2 ms·
This seems excessive. Instead of regulating search, which would have a net effect of entrenching Google as the only de-facto search engine, it is better to let
by glitchc 6y ago
This seems excessive. Instead of regulating search, which would have a net effect of entrenching Google as the only de-facto search engine, it is better to let competition take its course. A better technology can always up-end Google's business model (it's more fragile than people think). Let the open market perform its function. After all, it was only 2000 when people thought MS and RIM were too big and needed to be regulated. Nowadays, MS has lost much of its competitive edge in the desktop space and RIM is just a patent-holding shell of its former self.
- v7p1Qbt1im 6y agoMentioning MS in that way doesn’t help your argument. They are doing better than ever before. Who cares about desktop space (which they still have an enormous market share of btw) when you have Azure. I would argue the antitrust settlement actually helped them. Everyone is basically ignoring them in current “tech-lash” discussions. They got away with a slap on the wrist 20 years ago and are just slightly more careful.
- glitchc 6y agoOn the contrary, MS is an excellent example of a large company being forced to pivot (to cloud) after their existing business model (desktop software) looked increasingly dead in the water. Year to year earnings showcase how much more reliant MS was on desktop software two decades ago. Changes in technology, user expectations and computing model forced MS to innovate, not regulation, and that’s exactly my point.