2 ms·

Would Chrome, Android, and YouTube be viable companies without the money-printing engine that is Google’s ad business? I’m for less consolidation in the tech in

Would Chrome, Android, and YouTube be viable companies without the money-printing engine that is Google’s ad business? I’m for less consolidation in the tech industry, but I wonder whether a good balance could be struck between great services like these versus how they actually make money.

stuartd 1mo ago
The latter two potentially yes, as they can sell a product. Chrome - not so much: sell the browser, embed ads… nothing palatable.
- cyberax 1mo ago
  A $1 a year payment (like in WhatsUp) from all the current Chrome users can easily cover all the reasonable browser development.
  - eclipticplane 1mo ago
    Bonus: they might not be able to fund the anti-user behavior like sunsetting MV2, all of the "anonymous audience tracking" that prevents any other advertiser from identifying you (but Google's scale still can), aggressively pushing 'sign in with Google', retracting their stance on blocking third party cookies, continually removing settings that drive user control, and more.
bogwog 1mo ago
> Would Chrome, Android, and YouTube be viable companies without the money-printing engine that is Google’s ad business? Short answer? Yes. Long answer? Definitely. > I wonder whether a good balance could be struck between great services like these versus how they actually make money. I see you have an unconventional definition of the word "great". I'll take that to mean you're an outside-the-box thinker, so you're in a good position to understand that a break up of Google would radically change all the markets they're dominant in. If Android 'dies' post-breakup, that would leave a gaping hole in the economy. iOS might fill it, but regulators would need to break them up too. Say iOS 'dies' too, would we all collectively just stop using smartphones? Obviously not. Entrepreneurs who can see opportunity will raise money and hire the right people to build a new OS, foundations will apply for grants to maintain Android or iOS forks, industry standards will form to improve interop and reduce development costs, etc. The sky's the limit!
- Eueudhsbsj32 1mo ago
  I'm all for breaking up Google, but how do you see Chrome making money without ads? If they charged users directly, everyone would just switch back to Firefox.
  - cannonpalms 1mo ago
    Search licensing would be one of the big ones
  - bogwog 1mo ago
    Why does 'Chrome' need to survive as a standalone company? It never had a business model besides "support Google's monopolies", so it shouldn't survive (IMO). Lots of browser vendors already use Chrome's open source codebase, so those orgs can fork it, or they can collectively come together to fund development, or apply for government grants or something. I think that Chrome development team members will have plenty of new job and business opportunities available to them if this ever happens. New markets will open up for browser tech that didn't exist before, and I think everyone will come out winning in the end, even users who would never even consider paying money for a web browser.
    - someaccount1234 1mo ago
      > Why does 'Chrome' need to survive as a standalone company? It never had a business model besides "support Google's monopolies", so it shouldn't survive (IMO) You just explicitly claimed that Chrome has definitively a viable business model as a stand-alone company ("Short answer? Yes. Long answer? Definitely."). Now you claim the opposite... Is the argument also as strong for the other cases?
      - bogwog 1mo ago
        Sorry, I forgot this was HN and wasn't obnoxious enough in my reply. The original question was: > Would Chrome, Android, and YouTube be viable companies without the money-printing engine that is Google’s ad business? Please take note of the absence of the word "standalone" in that quote. My response to the response to my response (henceforth responses['bogwog'][1]) was thus: > Why does 'Chrome' need to survive as a standalone company? ... Please note the truthiness of `'standlone' in responses['bogwog'][1]` From this evidence we can surmise that my point was 'Chrome' the non-business can't survive as an independent business, because Chrome is not a business. Likewise, the 'Complimentary Cheez-Its' you get on an airplane can't survive as an independent business were we to break up the airline, as 'Complimentary Cheez-Its' isn't a business. But can Chrome the project survive without Google? I say yes, just like Cheez-Its can survive without being complimentary additions to overpriced flights. For why I think that, please refer to my other comment in this thread. Thank you.

stuartd 1mo ago

The latter two potentially yes, as they can sell a product. Chrome - not so much: sell the browser, embed ads… nothing palatable.

cyberax 1mo ago
A $1 a year payment (like in WhatsUp) from all the current Chrome users can easily cover all the reasonable browser development.
- eclipticplane 1mo ago
  Bonus: they might not be able to fund the anti-user behavior like sunsetting MV2, all of the "anonymous audience tracking" that prevents any other advertiser from identifying you (but Google's scale still can), aggressively pushing 'sign in with Google', retracting their stance on blocking third party cookies, continually removing settings that drive user control, and more.

bogwog 1mo ago

> Would Chrome, Android, and YouTube be viable companies without the money-printing engine that is Google’s ad business? Short answer? Yes. Long answer? Definitely. > I wonder whether a good balance could be struck between great services like these versus how they actually make money. I see you have an unconventional definition of the word "great". I'll take that to mean you're an outside-the-box thinker, so you're in a good position to understand that a break up of Google would radically change all the markets they're dominant in. If Android 'dies' post-breakup, that would leave a gaping hole in the economy. iOS might fill it, but regulators would need to break them up too. Say iOS 'dies' too, would we all collectively just stop using smartphones? Obviously not. Entrepreneurs who can see opportunity will raise money and hire the right people to build a new OS, foundations will apply for grants to maintain Android or iOS forks, industry standards will form to improve interop and reduce development costs, etc. The sky's the limit!

Eueudhsbsj32 1mo ago
I'm all for breaking up Google, but how do you see Chrome making money without ads? If they charged users directly, everyone would just switch back to Firefox.
- cannonpalms 1mo ago
  Search licensing would be one of the big ones
- bogwog 1mo ago
  Why does 'Chrome' need to survive as a standalone company? It never had a business model besides "support Google's monopolies", so it shouldn't survive (IMO). Lots of browser vendors already use Chrome's open source codebase, so those orgs can fork it, or they can collectively come together to fund development, or apply for government grants or something. I think that Chrome development team members will have plenty of new job and business opportunities available to them if this ever happens. New markets will open up for browser tech that didn't exist before, and I think everyone will come out winning in the end, even users who would never even consider paying money for a web browser.
  - someaccount1234 1mo ago
    > Why does 'Chrome' need to survive as a standalone company? It never had a business model besides "support Google's monopolies", so it shouldn't survive (IMO) You just explicitly claimed that Chrome has definitively a viable business model as a stand-alone company ("Short answer? Yes. Long answer? Definitely."). Now you claim the opposite... Is the argument also as strong for the other cases?
    - bogwog 1mo ago
      Sorry, I forgot this was HN and wasn't obnoxious enough in my reply. The original question was: > Would Chrome, Android, and YouTube be viable companies without the money-printing engine that is Google’s ad business? Please take note of the absence of the word "standalone" in that quote. My response to the response to my response (henceforth responses['bogwog'][1]) was thus: > Why does 'Chrome' need to survive as a standalone company? ... Please note the truthiness of `'standlone' in responses['bogwog'][1]` From this evidence we can surmise that my point was 'Chrome' the non-business can't survive as an independent business, because Chrome is not a business. Likewise, the 'Complimentary Cheez-Its' you get on an airplane can't survive as an independent business were we to break up the airline, as 'Complimentary Cheez-Its' isn't a business. But can Chrome the project survive without Google? I say yes, just like Cheez-Its can survive without being complimentary additions to overpriced flights. For why I think that, please refer to my other comment in this thread. Thank you.