3 ms·

Everything here you accuse Google of doing, Apple is running circles on. Ultimately, if this case goes through Google are right about one thing. The UX on Chrom

Everything here you accuse Google of doing, Apple is running circles on. Ultimately, if this case goes through Google are right about one thing. The UX on Chrome is going to take a steep nose dive.

jimjambw 2y ago
In what way?
- Timber-6539 2y ago
  Who is going to provide a competitive browser for the price of $0 other than Google?
  - water9 2y ago
    Microsoft could end up buying it
    - Timber-6539 2y ago
      A far worse monopoly than Google is going to solve your monopoly problem?
    - scarface_74 2y ago
      And do what with it? They already are using Chromium for Edge. They would still need to monetize it.
  - kmeisthax 2y ago
    Before Google, there were multiple competing browsers based on different technology, all of which were either offered for free or explicitly licensed as FOSS. Google used Chrome to put the web on an upgrade treadmill. The only way to keep your own code up-to-date with what websites expected was to either commit unending amounts of resources to the problem (Google), do the bare minimum to keep websites working as your resources are stretched thin (Safari, arguably Firefox), or just ship modified versions of Chrome so that it's easier to merge in new features (Edge, Opera, Brave, Vivaldi, etc).
    - Ferret7446 2y ago
      Before Google, all of those options sucked. Chrome was a breath of fresh air, which was why it exploded in popularity. I don't do web dev, but from what I've heard, web devs also suffered trying to support multiple conflicting browsers, and Chrome's dominance actually makes life much easier.
sunaookami 2y ago
Apple does not have a monopoly.
- Timber-6539 2y ago
  What do you call the Apple store then if it's not a monopolization of the iOS ecosystem? This article accurately captures all tech monopolies, Apple included. https://ia.net/topics/monopolies-apple-and-epic https://ia.net/topics/monopolies-apple-and-epic
  - scarface_74 2y ago
    Well in the one legal case Epic vs Apple, the judge said it was nonsensical to say that Apple had a monopoly on its own product.
    - Timber-6539 2y ago
      Judges get decisions wrong all the time.
    - fennecfoxy 2y ago
      Can't you apply the exact same logic to Google and Google's services being bundled together? The bundle is their product; nobody's forcing anybody to use the Google services bundle, but you're certainly at a disadvantage if you don't - the exact same - as with Apple, not using their provided APIs/following their ridiculous rules/not upsetting daddy or he'll take your app away is the exact same thing. Probably worse so as Google don't seem to copy the features of companies and then spin them as their own all the time like Apple gets away with. Or to kill/remove/restrict competing apps when Apple decides to get into the market for something, or just generally as a "punishment" for not following Apple's strict rules (that only exist to benefit Apple, whilst they tell consumers "it's all 4 u baby").
- PittleyDunkin 2y ago
  There's nothing inherently illegal about monopolies, just anti-competitive behavior. While Apple is engaging in clear anti-competitive behavior (eg shoving the app store down customers throats), they've reined in restrictions of competing browsers so that they're actually worth using now.
tuetuopay 2y ago
Apple does not run the largest advertising network on the planet. As simple as that. Even for the matter of the browser, Apple does not have the same push as Google does. Yes, Safari is the default browser on a phone. But outside of the mobile world, Safari is a rounding error.
- yunwal 2y ago
  In terms of controlling commerce (google’s main line of business), non-mobile is on its way to becoming a rounding error.
- fsflover 2y ago
  > Apple does not run the largest advertising network on the planet. No, but they're trying to: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42185080 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42185080
Gormo 2y ago
> The UX on Chrome is going to take a steep nose dive. In order to dive any further, it would have to begin excavation.

Everything here you accuse Google of doing, Apple is running circles on. Ultimately, if this case goes through Google are right about one thing. The UX on Chrome is going to take a steep nose dive.

jimjambw 2y ago

In what way?

Timber-6539 2y ago
Who is going to provide a competitive browser for the price of $0 other than Google?
- water9 2y ago
  Microsoft could end up buying it
  - Timber-6539 2y ago
    A far worse monopoly than Google is going to solve your monopoly problem?
  - scarface_74 2y ago
    And do what with it? They already are using Chromium for Edge. They would still need to monetize it.
- kmeisthax 2y ago
  Before Google, there were multiple competing browsers based on different technology, all of which were either offered for free or explicitly licensed as FOSS. Google used Chrome to put the web on an upgrade treadmill. The only way to keep your own code up-to-date with what websites expected was to either commit unending amounts of resources to the problem (Google), do the bare minimum to keep websites working as your resources are stretched thin (Safari, arguably Firefox), or just ship modified versions of Chrome so that it's easier to merge in new features (Edge, Opera, Brave, Vivaldi, etc).
  - Ferret7446 2y ago
    Before Google, all of those options sucked. Chrome was a breath of fresh air, which was why it exploded in popularity. I don't do web dev, but from what I've heard, web devs also suffered trying to support multiple conflicting browsers, and Chrome's dominance actually makes life much easier.

sunaookami 2y ago

Apple does not have a monopoly.

Timber-6539 2y ago
What do you call the Apple store then if it's not a monopolization of the iOS ecosystem? This article accurately captures all tech monopolies, Apple included. https://ia.net/topics/monopolies-apple-and-epic https://ia.net/topics/monopolies-apple-and-epic
- scarface_74 2y ago
  Well in the one legal case Epic vs Apple, the judge said it was nonsensical to say that Apple had a monopoly on its own product.
  - Timber-6539 2y ago
    Judges get decisions wrong all the time.
  - fennecfoxy 2y ago
    Can't you apply the exact same logic to Google and Google's services being bundled together? The bundle is their product; nobody's forcing anybody to use the Google services bundle, but you're certainly at a disadvantage if you don't - the exact same - as with Apple, not using their provided APIs/following their ridiculous rules/not upsetting daddy or he'll take your app away is the exact same thing. Probably worse so as Google don't seem to copy the features of companies and then spin them as their own all the time like Apple gets away with. Or to kill/remove/restrict competing apps when Apple decides to get into the market for something, or just generally as a "punishment" for not following Apple's strict rules (that only exist to benefit Apple, whilst they tell consumers "it's all 4 u baby").
PittleyDunkin 2y ago
There's nothing inherently illegal about monopolies, just anti-competitive behavior. While Apple is engaging in clear anti-competitive behavior (eg shoving the app store down customers throats), they've reined in restrictions of competing browsers so that they're actually worth using now.

tuetuopay 2y ago

Apple does not run the largest advertising network on the planet. As simple as that. Even for the matter of the browser, Apple does not have the same push as Google does. Yes, Safari is the default browser on a phone. But outside of the mobile world, Safari is a rounding error.

yunwal 2y ago
In terms of controlling commerce (google’s main line of business), non-mobile is on its way to becoming a rounding error.
fsflover 2y ago
> Apple does not run the largest advertising network on the planet. No, but they're trying to: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42185080 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42185080

Gormo 2y ago

> The UX on Chrome is going to take a steep nose dive. In order to dive any further, it would have to begin excavation.