5 ms·

Honestly it would be pretty incredible for Chrome to be split out of Google, and I for one would love to see that happen.

by snek 7y ago

JoshTriplett 7y ago
In what possible way would Chrome make money as a standalone company without utterly alienating its userbase? Chrome is subsidized by the rest of Google.
- sfotm 7y ago
  Only in the same way that Gmail and Android are "subsidized" by Google. They're sources of data and play directly into how they generate revenue. I agree that without those motivations it would be hard to fund these projects without them going paid or taking donations, but I take issue with calling them "subsidized".
- cm2187 7y ago
  By doing like firefox, making money out of making google the default search engine. Which means their unique source of revenue (and client) would be google. Full circle...
  - CharlesColeman 7y ago
    > By doing like firefox, making money out of making google the default search engine. Which means their unique source of revenue (and client) would be google. Full circle... However, a Chrome-with-Google-revenue would be far more independent of Google than Chrome-the-Google-Subsidiary. Mozilla/Firefox has shown that it's still possible to advance privacy even within such an arrangement. Also, its far from clear who would have the most power in such an arrangement. Without a popular browser of its own, Google will be forced to pay the browser vendors to stay the default, unless it wants to give a search engine competitor a chance to unseat it.
    - whatshisface 7y ago
      It only seems like Mozilla is independent because they are the most independent - a truly independent browser would probably do something shocking, like bundling adblock.
      - CharlesColeman 7y ago
        Independence comes in degrees, and I'm not convinced a "truly independent" browser would by truly better for consumers. It'd need a revenue model, and its not clear to me what that would be besides bundling with a paid product or displaying banner and text ads. Essentially Mozilla is selling ads, but only to one advertiser (Google) which is easy to disable.
        whatshisface 7y ago
        Linux doesn't have a revenue model... Although, doesn't Linus work for Google? There's also Blender. I'm sure we could think of a long list of others.
        abdullahkhalids 7y ago
        A good chunk of linux and related development is done by programmers being paid by some for-profit company in whose interest is it either to have those chunks developed or who want to keep their employees happy by letting them do open source contributions. Without this invisible injection of funds, linux development would slow down significantly and it might not remain competitive. Browsers are a lot less modular than operating systems and they operate in a different market (eg. contributing to their development doesn't help the bottom line of any company particularly), so Firefox doesn't get a lot of paid for third-party developer time. Hence, Mozilla makes unfortunate compromises.
        dredmorbius 7y ago
        Torvalds is employed by the Linux Foundation.
        7y ago
- 43920 7y ago
  Google (or another search engine) would pay Chrome to be included as the default search engine, the same way that Firefox exists now.
  - stingraycharles 7y ago
    Would this not defeat the purpose of splitting them up? Are they then not equally likely to behave in a way that favors Google?
    - vageli 7y ago
      > Would this not defeat the purpose of splitting them up? Are they then not equally likely to behave in a way that favors Google? Would you characterize Mozilla as behaving in ways that favor Google?
- ForHackernews 7y ago
  Charge money to any OEM that wants to ship with Chrome: i.e. every single non-Apple manufacturer of phones, tablets or computers.
kyrra 7y ago
I'd think it's a bit more difficult. You have ChromeOS (which is based on Chromium OS)[0]. And ChromeOS is used in places that aren't just Chromebooks. For example, Google's Wifi points are based on ChromeOS[1]. [0] https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/chromium-os-faq https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/chromium-os-faq [1] https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/developer-information-for-chrome-os-devices https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/developer-information-f...
iamnothere 7y ago
Becoming a separate for-profit company (as opposed to a nonprofit like Mozilla) could result in some really bad things. Chrome-the-company would have to find new sources of revenue; in the process, it would likely increase its tracking, and it might end up selling info to companies other than Google, which at least tends to hoard user data internally. It may also develop even more industry partnerships around things like DRM that aren't in the interest of users. If Chrome could somehow be forcefully split off into a decently funded nonprofit, I'd be all for it. I'm not sure that anyone but Google could make that happen, though.

Honestly it would be pretty incredible for Chrome to be split out of Google, and I for one would love to see that happen.

by snek 7y ago

Honestly it would be pretty incredible for Chrome to be split out of Google, and I for one would love to see that happen.

JoshTriplett 7y ago

In what possible way would Chrome make money as a standalone company without utterly alienating its userbase? Chrome is subsidized by the rest of Google.

sfotm 7y ago
Only in the same way that Gmail and Android are "subsidized" by Google. They're sources of data and play directly into how they generate revenue. I agree that without those motivations it would be hard to fund these projects without them going paid or taking donations, but I take issue with calling them "subsidized".
cm2187 7y ago
By doing like firefox, making money out of making google the default search engine. Which means their unique source of revenue (and client) would be google. Full circle...
- CharlesColeman 7y ago
  > By doing like firefox, making money out of making google the default search engine. Which means their unique source of revenue (and client) would be google. Full circle... However, a Chrome-with-Google-revenue would be far more independent of Google than Chrome-the-Google-Subsidiary. Mozilla/Firefox has shown that it's still possible to advance privacy even within such an arrangement. Also, its far from clear who would have the most power in such an arrangement. Without a popular browser of its own, Google will be forced to pay the browser vendors to stay the default, unless it wants to give a search engine competitor a chance to unseat it.
  - whatshisface 7y ago
    It only seems like Mozilla is independent because they are the most independent - a truly independent browser would probably do something shocking, like bundling adblock.
    - CharlesColeman 7y ago
      Independence comes in degrees, and I'm not convinced a "truly independent" browser would by truly better for consumers. It'd need a revenue model, and its not clear to me what that would be besides bundling with a paid product or displaying banner and text ads. Essentially Mozilla is selling ads, but only to one advertiser (Google) which is easy to disable.
      - whatshisface 7y ago
        Linux doesn't have a revenue model... Although, doesn't Linus work for Google? There's also Blender. I'm sure we could think of a long list of others.
        abdullahkhalids 7y ago
        A good chunk of linux and related development is done by programmers being paid by some for-profit company in whose interest is it either to have those chunks developed or who want to keep their employees happy by letting them do open source contributions. Without this invisible injection of funds, linux development would slow down significantly and it might not remain competitive. Browsers are a lot less modular than operating systems and they operate in a different market (eg. contributing to their development doesn't help the bottom line of any company particularly), so Firefox doesn't get a lot of paid for third-party developer time. Hence, Mozilla makes unfortunate compromises.
        dredmorbius 7y ago
        Torvalds is employed by the Linux Foundation.
      - 7y ago
43920 7y ago
Google (or another search engine) would pay Chrome to be included as the default search engine, the same way that Firefox exists now.
- stingraycharles 7y ago
  Would this not defeat the purpose of splitting them up? Are they then not equally likely to behave in a way that favors Google?
  - vageli 7y ago
    > Would this not defeat the purpose of splitting them up? Are they then not equally likely to behave in a way that favors Google? Would you characterize Mozilla as behaving in ways that favor Google?
ForHackernews 7y ago
Charge money to any OEM that wants to ship with Chrome: i.e. every single non-Apple manufacturer of phones, tablets or computers.

kyrra 7y ago

I'd think it's a bit more difficult. You have ChromeOS (which is based on Chromium OS)[0]. And ChromeOS is used in places that aren't just Chromebooks. For example, Google's Wifi points are based on ChromeOS[1]. [0] https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/chromium-os-faq https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/chromium-os-faq [1] https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/developer-information-for-chrome-os-devices https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/developer-information-f...

iamnothere 7y ago

Becoming a separate for-profit company (as opposed to a nonprofit like Mozilla) could result in some really bad things. Chrome-the-company would have to find new sources of revenue; in the process, it would likely increase its tracking, and it might end up selling info to companies other than Google, which at least tends to hoard user data internally. It may also develop even more industry partnerships around things like DRM that aren't in the interest of users. If Chrome could somehow be forcefully split off into a decently funded nonprofit, I'd be all for it. I'm not sure that anyone but Google could make that happen, though.