5 ms·

You shouldn’t be getting downvoted for that. It’s a fair question for those educated in Google’s history of cancelling products and uneducated in Chrome OS. A

You shouldn’t be getting downvoted for that. It’s a fair question for those educated in Google’s history of cancelling products and uneducated in Chrome OS. A lot of people are unaware that Google is deeply committed in the OS space. Apart from Android, which they saw/see as an existential need for their business, Chrome OS fills a similar space on the desktop (especially as MS ramps up their anticompetitive efforts with their own browser again). Google also uses a chromium build internally in GCP/GKE, so the OS is being maintained for servers as well. Lastly, Chrome OS has been around for a long time and is based off an open source project with passionate maintainers.

Closi 4y ago
Lol at the comment around Microsoft's "anti-competitive efforts" which were making IE a core part of Windows, in a thread about Chrome OS which makes Chrome core to the OS, and in a world where Chrome has the dominant market share and is solidifying it by building it into their products.
- yjftsjthsd-h 4y ago
  I'm not sure that those are really the same; Google already had Chrome and then made an OS to run it, while MS had OS dominance and used that to force everyone to have IE. The analog would be if Google made Chrome automatically add a ChromeOS dual-boot option to every Windows PC it was installed on.
  - Closi 4y ago
    Both companies are cut from exactly the same cloth - e.g. for a closer example of how Google behaves in an identical way we can look at Android which has OS market dominance and uses that to encourage/force everyone to use their app store and services (e.g. you also nerf your phone without using a Google account, the average user will struggle to install alternative app stores).
- minerva23 4y ago
  Are you aware that MS is again making it difficult to switch away from their own browser and tries to force people to switch back to it even after having switched away? Would you not call that an increase in anticompetitiveness? Do you see how that plus them setting the default to Bing is harmful to Google’s interests?
  - Closi 4y ago
    Why is it anti-competitive when Microsoft does it but not when Google does it? Google has the dominant mobile OS and pulls all the same tricks, and although Chrome OS isn't dominant yet it goes even further in entirely blocking other browsers by design. > Do you see how that plus them setting the default to Bing is harmful to Google’s interests? Anti-competitive doesn't mean harmful to Google's interests, it's supposed to mean it's harmful to a competitive market.

Closi 4y ago

Lol at the comment around Microsoft's "anti-competitive efforts" which were making IE a core part of Windows, in a thread about Chrome OS which makes Chrome core to the OS, and in a world where Chrome has the dominant market share and is solidifying it by building it into their products.

yjftsjthsd-h 4y ago
I'm not sure that those are really the same; Google already had Chrome and then made an OS to run it, while MS had OS dominance and used that to force everyone to have IE. The analog would be if Google made Chrome automatically add a ChromeOS dual-boot option to every Windows PC it was installed on.
- Closi 4y ago
  Both companies are cut from exactly the same cloth - e.g. for a closer example of how Google behaves in an identical way we can look at Android which has OS market dominance and uses that to encourage/force everyone to use their app store and services (e.g. you also nerf your phone without using a Google account, the average user will struggle to install alternative app stores).
minerva23 4y ago
Are you aware that MS is again making it difficult to switch away from their own browser and tries to force people to switch back to it even after having switched away? Would you not call that an increase in anticompetitiveness? Do you see how that plus them setting the default to Bing is harmful to Google’s interests?
- Closi 4y ago
  Why is it anti-competitive when Microsoft does it but not when Google does it? Google has the dominant mobile OS and pulls all the same tricks, and although Chrome OS isn't dominant yet it goes even further in entirely blocking other browsers by design. > Do you see how that plus them setting the default to Bing is harmful to Google’s interests? Anti-competitive doesn't mean harmful to Google's interests, it's supposed to mean it's harmful to a competitive market.