6 ms·
In the EU having a monopoly doesn't require you to be the only vendor in the market, it's sufficient to be large enough to exert abusive market forces on compet
by zaarn 7y ago
In the EU having a monopoly doesn't require you to be the only vendor in the market, it's sufficient to be large enough to exert abusive market forces on competitors. Google Chrome definitely fits that definition, so no it's not redefined by random HN posters this week.
- scarface74 7y agoAnd having a monopoly isn’t illegal. Again, despite what all of the wannabe lawyers who post to HN think. How many times have HN users posted that Apple is a “monopoly”?
- zaarn 7y agoGoogle is certainly not a corporation that has ever shown to have an interest in the best for their users. They have already done quite a few things that benefit them or hurt competitors (youtube's UI is slow on firefox, changing the scrolling UI for no reason, trying to kill adblockers and now blocking uBlock from their store).
- scarface74 7y agoGoogle is no different than any other for profit corporation. Their first interest is making money by getting their customers to pay them. Their customers are advertisers. Their users are what they sell to their customers.
- zaarn 7y agoEven better reason to push for independent browser engines like Gecko (Firefox).
- scarface74 7y agoAnd that’s fine. But anytime HN users start whining “monopoly” the next thing they start screaming is for government to intervene every time that Google/Apple/Amazon doesn’t something that they don’t like.
- zaarn 7y agoOh, don't worry, the government, or atleast the EU, should intervene and force Google to split Chrome into an independent organization.
- scarface74 7y agoAnd when has the EU successfully come to the rescue of geeks who don’t like the way a software company runs?
- zaarn 7y agoCorrect.