4 ms·

Google is as much of a monopoly than Microsoft ever was. Microsoft never was the only OS provider or browser provider or sole provider of anything, yet the pare

by smsm42 9y ago

Google is as much of a monopoly than Microsoft ever was. Microsoft never was the only OS provider or browser provider or sole provider of anything, yet the parent comment calls it a monopoly and praises the effort to hurt it. You can't have it both ways - if Microsoft was a monopoly, then Google is.

curun1r 9y ago
Microsoft was never a monopoly and Google can never be a monopoly. It's not something that a company is, it's something that a company has. In Microsoft's case, it was Windows and it was considered a monopoly not because it was the only operating system, but because of its market share. The only product that Google has that has anywhere near the required market share to be considered a monopoly is Google Search. Even so, Microsoft didn't get in trouble with the Justice Department for its Windows monopoly, it got in trouble for leveraging its monopoly to support its other, non-monopoly products. If you want to argue that Google should be constrained under anti-trust rules, you need to show how they're abusing a monopoly to compete unfairly with other products. People have made that argument but it's less cut-and-dry than it was in Microsoft's case. As it is, your lack of understanding of the basic definition of 'monopoly' makes what you're saying somewhat nonsensical.
- ocdtrekkie 9y ago
  Google not only has monopoly-level market shares in Search, Ads, and Android, they also have a massively dominant market share with Chrome. The magic, and where Google runs afoul, is how they leverage those to assist each other in ways you clearly ignore. - Chrome will soon start directly blocking Google Ads' competitors based on standards Google invented through an organization it runs. - Chrome pushes Google Search default, Search pesters you to get Chrome like three times. - Android devices are required to ship with nearly all of Google's products pre-installed. Literally through a confidential contract almost every phone manufacturer on the planet save like... Apple and Amazon have signed on. There are more, mind you, but this is kinda a taste. Microsoft did nothing this illegal, ever.
  - drawkbox 9y ago
    Net neutrality and ISP monopolies are important to observe here because only ISP monopolies can control packet level what goes through every single internet connection you make, that is why ISPs and local monopolies are important to the impact of net neutrality going away. ISPs inspecting packets to slow some down also leads to encroaching packet inspection that leads to more surveillance. Talking about Google here is a distraction and a false equivalency as they control nothing in the lower level of your network like ISPs do. Google is not a monopoly, they are a market leader with mind share. They were able to get the word "google" as a verb, that is through a good product and marketing. It seems you really prefer companies that buy their monopolies via legislation and bribes like ISPs (Comcast/AT&T/etc) over companies that build market share in the actual market (Google/Apple/Facebook/Netflix/Amazon etc). You need to read up on your Microsoft history, you are precluding lots of history, Microsoft is well known to do the "embrace, extend and extinguish"[1] technique back when they were essentially monopoly mind share level. Just one small thing in many that they did, they killed Quicktime, Real Player[2] when Windows player was created by making them not work on the OS level. ISPs want to do the same thing with competitive products, it is a natural progression for a market leader, you can't blame them you have to prevent it with regulation/laws. The only control Google has is to control technology via their browser, which Microsoft did with IE4 especially - and you can use others, and what kind of search results you can get. AMP is an overstep and their control but not monopoly level yet -- and they are overstepping on stomping internet standards in a new 'embrace, extend, and extinguish'. But even then, Google has less monopoly ability to control your network compared to ISPs that control everything you do on the internet and Microsoft could control OS level when Windows was 95% share and only desktop existed, which they pushed IE then as well and crushed competition, preinstalled and all that. I like Google and Microsoft though, they earned their mind share through innovative products. ISPs just buy off legislators and create state assisted monopolies. The latter is very anti-business and anti-competitive much more than building support in an open market. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis... [2] https://www.cnet.com/news/real-hits-microsoft-with-1-billion-antitrust-suit/ https://www.cnet.com/news/real-hits-microsoft-with-1-billion...
    - 9y ago
- la_oveja 9y ago
  > The only product that Google has that has anywhere near the required market share to be considered a monopoly is Google Search. What about Android? Did you ever see an Android phone sold without the Google App ecosystem? Oh, and the GApps tracks you everytime, even with GPS off it constantly tracks you. the only way to disable it is to reinstall with AOSP or CAF-based build. That seems pretty abusive and anti-consumer. And we're skipping Chrome/GoogleSearch combo, DoubleClick, Youtube... Google not only has a very monopolistic position in certain services, but also has a lot of control over the most used web services on the world (without being in a monopoly situation), and uses it to actively track it's users and get revenue with it. Google is one of the companies I trust less.

by smsm42 9y ago

curun1r 9y ago

Microsoft was never a monopoly and Google can never be a monopoly. It's not something that a company is, it's something that a company has. In Microsoft's case, it was Windows and it was considered a monopoly not because it was the only operating system, but because of its market share. The only product that Google has that has anywhere near the required market share to be considered a monopoly is Google Search. Even so, Microsoft didn't get in trouble with the Justice Department for its Windows monopoly, it got in trouble for leveraging its monopoly to support its other, non-monopoly products. If you want to argue that Google should be constrained under anti-trust rules, you need to show how they're abusing a monopoly to compete unfairly with other products. People have made that argument but it's less cut-and-dry than it was in Microsoft's case. As it is, your lack of understanding of the basic definition of 'monopoly' makes what you're saying somewhat nonsensical.

ocdtrekkie 9y ago
Google not only has monopoly-level market shares in Search, Ads, and Android, they also have a massively dominant market share with Chrome. The magic, and where Google runs afoul, is how they leverage those to assist each other in ways you clearly ignore. - Chrome will soon start directly blocking Google Ads' competitors based on standards Google invented through an organization it runs. - Chrome pushes Google Search default, Search pesters you to get Chrome like three times. - Android devices are required to ship with nearly all of Google's products pre-installed. Literally through a confidential contract almost every phone manufacturer on the planet save like... Apple and Amazon have signed on. There are more, mind you, but this is kinda a taste. Microsoft did nothing this illegal, ever.
- drawkbox 9y ago
  Net neutrality and ISP monopolies are important to observe here because only ISP monopolies can control packet level what goes through every single internet connection you make, that is why ISPs and local monopolies are important to the impact of net neutrality going away. ISPs inspecting packets to slow some down also leads to encroaching packet inspection that leads to more surveillance. Talking about Google here is a distraction and a false equivalency as they control nothing in the lower level of your network like ISPs do. Google is not a monopoly, they are a market leader with mind share. They were able to get the word "google" as a verb, that is through a good product and marketing. It seems you really prefer companies that buy their monopolies via legislation and bribes like ISPs (Comcast/AT&T/etc) over companies that build market share in the actual market (Google/Apple/Facebook/Netflix/Amazon etc). You need to read up on your Microsoft history, you are precluding lots of history, Microsoft is well known to do the "embrace, extend and extinguish"[1] technique back when they were essentially monopoly mind share level. Just one small thing in many that they did, they killed Quicktime, Real Player[2] when Windows player was created by making them not work on the OS level. ISPs want to do the same thing with competitive products, it is a natural progression for a market leader, you can't blame them you have to prevent it with regulation/laws. The only control Google has is to control technology via their browser, which Microsoft did with IE4 especially - and you can use others, and what kind of search results you can get. AMP is an overstep and their control but not monopoly level yet -- and they are overstepping on stomping internet standards in a new 'embrace, extend, and extinguish'. But even then, Google has less monopoly ability to control your network compared to ISPs that control everything you do on the internet and Microsoft could control OS level when Windows was 95% share and only desktop existed, which they pushed IE then as well and crushed competition, preinstalled and all that. I like Google and Microsoft though, they earned their mind share through innovative products. ISPs just buy off legislators and create state assisted monopolies. The latter is very anti-business and anti-competitive much more than building support in an open market. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis... [2] https://www.cnet.com/news/real-hits-microsoft-with-1-billion-antitrust-suit/ https://www.cnet.com/news/real-hits-microsoft-with-1-billion...
  - 9y ago
la_oveja 9y ago
> The only product that Google has that has anywhere near the required market share to be considered a monopoly is Google Search. What about Android? Did you ever see an Android phone sold without the Google App ecosystem? Oh, and the GApps tracks you everytime, even with GPS off it constantly tracks you. the only way to disable it is to reinstall with AOSP or CAF-based build. That seems pretty abusive and anti-consumer. And we're skipping Chrome/GoogleSearch combo, DoubleClick, Youtube... Google not only has a very monopolistic position in certain services, but also has a lot of control over the most used web services on the world (without being in a monopoly situation), and uses it to actively track it's users and get revenue with it. Google is one of the companies I trust less.