4 ms·
> There's plenty of other reasons to criticize Google, changing default settings doesn't seem to be a hill to die on. This statement is ironic considering that
by addicted 6y ago
> There's plenty of other reasons to criticize Google, changing default settings doesn't seem to be a hill to die on.
This statement is ironic considering that when Google was the profit driven upstart, changing default settings on IE was literally the hill Google chose to die on, as far as anti trust regulation against Microsoft was concerned.
https://www.zdnet.com/article/google-seeks-to-join-internet-explorer-antitrust-complaint/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/google-seeks-to-join-internet-...
- ceejayoz 6y agoYou either die a hero, or live long enough to see yourself become the villain.
- antisthenes 6y agoSeems like now we have an official timeline for the hero-->villain transition, and it is ~11 years! How time flies!
- krisgenre 6y agohttps://publicpolicy.googleblog.com/2009/02/browsers-powered-by-user-choice.html https://publicpolicy.googleblog.com/2009/02/browsers-powered... was posted by Sundar Pichai himself!
- fbelzile 6y ago> Google believes that the browser market is still largely uncompetitive ... This is because Internet Explorer is tied to Microsoft's dominant computer operating system, giving it an unfair advantage over other browsers. Compare this to the mobile market, where Microsoft cannot tie Internet Explorer to a dominant operating system, and its browser therefore has a much lower usage. The value of competition for users (even in the limited form we see today) is clear: tabbed browsing, faster downloads, private browsing features, and more. Wow, this is enlightening. I'll take back my last statement. Maybe Google should be offering users to pick a default search engine from the start like they wanted Microsoft to do...