27 ms·
While I'm strongly in favor, in surprised Facebook+WhatsApp+Instagram is a problem while Google+Gmail+YouTube+Meet+GCP+Chrome+Android is not.
by remram 5y ago
While I'm strongly in favor, in surprised Facebook+WhatsApp+Instagram is a problem while Google+Gmail+YouTube+Meet+GCP+Chrome+Android is not.
- cvak 5y agoOr exchange + office + teams + skype + windows + onedrive + github....
- rvense 5y agoTeams being part of Office 365 is a pretty obvious.
- mensetmanusman 5y agoBut it was to knee-cap Slack…
- rvense 5y agoPrecisely. They're using their success in one space to prevent others from being successful in a different space.
- csunbird 5y agoBecause, one of them bought the competition, while other just built it themselves. (well, ignoring YT)
- namelessoracle 5y agoAlphabet buys lots of companies, so im not sure what you are talking about here.
- ironman1478 5y agoAndroid was bought and Chrome was initially based on webkit.
- robocat 5y agoAndroid was built by Google. What they bought was a prototype that lacked virtually all of the functionality they needed.
- sangnoir 5y agoI heard[1] the Android team was pretty insular after being acquired: they wouldn't even let other Googlers into their building on the Google campus. So if it was the same leadership and mostly the same engineers as before acquisition, can you say Google built Android? Even if they bought a prototype, the acquired the company to execute something Google would have struggled to without the talent, so IMO divining if Google were interested in the product or the personnel is splitting hairs. 1. I have never worked at Google, I'm pulling this information from my recollection of reports & forum submissions back then.
- endisneigh 5y agoYou can argue that instagram and WhatsApp would be viable strong competition to Facebook. Gmail wouldn’t really be competitor to Google search. YouTube definitely could be though. Chrome isn’t a viable company - GCP is pretty fledgling but possible.
- rsstack 5y agoThe anti-competitive argument here isn't that Chrome would be a good competitor to Google Search, but that Google operates both products in a way that makes it all but impossible for other companies to create viable competitors to Chrome or Google Search.
- endisneigh 5y agoHow is it all but impossible for companies to create viable competitors to chrome, exactly?
- rsstack 5y agoThat "or" wasn't meant as "both" or to opine on which one it is. I personally believe the way Google operate Chrome is one of the reasons it is all but impossible to seriously compete with Google Search. But I'm not the judge.
- Natfan 5y agoTry making a web browser that supports Widevine (Google's DRM for web browsers) and see how far you get. Back in 2019, someone tried exactly this and was blocked by Google as they didn't want another web browser on the market: https://blog.samuelmaddock.com/posts/google-widevine-blocked-my-browser/ https://blog.samuelmaddock.com/posts/google-widevine-blocked...
- endisneigh 5y agoDoes edge, brave and Firefox all support it?
- mmastrac 5y agoIf this succeeds, they'll target the others next. Google, Microsoft, Amazon and Apple all have easily divisible lines.
- Tenoke 5y agoIt is pretty ridiculous as Facebook have big competitors in all their markets which aren't even that many. Google has more near-monopolies and in more markets and co-integrated more heavily at that. It's really hard for me to see this as due to just Facebook being a popular target rather than actual solid analyses.
- tarsinge 5y agoThe way I see it Facebook+ is a societal problem and so is a larger one than the usual tech monopoly problem which Google fall in (which is still a problem though, just not on the same level).