5 ms·

>they've successfully demonstrated that they both have too much power and don't give a shit about their end users. This is the fundamental problem with Google,

>they've successfully demonstrated that they both have too much power and don't give a shit about their end users. This is the fundamental problem with Google, period.

fakedang 6y ago
Strictly my opinion but I can't help thinking that current Google leadership seems way more incompetent than the Ballmer decade at MSFT. At least Ballmer can attribute his incompetence to being overly cautious after the antitrust case. On a tangential note, honest question to people here. If Microsoft was fined for bundling the Internet Explorer browser along with Windows in 1997, why is it that I can't remove Chrome from Android or Safari from iOS or Edge from Windows today? I'm largely stranger to US antitrust laws.
- eric-hu 6y ago
  Probably has to do with Windows market share being far bigger in the 90’s.
- docdeek 6y ago
  Not sure about Chrome and Android, but iOS global market share is still very low (15%). In my country it is higher (about a third of the market) but nowhere near the market share of Windows in the 1990s. IANAL but this could be part of it.
  - fakedang 6y ago
    iOS on phone is 50%+ market share in the US. I thought the US antitrust laws cared primarily about US consumers, or am I mistaken? Still doesn't explain why Edge is bundled with Windows and why I can't uninstall it from my PC without going to the system files.
    - freddie_mercury 6y ago
      I'm not sure how you think it works. Do you think there's some kind of Supreme Court precedent making it illegal for OS vendors to bundle software? Microsoft didn't lose the antitrust case. It was overturned on appeal, remanded to a lower court to try again, and then the government settled out of court. From the Wikipedia description of the settlement: "the DOJ did not require Microsoft to change any of its code nor prevent Microsoft from tying other software with Windows in the future". What's more "Microsoft’s obligations under the settlement, as originally drafted, expired on November 12, 2007." Given all of that why wouldn't Edge be bundled?
      - fakedang 6y ago
        Ah thanks, that explains a lot. I did actually think that case set the precedent that way, since MSFT was totally defanged by then upstarts over the next decade.
  - Dma54rhs 6y ago
    Anti trust brought by US was about protecting American consumers, so world has a little to do with it. Apple with his pricing alone could always keep 50% of the world out, thankfully it doesn't work like that.
- waterhouse 6y ago
  > At least Ballmer can attribute his incompetence to being overly cautious after the antitrust case. Theoretically, anticipating an antitrust case might lead you to be equally cautious, in roughly the same way, as having recently gotten an antitrust case. Though things that "demonstrated that they ... have too much power" sound like some of the worst things you could do if you were anticipating an antitrust case.
  - jfoster 6y ago
    Isn't this mixing things up a bit? This issue relates to their dealings in Australia, whilst any antitrust case is most likely to come from US or EU and be focused on those markets, isn't it?
    - sjy 6y ago
      This legislation is supposed to be a kind of antitrust (ie. competition law) regulation. It came out of an inquiry by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission. The stated purpose of the law is to remedy a 'bargaining power imbalance between digital platforms and news media businesses': https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r6652_ems_2fe103c0-0f60-480b-b878-1c8e96cf51d2/upload_pdf/JC000725.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/em...
- the_duke 6y ago
  It's not so much incompetence as (maybe misguided) confidence. Google and other big IT corpos seem to be operating under the assumption that government action is harmless. At most they get a moderate fine, which they can delay in courts for years, and then keep operating with minor alterations. This won't change until there is actual legislation or they are threatened with being broken.
- hsbauauvhabzb 6y ago
  I’m more concerned about tightly bound integration. Why can’t Siri default to google maps? Having a browser engine in an OS makes sense from a third party developer point of view - if I want my app to run on all windows/Mac/iOS/android/whatever systems without bundling WebKit, having a browser libs guaranteed to be on $target is really helpful.
- fogihujy 6y ago
  It's quite possible for me to remove remove Edge from my Windows install. It might not remove individual components like the browser engine, but Edge itself won't be available. Android/iOS is a different beast, as they both have decent shares of the market; if you don't like Safari being bundled with iOS you can always buy an Android phone. That seems to be the reasoning behind it anyway. Mind you, Windows has a smaller market share of the personal computing market today, compared to when the anti-trust cases were settled. I suspect that with Apple's currently higher market share and the fact that browsers are available on phones, pads and other devices, those settlements would have ended up differently.
loceng 6y ago
You only give them power by using them. Create a competitor. Barriers to entry? Figure out how to dismantle or deal with those barriers. Too lazy or don't know/understand how and just want legislation, control, towards tyrannical systems - then yeah, lobby your government to stifle innovation; most governments already stifle innovation - patents arguably being the largest problem here, in bed with the legal-lawyer industrial complex. This learned helplessness that society feels trapped in really is a problem; thanks to Eric Weinstein for adding that lens as a tool to understand current conversations through as well. Use DuckDuckGo search or other, gift them money so they can improve their search - or fund another startup who's working on the problem etc. Plenty of options. Edit to add: I see at least 2 people have continued to choose the lazy option.
- ant6n 6y ago
  Wait, so your response to the concern that Google has too much power is just invest a couple hundred million to create a competitor, otherwise you’re just lazy. I’m not sure that’s a strategy open to many people. Using laws created by democratic processes to reduce power of a Single corp seems more viable.
  - roenxi 6y ago
    Laws created by the democratic process generally require a majority of the population or very powerful sponsors. Either of which is a group of people more than capable of starting their own business. Winning an election requires the support of exceptional people.
- bulleyashah 6y ago
  Hmm. Don't like your planet? Terraform a new planet. Don't like End of Universe? Create your own big bang. What do you mean it's impossible? Stop this learned helplessness.
  - loceng 6y ago
    Exaggeration are pretty weak counter argument points.
Mauricebranagh 6y ago
I think you mean a large proportion of the newspapers here, even "Liberal" papers like the Guardian do this.

>they've successfully demonstrated that they both have too much power and don't give a shit about their end users. This is the fundamental problem with Google, period.

fakedang 6y ago

Strictly my opinion but I can't help thinking that current Google leadership seems way more incompetent than the Ballmer decade at MSFT. At least Ballmer can attribute his incompetence to being overly cautious after the antitrust case. On a tangential note, honest question to people here. If Microsoft was fined for bundling the Internet Explorer browser along with Windows in 1997, why is it that I can't remove Chrome from Android or Safari from iOS or Edge from Windows today? I'm largely stranger to US antitrust laws.

eric-hu 6y ago
Probably has to do with Windows market share being far bigger in the 90’s.
docdeek 6y ago
Not sure about Chrome and Android, but iOS global market share is still very low (15%). In my country it is higher (about a third of the market) but nowhere near the market share of Windows in the 1990s. IANAL but this could be part of it.
- fakedang 6y ago
  iOS on phone is 50%+ market share in the US. I thought the US antitrust laws cared primarily about US consumers, or am I mistaken? Still doesn't explain why Edge is bundled with Windows and why I can't uninstall it from my PC without going to the system files.
  - freddie_mercury 6y ago
    I'm not sure how you think it works. Do you think there's some kind of Supreme Court precedent making it illegal for OS vendors to bundle software? Microsoft didn't lose the antitrust case. It was overturned on appeal, remanded to a lower court to try again, and then the government settled out of court. From the Wikipedia description of the settlement: "the DOJ did not require Microsoft to change any of its code nor prevent Microsoft from tying other software with Windows in the future". What's more "Microsoft’s obligations under the settlement, as originally drafted, expired on November 12, 2007." Given all of that why wouldn't Edge be bundled?
    - fakedang 6y ago
      Ah thanks, that explains a lot. I did actually think that case set the precedent that way, since MSFT was totally defanged by then upstarts over the next decade.
- Dma54rhs 6y ago
  Anti trust brought by US was about protecting American consumers, so world has a little to do with it. Apple with his pricing alone could always keep 50% of the world out, thankfully it doesn't work like that.
waterhouse 6y ago
> At least Ballmer can attribute his incompetence to being overly cautious after the antitrust case. Theoretically, anticipating an antitrust case might lead you to be equally cautious, in roughly the same way, as having recently gotten an antitrust case. Though things that "demonstrated that they ... have too much power" sound like some of the worst things you could do if you were anticipating an antitrust case.
- jfoster 6y ago
  Isn't this mixing things up a bit? This issue relates to their dealings in Australia, whilst any antitrust case is most likely to come from US or EU and be focused on those markets, isn't it?
  - sjy 6y ago
    This legislation is supposed to be a kind of antitrust (ie. competition law) regulation. It came out of an inquiry by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission. The stated purpose of the law is to remedy a 'bargaining power imbalance between digital platforms and news media businesses': https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r6652_ems_2fe103c0-0f60-480b-b878-1c8e96cf51d2/upload_pdf/JC000725.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/em...
the_duke 6y ago
It's not so much incompetence as (maybe misguided) confidence. Google and other big IT corpos seem to be operating under the assumption that government action is harmless. At most they get a moderate fine, which they can delay in courts for years, and then keep operating with minor alterations. This won't change until there is actual legislation or they are threatened with being broken.
hsbauauvhabzb 6y ago
I’m more concerned about tightly bound integration. Why can’t Siri default to google maps? Having a browser engine in an OS makes sense from a third party developer point of view - if I want my app to run on all windows/Mac/iOS/android/whatever systems without bundling WebKit, having a browser libs guaranteed to be on $target is really helpful.
fogihujy 6y ago
It's quite possible for me to remove remove Edge from my Windows install. It might not remove individual components like the browser engine, but Edge itself won't be available. Android/iOS is a different beast, as they both have decent shares of the market; if you don't like Safari being bundled with iOS you can always buy an Android phone. That seems to be the reasoning behind it anyway. Mind you, Windows has a smaller market share of the personal computing market today, compared to when the anti-trust cases were settled. I suspect that with Apple's currently higher market share and the fact that browsers are available on phones, pads and other devices, those settlements would have ended up differently.

loceng 6y ago

You only give them power by using them. Create a competitor. Barriers to entry? Figure out how to dismantle or deal with those barriers. Too lazy or don't know/understand how and just want legislation, control, towards tyrannical systems - then yeah, lobby your government to stifle innovation; most governments already stifle innovation - patents arguably being the largest problem here, in bed with the legal-lawyer industrial complex. This learned helplessness that society feels trapped in really is a problem; thanks to Eric Weinstein for adding that lens as a tool to understand current conversations through as well. Use DuckDuckGo search or other, gift them money so they can improve their search - or fund another startup who's working on the problem etc. Plenty of options. Edit to add: I see at least 2 people have continued to choose the lazy option.

ant6n 6y ago
Wait, so your response to the concern that Google has too much power is just invest a couple hundred million to create a competitor, otherwise you’re just lazy. I’m not sure that’s a strategy open to many people. Using laws created by democratic processes to reduce power of a Single corp seems more viable.
- roenxi 6y ago
  Laws created by the democratic process generally require a majority of the population or very powerful sponsors. Either of which is a group of people more than capable of starting their own business. Winning an election requires the support of exceptional people.
bulleyashah 6y ago
Hmm. Don't like your planet? Terraform a new planet. Don't like End of Universe? Create your own big bang. What do you mean it's impossible? Stop this learned helplessness.
- loceng 6y ago
  Exaggeration are pretty weak counter argument points.

Mauricebranagh 6y ago

I think you mean a large proportion of the newspapers here, even "Liberal" papers like the Guardian do this.