4 ms·

It's certainly shady, given that they own both the product they're advertising and the medium they're advertising it through. I don't expect that I'll be able

by alxlaz 7y ago

It's certainly shady, given that they own both the product they're advertising and the medium they're advertising it through. I don't expect that I'll be able to get them to give me a top spot for an ad saying "Concerned about Microsoft's tracking policy? Mozilla Firefox is here", or "Still using Edge? Why not just get the original -- Google Chrome is here'.

zchrykng 7y ago
No, but Google would be more than happy to put the later on their main search page. Not really any different. Microsoft controls Windows and uses it to advance corporate goals. Google owns their search interface and uses it to advance their corporate goals.
- alxlaz 7y ago
  What does Google have to do with any of this?
  - wlesieutre 7y ago
    >"Still using Edge? Why not just get the original -- Google Chrome is here' Is something Google would totally do. They've been pushing Chrome with the search home page for years.
  - zchrykng 7y ago
    People are complaining about Microsoft pushing Edge on Windows. Google pushes Chrome on google.com all the time. Frequently with some negative comment about your current browser. They may be less negative now than what I remember, haven't looked at one in forever.
    - alxlaz 7y ago
      I'm sure Google is shady in this, and many other ways, too, but I really don't see how it's important in this discussion. If Google is doing the same thing then I hope they choke on their Bacardi and Coke, too, but the news is that Microsoft is also doing it now. I'm not sure what the adequate reaction here would have been. Should I have added a "P.S. oh yeah by the way Google is also doing this, don't forget to hate on them, too?" line in my original reply, for completeness?
      - jevgeni 7y ago
        This is not news, if people here are collectively OK with such behavior if it is done by a company they haven’t been trained to hate.
  - tatersolid 7y ago
    They push chrome on their search home page. Same thing really.
- Piskvorrr 7y ago
  This doesn't look like the 2001 brouhaha over "MS using Windows to peddle IE", nope, nooosir, not at all, honest.
- mr_overalls 7y ago
  Google is free - ads are expected. Microsoft is a paid product. Completely different situations.
  - kd913 7y ago
    I disagree that it's completely different situations. I have not seen anywhere in the legal structure that allows such moves if advertisements are enabled. It is still a company abusing their monopoly situation to influence another market. In fact Google did it worse by blocking browsers purely by user-agent to key google services like maps to block the entry or Fire devices or windows phone devices. Both cases aren't acceptible and both should be punished imho.
    - jevgeni 7y ago
      It is not, because they are not a monopoly.
      - zchrykng 7y ago
        Google Search is more of a monopoly than Microsoft Windows is last I checked.
        jevgeni 7y ago
        Totally agree.
tzs 7y ago
This seems pretty common, and I've not heard anyone consider it a problem before. For example radio stations commonly run promos for their own shows while not accepting ads for shows on other stations. Do you consider that shady too? If not, how do to you distinguish the Microsoft case?
- alxlaz 7y ago
  Rules for advertising on radio and TV are a lot older and consequently more comprehensive, and there's a lot of variation from one country to another, of course. But at least where I'm from, it's explicitly forbidden for radio stations (in fact it's illegal for any company) to run any kind of comparative advertising that denigrates a competitor's product. It's OK to show off your product, and it's OK to compare your own product to another company's, as long as you're transparent about what's compared and under what conditions. But an ad that mentions a competitor's product just to denigrate it would be illegal. It would be okay for KBBL to advertise its news program. It would also be OK for KBBL to run an ad saying "Our program has the fewest fake news on the market", as long as they they tell you how to verify the claim (i.e. what numbers they used, who came up with them, how they came up with them, and how you can get them, too). But if they ran an ad saying "Still listening to WQHG-FM news? Tune to KBBL instead!" they'd risk having their license withdrawn. It's definitely not pretty common precisely because it's illegal :).
  - jevgeni 7y ago
    It’s not illegal in the U.S.
    - simion314 7y ago
      So in US on TV and radio do you have say Pepsi commercials that mention Coca Cola in a bad way? I seen this kind of commercials on YouTube but I was under the impression that those never were on TV but maybe I am wrong and those are only illegal in Europe and other countries.
      - 7y ago

by alxlaz 7y ago

zchrykng 7y ago

No, but Google would be more than happy to put the later on their main search page. Not really any different. Microsoft controls Windows and uses it to advance corporate goals. Google owns their search interface and uses it to advance their corporate goals.

alxlaz 7y ago
What does Google have to do with any of this?
- wlesieutre 7y ago
  >"Still using Edge? Why not just get the original -- Google Chrome is here' Is something Google would totally do. They've been pushing Chrome with the search home page for years.
- zchrykng 7y ago
  People are complaining about Microsoft pushing Edge on Windows. Google pushes Chrome on google.com all the time. Frequently with some negative comment about your current browser. They may be less negative now than what I remember, haven't looked at one in forever.
  - alxlaz 7y ago
    I'm sure Google is shady in this, and many other ways, too, but I really don't see how it's important in this discussion. If Google is doing the same thing then I hope they choke on their Bacardi and Coke, too, but the news is that Microsoft is also doing it now. I'm not sure what the adequate reaction here would have been. Should I have added a "P.S. oh yeah by the way Google is also doing this, don't forget to hate on them, too?" line in my original reply, for completeness?
    - jevgeni 7y ago
      This is not news, if people here are collectively OK with such behavior if it is done by a company they haven’t been trained to hate.
- tatersolid 7y ago
  They push chrome on their search home page. Same thing really.
Piskvorrr 7y ago
This doesn't look like the 2001 brouhaha over "MS using Windows to peddle IE", nope, nooosir, not at all, honest.
mr_overalls 7y ago
Google is free - ads are expected. Microsoft is a paid product. Completely different situations.
- kd913 7y ago
  I disagree that it's completely different situations. I have not seen anywhere in the legal structure that allows such moves if advertisements are enabled. It is still a company abusing their monopoly situation to influence another market. In fact Google did it worse by blocking browsers purely by user-agent to key google services like maps to block the entry or Fire devices or windows phone devices. Both cases aren't acceptible and both should be punished imho.
  - jevgeni 7y ago
    It is not, because they are not a monopoly.
    - zchrykng 7y ago
      Google Search is more of a monopoly than Microsoft Windows is last I checked.
      - jevgeni 7y ago
        Totally agree.

tzs 7y ago

This seems pretty common, and I've not heard anyone consider it a problem before. For example radio stations commonly run promos for their own shows while not accepting ads for shows on other stations. Do you consider that shady too? If not, how do to you distinguish the Microsoft case?

alxlaz 7y ago
Rules for advertising on radio and TV are a lot older and consequently more comprehensive, and there's a lot of variation from one country to another, of course. But at least where I'm from, it's explicitly forbidden for radio stations (in fact it's illegal for any company) to run any kind of comparative advertising that denigrates a competitor's product. It's OK to show off your product, and it's OK to compare your own product to another company's, as long as you're transparent about what's compared and under what conditions. But an ad that mentions a competitor's product just to denigrate it would be illegal. It would be okay for KBBL to advertise its news program. It would also be OK for KBBL to run an ad saying "Our program has the fewest fake news on the market", as long as they they tell you how to verify the claim (i.e. what numbers they used, who came up with them, how they came up with them, and how you can get them, too). But if they ran an ad saying "Still listening to WQHG-FM news? Tune to KBBL instead!" they'd risk having their license withdrawn. It's definitely not pretty common precisely because it's illegal :).
- jevgeni 7y ago
  It’s not illegal in the U.S.
  - simion314 7y ago
    So in US on TV and radio do you have say Pepsi commercials that mention Coca Cola in a bad way? I seen this kind of commercials on YouTube but I was under the impression that those never were on TV but maybe I am wrong and those are only illegal in Europe and other countries.
    - 7y ago