This roughly the same anti-trust, monopoly garbage rhetoric by the DOJ happened against Microsoft in the early 1990s with its now-dead Internet Explorer browser. Funny no one is bringing up that story. With Microsoft, however, they were not allowing competing browsers to be installed on Windows computers; so in that sense it really was a kind of monopoly. The simple fix was to allow other browsers to be installed on Windows computers, which BY THE WAY included the Google browser. But before Google came along, the Microsoft Internet Explorer browser was the go-to browser for most Internet users, the same way the Google Chrome browser is now. There was no better browser that Internet Explorer at the time. So it didn't matter that various competing browsers were being installed on new Windows computers, because nobody used them anyway. Mostly everyone used the Internet Explorer browser, including me. Then Google comes along. Everyone thinks it looks stupid and is a stupid name. But very quickly the Google browser outperforms Internet Explorer and then everyone had a new favorite browser. Internet Explorer took a back seat to Google and it has been in the back seat ever since. That isn't Google's fault. Google Chrome is just the better browser. And so of course most consumers will pick the better choice of something to use no matter what it is. Microsoft officially dumped the Internet Explorer browser only in 2022. I think they waited way too long to do that personally. And now they have rebranded it to the "EDGE" browser. But it doesn't matter. EDGE is still not the better browser compared to Google Chrome. So I get it: Bill Gates is whimpering and whining and feeling sorry for himself and wants to punish Google, when in reality Bill Gates is the guy who purposely tried to rig his own monopoly in the 1990s. Bill Gates is the criminal if anyone is a criminal. I personally just won't use the Chrome browser anymore if Google is forced to sell it. It might carry the name "Chrome" but it WILL NOT be the same browser. That would not even be possible. I also won't use the EDGE browser. But I used to use the Mozilla Firefox browser and always liked it. So I would just go back to Firefox. Otherwise, I think if I was Google, I would refuse to sell and instead I would just DISCONTINUE use of the Chrome browser. Tell the DOJ to screw itself and just toss the Chrome browser in the garbage rather than kissing dirty butt and selling it off. Then watch as the entire stock market dumps by 60% or more. That would be funny to see...😂
80% of Firefox income comes form Google, so Firefox may die too as a result. That leaves us with MS dominance which feels far more threatening than Google. The gov should be addressing MS.
@musicalvisions 》Well, Firefox was released in 2004 and the original Google browser was released in 2008. So Firefox seemed to be doing okay without Google back then and I don't know why they couldn't survive now. Then there's the newer "Brave" browser, released in 2016, that is a decent browser and also sort of caters to the cryptocurrency sector. But you know, the only reason Google shot to stardom the way it did was because of how it revolutionized the search algorithm. Before Google, search results were based on "keyword density" in articles and other content. But Google challenged that method by instead using "social proof" rankings, which is based on how many external sites are linked to any given website. The more links a website receives the higher the social ranking. And Google's theory was that more links to sites equaled better content that people were searching for in the first place. And Google was right. Also the problem as I see it with relying on keyword density for search results is that it invites the opportunity for bad actors to be peddling misinformation under the pretense of relevant search results that the user must have been looking for based on any given search phrase. And there is no institution in the world more guilty of spreading misinformation and propaganda than the U.S. government, which includes both Democrats and Republicans, as well as the DOJ. I mean, you need look no further than the faked Apollo Moon landings of the 1960s & 1970s to see that, which still reigns as the greatest American lie ever told. So I agree with you that people should be most worried about Internet searches being dominated by Microsoft; and founded by a perv guy who peddles dangerous vaccines that he doesn't even take himself and who is busy buying up all of America's farmland...
build around standards yes, but not at expense of Chrome, Google has been a strong proponent for the web architecture amidst their advantages this only opens the door for OpenAI to further their motives to control the Web
This roughly the same anti-trust, monopoly garbage rhetoric by the DOJ happened against Microsoft in the early 1990s with its now-dead Internet Explorer browser. Funny no one is bringing up that story.
With Microsoft, however, they were not allowing competing browsers to be installed on Windows computers; so in that sense it really was a kind of monopoly. The simple fix was to allow other browsers to be installed on Windows computers, which BY THE WAY included the Google browser.
But before Google came along, the Microsoft Internet Explorer browser was the go-to browser for most Internet users, the same way the Google Chrome browser is now. There was no better browser that Internet Explorer at the time. So it didn't matter that various competing browsers were being installed on new Windows computers, because nobody used them anyway. Mostly everyone used the Internet Explorer browser, including me.
Then Google comes along. Everyone thinks it looks stupid and is a stupid name. But very quickly the Google browser outperforms Internet Explorer and then everyone had a new favorite browser. Internet Explorer took a back seat to Google and it has been in the back seat ever since.
That isn't Google's fault. Google Chrome is just the better browser. And so of course most consumers will pick the better choice of something to use no matter what it is.
Microsoft officially dumped the Internet Explorer browser only in 2022. I think they waited way too long to do that personally. And now they have rebranded it to the "EDGE" browser. But it doesn't matter. EDGE is still not the better browser compared to Google Chrome.
So I get it: Bill Gates is whimpering and whining and feeling sorry for himself and wants to punish Google, when in reality Bill Gates is the guy who purposely tried to rig his own monopoly in the 1990s. Bill Gates is the criminal if anyone is a criminal.
I personally just won't use the Chrome browser anymore if Google is forced to sell it. It might carry the name "Chrome" but it WILL NOT be the same browser. That would not even be possible.
I also won't use the EDGE browser. But I used to use the Mozilla Firefox browser and always liked it. So I would just go back to Firefox.
Otherwise, I think if I was Google, I would refuse to sell and instead I would just DISCONTINUE use of the Chrome browser. Tell the DOJ to screw itself and just toss the Chrome browser in the garbage rather than kissing dirty butt and selling it off.
Then watch as the entire stock market dumps by 60% or more. That would be funny to see...😂
80% of Firefox income comes form Google, so Firefox may die too as a result. That leaves us with MS dominance which feels far more threatening than Google. The gov should be addressing MS.
@musicalvisions 》Well, Firefox was released in 2004 and the original Google browser was released in 2008. So Firefox seemed to be doing okay without Google back then and I don't know why they couldn't survive now. Then there's the newer "Brave" browser, released in 2016, that is a decent browser and also sort of caters to the cryptocurrency sector.
But you know, the only reason Google shot to stardom the way it did was because of how it revolutionized the search algorithm. Before Google, search results were based on "keyword density" in articles and other content. But Google challenged that method by instead using "social proof" rankings, which is based on how many external sites are linked to any given website. The more links a website receives the higher the social ranking. And Google's theory was that more links to sites equaled better content that people were searching for in the first place.
And Google was right. Also the problem as I see it with relying on keyword density for search results is that it invites the opportunity for bad actors to be peddling misinformation under the pretense of relevant search results that the user must have been looking for based on any given search phrase.
And there is no institution in the world more guilty of spreading misinformation and propaganda than the U.S. government, which includes both Democrats and Republicans, as well as the DOJ. I mean, you need look no further than the faked Apollo Moon landings of the 1960s & 1970s to see that, which still reigns as the greatest American lie ever told.
So I agree with you that people should be most worried about Internet searches being dominated by Microsoft; and founded by a perv guy who peddles dangerous vaccines that he doesn't even take himself and who is busy buying up all of America's farmland...
Good, its about time. Googles strangle on the web is limiting freedom of development and pluggins (eg:uBlock, web standards). Long live Firefox
build around standards yes, but not at expense of Chrome, Google has been a strong proponent for the web architecture amidst their advantages
this only opens the door for OpenAI to further their motives to control the Web