3 ms·
US alleges Google got rich because people stick with search defaults
- theandrewbailey 3y agoDidn't Google have the majority share in search engines before they started paying to be the default (~early 2000s)?
- elashri 3y agoNo according to this dataset [1] about US search engine marketshare [1] https://datahub.io/rufuspollock/search-engine-market-shares https://datahub.io/rufuspollock/search-engine-market-shares
- notatallshaw 3y agoThe link you've given shows Google had the majority of market share by October 2004, which is in line with what the parent comment states (at least the way I parse it). What were they paying to be default on prior to October 2004? Smartphones didn't exist, Firefox didn't exist, Internet Explorer didn't have a dedicated UI element that led you to a search engine. Are we talking about software that made Google the default home page? IE Toolbars? Feature phones like the Blackberry? I was active on the Internet since the late 90s, but I only remember having to type "www.google.com" prior to 2005, but I'm certainly no means an expert.
- qbrass 3y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Desktop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Desktop To be fair, I don't know if they actually had to pay anyone.
- notatallshaw 3y agoGoogle Desktop was not released before October 2004 though. And even then, what was its significance on the general desktop space? I used it heavily, but I didn't know anyone else who had it installed.
- isk517 3y agoI agree, Google got rich by having the best product. Now they are staying rich because people will stick with the default as long as there isn't a head-and-shoulders about the rest better option.
- greatpostman 3y agoChatgpt like competitors will take down google search
- itiro 3y agoGoogle’s window of having the best product closed over a decade ago. Payola schemes been keeping them afloat since mobile took off. App stores would have become the new default search for a solution engine.
- hulitu 3y ago> I agree, Google got rich by having the best product no. There were better search engines (altavista, yahoo). Google was the most agressive.
- throwaway-blaze 3y agoGoogle pays billions to Apple to be the default search engine on Apple devices, and pays billions to the US Carriers to be the default search engine on Android phones they sell. They wouldn't do that if they didn't feel they needed to...
- kuchenbecker 3y ago> feel they needed to... Or rather felt the monetary benefit greater than the cost. It's not necessarily about need but rather maximization.
- mpalmer 3y ago(Alleged) monopolies aren't maintained by doing nothing.
- LargeTomato 3y agoI've been thinking about this. When I'm hungry in the evening I go to Jack in the Box. JitB isn't the best. It's pretty low quality and the restaurants are gross. But JitB paid money for access to open a restaurant closest to me. That seems the same as Google.