4 ms·

All of the useful little tools that google shows you based on your search could now be subject the same treatment. If I search for "Seattle weather" google show

All of the useful little tools that google shows you based on your search could now be subject the same treatment. If I search for "Seattle weather" google shows me a nice weather forecast at the top of the results (courtesy of weather.com). Could Google be forced to stop showing this because it unfairly disadvantages other weather websites?

kuschku 9y ago
This is actually an ongoing process, too. The opinion of the EU is that Google should be forced to either allow the user to choose the provider of these widgets (maps, weather, etc), or to require Google to rank these widgets at the same position that they would show up in regular search. For example, in a search for a product, Google returns first a Shopping widget, then the Amazon result (and in it, an amazon widget), then several competitors, and only then Google Shopping. Google should rank the widgets of each provider the same way as search results, without any bias.
- dlubarov 9y ago
  It sounds good in theory, but since Google's ranking algorithm ranks pages, how is Google supposed to apply it to widgets? Most widgets do have associated pages, such as shopping search result pages, but they're not the same. They have different interfaces and contain different information, and often they have low PageRank because there's little point in linking to them. If I search "My name is Daniel in Spanish", I would probably like to see a Google Translate widget (or at least some kind of widget), even though the associated page https://translate.google.com/#en/es/My%20name%20is%20Daniel https://translate.google.com/#en/es/My%20name%20is%20Daniel isn't ranked highly. And some widgets have no associated pages -- if a user searches "96 tablespoons in cups", Google simply shows the answer (6), with no associated page. Should that not be allowed? It would be unfortunate if Google was forced to send users to some conversion website for that.
  - kuschku 9y ago
    The problem is that Google has a monopoly on search (>96% in EU), and is using that to gain a monopoly in other areas. For example, where I live, Google maps hasn’t updated map data since 2009. They have no transit in it, no integration with taxi or ridesharing companies, nothing. Here maps has up-to-date maps, with all that in it. Yet, people use Google maps, and not even consider that there might be a better competitor – because Google maps is the default, and shows up first in search. A significantly worse product is winning here, and doesn’t even have a market pressure to improve, just because of anticompetitive powers. You surely can see how that’d be problematic if you’d ever try to disrupt an existing market as startup.
    - DocTomoe 9y ago
      Can you give a bit more information about where (in the geographical sense) Google Maps is inferior to [unknownCompetitor]?
      - socksy 9y ago
        Can't speak for the GP, but I always switch to HERE Maps when I visit Leipzig, the transit info is way better for routing. HERE is pretty good throughout Germany too.
        DocTomoe 9y ago
        Hm, I happen to live in Germany. I have yet to see a map that's years out of sync with reality from GMaps... and I don't use much public transit anymore (mostly because I lack that kind of patience). It is my understanding that public transit information has to be offered by the respective Transit Authority, and that does not currently happen with GMaps. Chances are Here is paying top coin for that. When doing a search on "My Location -> Leipzig HBf", I get oneidentical street routing (google taking construction sites into consideration when calculating the driving duration). Google gives me an alternative strreet route, Here doesn't. Google suggests I can drive to the nearest airport and fly over there (making the trip 3 hours shorter) - and gives me the estimated fare. Here gives me the information about using the train (making the trip two hours longer) - without giving me the fare. As of now, I do not see an advantage... can you give a more specific example?
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]

kuschku 9y ago

This is actually an ongoing process, too. The opinion of the EU is that Google should be forced to either allow the user to choose the provider of these widgets (maps, weather, etc), or to require Google to rank these widgets at the same position that they would show up in regular search. For example, in a search for a product, Google returns first a Shopping widget, then the Amazon result (and in it, an amazon widget), then several competitors, and only then Google Shopping. Google should rank the widgets of each provider the same way as search results, without any bias.

dlubarov 9y ago
It sounds good in theory, but since Google's ranking algorithm ranks pages, how is Google supposed to apply it to widgets? Most widgets do have associated pages, such as shopping search result pages, but they're not the same. They have different interfaces and contain different information, and often they have low PageRank because there's little point in linking to them. If I search "My name is Daniel in Spanish", I would probably like to see a Google Translate widget (or at least some kind of widget), even though the associated page https://translate.google.com/#en/es/My%20name%20is%20Daniel https://translate.google.com/#en/es/My%20name%20is%20Daniel isn't ranked highly. And some widgets have no associated pages -- if a user searches "96 tablespoons in cups", Google simply shows the answer (6), with no associated page. Should that not be allowed? It would be unfortunate if Google was forced to send users to some conversion website for that.
- kuschku 9y ago
  The problem is that Google has a monopoly on search (>96% in EU), and is using that to gain a monopoly in other areas. For example, where I live, Google maps hasn’t updated map data since 2009. They have no transit in it, no integration with taxi or ridesharing companies, nothing. Here maps has up-to-date maps, with all that in it. Yet, people use Google maps, and not even consider that there might be a better competitor – because Google maps is the default, and shows up first in search. A significantly worse product is winning here, and doesn’t even have a market pressure to improve, just because of anticompetitive powers. You surely can see how that’d be problematic if you’d ever try to disrupt an existing market as startup.
  - DocTomoe 9y ago
    Can you give a bit more information about where (in the geographical sense) Google Maps is inferior to [unknownCompetitor]?
    - socksy 9y ago
      Can't speak for the GP, but I always switch to HERE Maps when I visit Leipzig, the transit info is way better for routing. HERE is pretty good throughout Germany too.
      - DocTomoe 9y ago
        Hm, I happen to live in Germany. I have yet to see a map that's years out of sync with reality from GMaps... and I don't use much public transit anymore (mostly because I lack that kind of patience). It is my understanding that public transit information has to be offered by the respective Transit Authority, and that does not currently happen with GMaps. Chances are Here is paying top coin for that. When doing a search on "My Location -> Leipzig HBf", I get oneidentical street routing (google taking construction sites into consideration when calculating the driving duration). Google gives me an alternative strreet route, Here doesn't. Google suggests I can drive to the nearest airport and fly over there (making the trip 3 hours shorter) - and gives me the estimated fare. Here gives me the information about using the train (making the trip two hours longer) - without giving me the fare. As of now, I do not see an advantage... can you give a more specific example?
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]