6 ms·

This is great news: the government can force Google to sell Chrome to Microsoft, and then we can go back to 20 years ago when everyone was basically forced to u

This is great news: the government can force Google to sell Chrome to Microsoft, and then we can go back to 20 years ago when everyone was basically forced to use IE6. Or they can force them to sell to Apple, and everyone will be forced to use Macs and iPhones. And, of course, the government won't have a problem with those companies having a browser monopoly and tying it to their other HW/SW.

loktarogar 2y ago
Are those the only options?
- dmalik 2y ago
  Elon likes to buy things.
  - shiroiushi 2y ago
    I suppose this is also a possibility, but I think it's highly unlikely. He already has his hands full with Xitter and DoGE, and he had trouble getting enough money together for his Twitter acquisition, so I'm not sure how he'd have enough money to also buy Chrome. And unlike Twitter, there's no clear way to make any money from Chrome unless it's tied to an advertising empire, which Xitter is not; after all, it's a company so unpopular with advertisers (he told them to go fuck themselves remember) that the CEO wants to the government to prosecute companies for not advertising with them.
- diffeomorphism 2y ago
  Well, there is also Facebook or Amazon. But pretty much yes. Chrome is a very large, very expensive product to develop with very unclear profit perspective once disassociated from Google.
- tdeck 2y ago
  Maybe ByteDance can buy it!
- 0x073 2y ago
  Oracle
  - shiroiushi 2y ago
    While Oracle is indeed a big IT company and could probably afford to buy Chrome, I don't see how it would make any business sense for them whatsoever. How would this improve profits for their other products or services?
    - 0x073 2y ago
      I don't understand why they bought sun. As everyone I know use mariadb or percona.
  - lakomen 2y ago
    Anyone but them. They're even worse than Microsoft when it comes to customer hostility
- TowerTall 2y ago
  One possibility is that Chrome could be acquired and run by a consortium of companies, similar to how the C++ programming language is governed. In the C++ model, a committee with representatives from various organizations works collaboratively on proposals, agreeing on features and then implementing them. A similar approach for Chrome could involve major tech companies forming a consortium to collectively manage and develop the browser while adhering to agreed-upon principles and priorities.
  - shiroiushi 2y ago
    The C++ you speak of is a programming language specification, not a consumer-ready piece of software developed by software engineers. I don't see how these are remotely comparable: the C++ consortium doesn't require an army of paid engineers, managers, IT personnel, etc. to operate. A browser does: just look at Mozilla Corp.
KingMob 2y ago
"My made-up strawman scenario is horrible!" Not to mention ahistorical. Frequently, monopoly breakups just resulted in new companies formed.
hot_gril 2y ago
Microsoft already shoves Edge on its users via OS dominance. Seems way more anti-competitive than what Google does with Chrome.
- Yeul 2y ago
  Edge is based on Chromium. Google won the internet.
  - meltyness 2y ago
    V8 and jQuery won the web, really.
  - hot_gril 2y ago
    Edge was able to fork Chromium without paying Google for it. It's so different from the old IE dominance.
0x073 2y ago
The best would be a nonprofit company like Mozilla funded by the eu. (With most of the old developers) (Yes I'm a dreamer)
- aleph_minus_one 2y ago
  Tell your friends to use Firefox much more aggressively, and the dream will at least partly come true.
  - 0x073 2y ago
    Mozilla is better than Google, but still a bad choice nowadays:/ E.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42191110 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42191110
    - metalman 2y ago
      mozilla is just a monster in waiting, horribly invasive software,promises controll and just feeds ads faster than the rest as an alternative console tool,ok it has its place, but for a daily driver I only use it for niche uses where my other browsers dont render certain big tech web sites and no google anything here
      - Moomoomoo309 2y ago
        I think you should review Mozilla's privacy issues and compare them objectively to Chrome's. In comparison to the two, Chrome is more invasive, offers less control, and feeds you more ads. Mozilla is no saint, but I don't think any browser companies are (Brave, Vivaldi have had controversies too).
    - shiroiushi 2y ago
      "bad" is still better than "even worse".
- reacharavindh 2y ago
  My version of the dream is the EU funding a non-profit organization whose _only_ goal, and mandate is to develop and maintain the open web browser like Firefox in a “user. Privacy first” focus. I is also dream about EU suspending all their “green sustainability” efforts and focus on one thing and do it well. The one thing? Lay new high speed tracks and create a “European Rail” entity that is not merely a composition of national rail organizations. There should be _one_ organization, funded by the EU responsible for high speed tracks between all major cities. Amsterdam, Brussels, Paris, Barcelona, Madrid, Lisbon, Frankfurt, Vienna, Zurich, Rome, Prague, Berlin, Warsaw, Hamburg, Copenhagen, Stockholm,Helsinki, Oslo - imagine all reachable by high speed train who tickets you could buy from one entity, and runs like clockwork.
safety1st 2y ago
I mean, obviously you are just making this up and attacking a straw man - the court is not going to order Google to sell the browser to Microsoft. Lots of companies would probably be interested. None of them will be companies that possess a monopoly on search, because Google is the only one who has that. It will lead to more competition in search. Google will not be able to prop up their search monopoly by being the default engine in Chrome anymore. They'll have to compete with, at a minimum, whoever buys it and immediately changes the default. A more likely remedy than selling off the browser (or maybe both will happen) is that Google won't be able to set all your defaults for everything to Google anymore. This will create breathing room for other companies to market competing services and make money. This is all good stuff for everyone who doesn't work at Google, which is 99.999999% of us even on Hacker News
- shiroiushi 2y ago
  It's not a strawman, and you made your own strawman too by putting words in my mouth. I never said they'd force Google to sell to Microsoft specifically. You clearly haven't thought very clearly about how this would work. How exactly would a buyer make money from Chrome? Think about that for a few minutes and then maybe you'll understand why Microsoft is the most likely buyer, with Apple the next most likely.
whiplash451 2y ago
They don’t have to sell. They have to spin off. There are many scenarios that you are ruling out because nobody can predict 2026. Meanwhile, working towards a somewhat healthier and competitive landscape on browsers is more than welcome.
hoppp 2y ago
I buy it for a dollar. Then let people contribute to the open source code. Problem solved

loktarogar 2y ago

Are those the only options?

dmalik 2y ago
Elon likes to buy things.
- shiroiushi 2y ago
  I suppose this is also a possibility, but I think it's highly unlikely. He already has his hands full with Xitter and DoGE, and he had trouble getting enough money together for his Twitter acquisition, so I'm not sure how he'd have enough money to also buy Chrome. And unlike Twitter, there's no clear way to make any money from Chrome unless it's tied to an advertising empire, which Xitter is not; after all, it's a company so unpopular with advertisers (he told them to go fuck themselves remember) that the CEO wants to the government to prosecute companies for not advertising with them.
diffeomorphism 2y ago
Well, there is also Facebook or Amazon. But pretty much yes. Chrome is a very large, very expensive product to develop with very unclear profit perspective once disassociated from Google.
tdeck 2y ago
Maybe ByteDance can buy it!
0x073 2y ago
Oracle
- shiroiushi 2y ago
  While Oracle is indeed a big IT company and could probably afford to buy Chrome, I don't see how it would make any business sense for them whatsoever. How would this improve profits for their other products or services?
  - 0x073 2y ago
    I don't understand why they bought sun. As everyone I know use mariadb or percona.
- lakomen 2y ago
  Anyone but them. They're even worse than Microsoft when it comes to customer hostility
TowerTall 2y ago
One possibility is that Chrome could be acquired and run by a consortium of companies, similar to how the C++ programming language is governed. In the C++ model, a committee with representatives from various organizations works collaboratively on proposals, agreeing on features and then implementing them. A similar approach for Chrome could involve major tech companies forming a consortium to collectively manage and develop the browser while adhering to agreed-upon principles and priorities.
- shiroiushi 2y ago
  The C++ you speak of is a programming language specification, not a consumer-ready piece of software developed by software engineers. I don't see how these are remotely comparable: the C++ consortium doesn't require an army of paid engineers, managers, IT personnel, etc. to operate. A browser does: just look at Mozilla Corp.

KingMob 2y ago

"My made-up strawman scenario is horrible!" Not to mention ahistorical. Frequently, monopoly breakups just resulted in new companies formed.

hot_gril 2y ago

Microsoft already shoves Edge on its users via OS dominance. Seems way more anti-competitive than what Google does with Chrome.

Yeul 2y ago
Edge is based on Chromium. Google won the internet.
- meltyness 2y ago
  V8 and jQuery won the web, really.
- hot_gril 2y ago
  Edge was able to fork Chromium without paying Google for it. It's so different from the old IE dominance.

0x073 2y ago

The best would be a nonprofit company like Mozilla funded by the eu. (With most of the old developers) (Yes I'm a dreamer)

aleph_minus_one 2y ago
Tell your friends to use Firefox much more aggressively, and the dream will at least partly come true.
- 0x073 2y ago
  Mozilla is better than Google, but still a bad choice nowadays:/ E.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42191110 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42191110
  - metalman 2y ago
    mozilla is just a monster in waiting, horribly invasive software,promises controll and just feeds ads faster than the rest as an alternative console tool,ok it has its place, but for a daily driver I only use it for niche uses where my other browsers dont render certain big tech web sites and no google anything here
    - Moomoomoo309 2y ago
      I think you should review Mozilla's privacy issues and compare them objectively to Chrome's. In comparison to the two, Chrome is more invasive, offers less control, and feeds you more ads. Mozilla is no saint, but I don't think any browser companies are (Brave, Vivaldi have had controversies too).
  - shiroiushi 2y ago
    "bad" is still better than "even worse".
reacharavindh 2y ago
My version of the dream is the EU funding a non-profit organization whose _only_ goal, and mandate is to develop and maintain the open web browser like Firefox in a “user. Privacy first” focus. I is also dream about EU suspending all their “green sustainability” efforts and focus on one thing and do it well. The one thing? Lay new high speed tracks and create a “European Rail” entity that is not merely a composition of national rail organizations. There should be _one_ organization, funded by the EU responsible for high speed tracks between all major cities. Amsterdam, Brussels, Paris, Barcelona, Madrid, Lisbon, Frankfurt, Vienna, Zurich, Rome, Prague, Berlin, Warsaw, Hamburg, Copenhagen, Stockholm,Helsinki, Oslo - imagine all reachable by high speed train who tickets you could buy from one entity, and runs like clockwork.

safety1st 2y ago

I mean, obviously you are just making this up and attacking a straw man - the court is not going to order Google to sell the browser to Microsoft. Lots of companies would probably be interested. None of them will be companies that possess a monopoly on search, because Google is the only one who has that. It will lead to more competition in search. Google will not be able to prop up their search monopoly by being the default engine in Chrome anymore. They'll have to compete with, at a minimum, whoever buys it and immediately changes the default. A more likely remedy than selling off the browser (or maybe both will happen) is that Google won't be able to set all your defaults for everything to Google anymore. This will create breathing room for other companies to market competing services and make money. This is all good stuff for everyone who doesn't work at Google, which is 99.999999% of us even on Hacker News

shiroiushi 2y ago
It's not a strawman, and you made your own strawman too by putting words in my mouth. I never said they'd force Google to sell to Microsoft specifically. You clearly haven't thought very clearly about how this would work. How exactly would a buyer make money from Chrome? Think about that for a few minutes and then maybe you'll understand why Microsoft is the most likely buyer, with Apple the next most likely.

whiplash451 2y ago

They don’t have to sell. They have to spin off. There are many scenarios that you are ruling out because nobody can predict 2026. Meanwhile, working towards a somewhat healthier and competitive landscape on browsers is more than welcome.

hoppp 2y ago

I buy it for a dollar. Then let people contribute to the open source code. Problem solved