4 ms·

Google was made possible by a platform shift: From desktop apps to websites. First they positioned themselves very early in the web user experience: After the

by mg 3y ago

Google was made possible by a platform shift: From desktop apps to websites. First they positioned themselves very early in the web user experience: After the user turned on their Dell computer, booted Windows and started Internet Explorer, the next step was to use Google. Then they moved one step closer to the user by building their own browser: Chrome Then they moved even closer to the user by building their own OS: Android Then they moved even closer to the user by building their own computer: The Pixel Phone The question is what the next platform shift could be. And if the big players will miss it so that a new player can emerge. And if there will be a new player which is as smart and driven as the Google founders.

gbin 3y ago
Ad Chromebooks too.
worrycue 3y ago
Frankly, I think it’s less “moving closer to the user” and more just securing control over the path users use to get to their service. Chrome was made to prevent whoever controls the browser from blocking users’ access to Google. Android was created because they were afraid Apple would block them on mobile. All tech companies do this kind of positioning. Apple made Apple Maps to make sure Google Maps isn’t the only choice on iOS fearing Google could withdraw Google Maps and hurt the utility of iOS devices - at least in the short term. It’s why Apple made Safari and enforces it as the only browser on iOS. Apple learnt relatively early the dangers of being dependent on another company, https://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=MacBasic.txt https://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=MacBasic.txt
izacus 3y ago
The next platform shift are obviously DRM locked closed app platforms like TikTok, ChatGPT, Meta ecosystem and Apple apps. No APIs, no freedom. Everyone is very actively working on making the browser dead and serving you content exclusively via corporate controled apps on locked platforms. You can kill off Chrome, but the result isn't going to be a renessaince of Firefox, but a move into your content being only available on locked iPhone.
- skydhash 3y ago
  > Everyone is very actively working on making the browser dead and serving you content exclusively via corporate controled apps on locked platforms. Aka cable box.
tannhaeuser 3y ago
Google was made possible by US antitrust turning a blind eye towards Google's acquisition of DoubleClick and YouTube. Considering Alphabet is dominating both search and ads and also offers services via searches, the EU commission already hinted at a breakup as a viable measure to lead the web out of its misery. [1]: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_3207 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_...
- mg 3y ago
  Google's market cap was already at over $100B with billions in revenue and hundreds of millions in profits when it bought DoubleClick and YouTube. So while those were big aquisitions (Around $3B and $2B) they only accelerated the process of Google turning into the web's central player. It was already set in motion before the aquisitions.
  - rwmj 3y ago
    The large market cap is exactly why they shouldn't have been allowed to acquire either. (Same goes for Facebook with Instagram, Whatapp).

by mg 3y ago

gbin 3y ago

Ad Chromebooks too.

worrycue 3y ago

Frankly, I think it’s less “moving closer to the user” and more just securing control over the path users use to get to their service. Chrome was made to prevent whoever controls the browser from blocking users’ access to Google. Android was created because they were afraid Apple would block them on mobile. All tech companies do this kind of positioning. Apple made Apple Maps to make sure Google Maps isn’t the only choice on iOS fearing Google could withdraw Google Maps and hurt the utility of iOS devices - at least in the short term. It’s why Apple made Safari and enforces it as the only browser on iOS. Apple learnt relatively early the dangers of being dependent on another company, https://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=MacBasic.txt https://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=MacBasic.txt

izacus 3y ago

The next platform shift are obviously DRM locked closed app platforms like TikTok, ChatGPT, Meta ecosystem and Apple apps. No APIs, no freedom. Everyone is very actively working on making the browser dead and serving you content exclusively via corporate controled apps on locked platforms. You can kill off Chrome, but the result isn't going to be a renessaince of Firefox, but a move into your content being only available on locked iPhone.

skydhash 3y ago
> Everyone is very actively working on making the browser dead and serving you content exclusively via corporate controled apps on locked platforms. Aka cable box.

tannhaeuser 3y ago

Google was made possible by US antitrust turning a blind eye towards Google's acquisition of DoubleClick and YouTube. Considering Alphabet is dominating both search and ads and also offers services via searches, the EU commission already hinted at a breakup as a viable measure to lead the web out of its misery. [1]: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_3207 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_...

mg 3y ago
Google's market cap was already at over $100B with billions in revenue and hundreds of millions in profits when it bought DoubleClick and YouTube. So while those were big aquisitions (Around $3B and $2B) they only accelerated the process of Google turning into the web's central player. It was already set in motion before the aquisitions.
- rwmj 3y ago
  The large market cap is exactly why they shouldn't have been allowed to acquire either. (Same goes for Facebook with Instagram, Whatapp).