strategy to sideline other browsers, and gain enough power to become the de-facto standard. We got lucky and avoided that, but doing only what's most convenient at any given point in time can be harmful over the longer term. After all, Microsoft at that time tried to established their (patent-covered, binary-blob) .doc as the format for the web, instead of the open HTML.

goodplay 9y ago

Anecdotal experience: I switched browsers on android because android's default browser kept opening map links in google map. Firefox mobile didn't seem to suffer from that issue. While google's tight integration lead to a positive experience for you, it lead to a very poor experience for myself or others who want to use something not google. I'm not asking for the EUC to fine google, I'm asking for choice.

theBobBob 9y ago
Not 100% but I thought that android asks you the first time you click on a maps/wiki etc link would you rather use browser or app and whether you want to do it once or always. I agree with you that choice is good. That is kinda why I proposed my very simplistic solution of Google offering two ways of searching. One stream which tightly integrates with the Google Ecosystem which would be a plus for many people (like myself) and another where they just give you the results without any integration.
- dmix 9y ago
  This is true, Google always asks you which app to open specialized links in. The OP may have been using the Google search results which directly rendered a Google Maps instead of a address link. Not 100% sure either.
easytiger 9y ago
> opening map links in google map Clear down the default intent then
jpttsn 9y ago
Choice beyond using something other than Google? If I buy all my tech at the Apple Store, am I still entitled to a choice among various manufacturers?
tripzilch 9y ago
Additional bonus, Firefox Android has extensions, so you can get uBlock Origin and such :) I have a similar problem with Google Maps. I don't want it tracking my location history to my Google Account (integration I never asked for), but when I disable this it even refuses to remember my search history for addresses and such (no reason that needs cloud storage except Google wanting to get their hands on this info). Therefore I most often use Open Streetmaps with Maps.me. Which has other advantages too, so it's not all bad.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

cyxxon 9y ago

> If they are forced to stop doing this it will make my search experience worse for me. This seems to be the whole point of the fine. Currently Google's services just so damned conveniently integrated that no one uses competitors' services, even if they are better. The thing is, though, I am totally with you here. I don't want to use one of the other services for maps, or flights, or these snippets for information. They are just search results for me. The integration is more important for me than ... better filtering, or whatnot. I can always go to one of those sites, but there really is no need, And frankly, it would really, really suck if I had to now. Edit: From the text: > Google has to apply the same processes and methods to position and display rival comparison shopping services in Google's search results pages as it gives to its own comparison shopping service. What does that even mean? Right now Google has a link for Maps, Images, Shopping, Videos, ... in the top bar. Do they need to change it to Maps, Images, Shooping (Google), Shopping (Idealo), Shopping (yet another service), ...? Embedding results would not work. Have a link called Shopping that does not list results, but points to more shopping sites, maybe with the search term already preappended? Meh...

patrickaljord 9y ago
This is basically the EU protecting other corporations even if most of the populations benefit from Google's current practices. Corporatism at its worse.
- catdog 9y ago
  I wouldn't be so sure if they benefit. Not every Google service which is pushed upwards by their tight integration is top notch.Also the better ones may have room for improvement and innovation which we might not see from a monopoly in a comfortable position.
  - patrickaljord 9y ago
    If they didn't benefit, if using those services were a net loss, then people wouldn't be using them. Also, I like to draw a line between monopolies imposed by force (eg taxi offering horrible services making competitors illegal through licensing) and those used by people voluntarily because they enjoy the services. Google is used voluntarily, because people enjoy it, like Microsoft during the 90's. As I read elsewhere, Microsoft lost relevance to tech because OSS took servers, web took applications and mobile took the client. Antitrust didn't do much. With Google, the only thing the EU is doing right now is forcing Google to offer a lower quality service. What should make Google less useful should be innovators making them less relevant and ubiquitous like the web, OSS and mobile did to Microsoft. iOS and Siri already made Google Search much less relevant on mobile, I'm sure there will be more in the future. Monopolies used voluntarily usually don't last long unless they keep innovating, but if they do keep innovating then forcing them to offer lower quality services seems really bad and it doesn't motivate other people to out-innovate them if the government will just help make Google worse, we all lose. Innovation should be bottom up, not top down.

rayiner 9y ago

I like getting results when I search, not necessarily Google ones. Google Flights/Hotels sucks, for example, I'd rather get Orbitz or Hotwire. Like how Google does it for Uber/Lyft when you pull up a Maps location.

IanCal 9y ago

As a counter, perhaps if it were more open & their shopping results had to compete with other providers in a fair way then your experience would be better. Right now they can be OK but simply more prominent and win.

sweden 9y ago

Because it works for you, it doesn't mean it works for everyone else. Of all Google's services I don't care about: - Google Shopping, I never saw a reason to use it and I never did, I prefer to use local shops or Amazon - Google Maps, I actually prefer Open Street Maps. The amount of detail on OSM is staggering and in many ways, I think the data is much more complete than Google Maps - Google reviews about restaurants and businesses, I prefer to use TripAdvisor - Google Books, I prefer using Amazon and Kobo Store - Google Flights, I was never able to get anything useful out of this service. I usually use Momondo As you can see, the only thing that is interesting to me about Google is the search engine and yet, it keeps throwing to my face all these services I don't use and that I don't care about. Worse, it takes the spotlight from the services I actually use. So yes, this is Microsoft all over again: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish

devoply 9y ago
On operating systems you set preferences for which service/program to open when a certain extension is clicked. Similarly Google should be forced to allow you to set your preferences through your browser, i.e. not forcing you to login, on where you want to go when you type certain types of queries, like for instance directions or products. That would improve competition and give other service providers at least a good chance of their services being used instead of Google. And keep the system more competitive. Then Google can go and claim that this is what their users actually prefer. This could work through cookies that the browser always makes available to certain or all sites that indicate preferences of the user.
- cbr 9y ago
  Google should be forced to allow you to set your preferences through your browser, i.e. not forcing you to login ... I see how this is at least possible in Chrome, but how would this work in browsers Google doesn't control?
  - simias 9y ago

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

fauigerzigerk 9y ago

I think the right way to do what you're asking is to serve Google specific content to users that are logged in to their Google account. This should be easy to justify legally as well.

larma 9y ago

I think it really depends on the product (e.g. having Google Maps integrated is not a bad idea, because that's what you usually want to access if you enter a address in Google). But honestly, I don't know anyone that is happy with the Google Products service in Germany. They don't even show links to Amazon here, although they often have the best total price (because of free shipping). I even know a lot of people that go directly to Amazon or a price comparison site because the results presented by Google are so crappy. As results might be different based on country, region and cookie, here is a screenshot comparing idealo (a large price comparison site) with Google Product search (I just picked this specific product randomly): http://imgur.com/a/MByay http://imgur.com/a/MByay

matt4077 9y ago

It was also more convenient to have Internet Explorer ship with Windows. But it happened to be part of MS strategy to sideline other browsers, and gain enough power to become the de-facto standard. We got lucky and avoided that, but doing only what's most convenient at any given point in time can be harmful over the longer term. After all, Microsoft at that time tried to established their (patent-covered, binary-blob) .doc as the format for the web, instead of the open HTML.