Microsoft CEO says unfair practices by Google led to its dominance as a search engine::Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella said Monday that unfair tactics used by Google led to its dominance as a search engine, tactics that in turn have thwarted his company's rival program, Bing. Nadella testified in a packed Washington, D.C., courtroom as part of the government's landmark antitrust trial against Google's parent company, Alphabet. The Justice Department alleges Google has abused the dominance of its ubiquitous search engine to throttle competition and innovation at the expense of consumers, allegations that echo a similar case brought against Microsoft in the late 1990s.
I mean he’s not wrong, but you know, pot, kettle, etc.
“They did what we did, and now we are pissed.”
True pot, the kettle is definitely a slut, but you're a god damn whore!
Windows is constantly nagging you to switch to Edge when you use a non-Edge browser but apparently Nadella is totally cool with that.
Yep. Microsoft has been successfully sued for monopolistic behavior, but yeah, pot, kettle, etc.
Takes a monopoly to know a monopoly, I guess.
Man, I booted up a Windows laptop I use for 3D printing software for the first time in 6 months. The fucking popup ads for Microsoft shit were out of control. Fuck that shit, I turned it off and started searching for something that works under Linux.
I've been using Firefox on Windows for a few years (and Chrome for many years before that) and I can't remember the last time it nagged me, if it ever did. I've sometimes wanted to temporarily switch the default browser back to Edge and the setting to do it hard to find if you don't know where to look.
Honestly, I've only ever seen the first one after a major update. I've never personally seen the 2nd one, but I also trim down the start menu and taskbar to be windows 7 like, so 🤷
I mean, he is wrong. Google isn't the default on Windows, but Chrome and Google search dominate Windows.
Google is the default for Android, so we can discuss that (but that isn't what Microsoft is complaining about.)
That just leaves macOS and more importantly iPhone. Google pays to be the default there. Is that unfair? Should Apple be able to bid for/charge a company to be the default?
Additionally in all these cases switching is easy.
I won't deny that being the default is an advantage but it isn't like users can't switch. You can remove Google search from your phone and it will work just fine. You can change the defaults on your Safari browser in a few clicks.
To be clear if this case uncovers shady/illegal behavior from Google, fuck 'em, but I'm not seeing it.
IMHO, no, he’s not wrong. Google is the default because they’re paying to be the default. That’s monopolistic.
It’s also not easy to switch from Google. In Safari, DuckDuckGo is set as my default search engine, but Siri will still use Google when I ask to search something. Same with Google Assistant. Sure, you can disable Google search on your phone, but that also removes other features that aren’t even related to search (like Assistant, which only runs if the Google app is enabled).
To me, that is absolutely anticompetitive behavior.
And good luck installing and using most mobile apps or doing mobile payments without being trapped into one of the duopolists ecosystem.
In the US if you want to watch the Olympics what company do you turn to? Well the only option is NBC who paid 7 billion for exclusive (US) rights, so you're turning to NBC. Other companies could and likely did bid, but NBC paid the most. Even worse there are no (legal) alternatives.
How about your local sports arena, school campus or restaurant? Do they serve Pepsi or Coke? It's not always cash but they might have bought (or discounted) that soda machine with the big PEPSI logo on the side, or the scoreboard that says COCA-COLA.
If I search for "shoes" on Bing the top result is Temu, are they monopolizing Bing Search?
Just because you pay doesn't mean it's a monopoly. Google pays Apple $20 billion per year to be the default. Microsoft can afford $20 billion, heck they can afford $40 billion, why aren't they paying?
In terms of switching, you said you switched Safari but that didn't update Siri. That sounds like an Apple bug to me. If Google is forcing/threatening Apple to make a worse product, that's a case of them being a monopoly.
In terms of Assistant, that is part of Google Search. On my Android phone I can choose a different default "Digital Assistant", in my case I can pick Firefox, but it looks like others exist in the wider ecosystem.
If you're saying Google Search should be separate from Google Assistant, I think that's a reasonable request, but not doing so doesn't make them monopolistic. Looking online, since I don't have these assistants/devices, Siri can be charged by changing Safari (which I know you mentioned was an issue for you earlier), but Alexa will only use Bing (unless you use some third party stuff) and I'm unclear about Cortana but Microsoft gave up on that so we can ignore it.
I do agree I would love to see more open and accessible APIs for all these different services. I should be able to have Apple iMessage on my Chromebook and Chromecast on my Apple TV. I think there is a lot that can be done to improve things, but what I'm not convinced of, yet, is that Google has been monopolistic. Obviously the case is ongoing, so I look forward to more information.
As for the Microsoft CEO, it's clear to me he wants to be the default without paying for it. I won't fault him for that, that's $20 billion in savings.
Google is monopolistic now, but they didn't BECOME the biggest search because of it, obviously. They became the biggest because they had the best search engine, then leveraged it to become what they are now.
That’s usually how monopolies come about.
While I mostly agree with what you're saying here, I would like to point out that removing Google Search from an Android device can prevent a user from accessing other applications or specific features within (obviously Google developed apps). I guess that one really comes down to what we think working "just fine" is.
I think you're right for the Play Store or Google Play Services but I can disable the "Google" app and things run just fine, and I can install more apps.
You're not wrong that ROMs that don't include the core services have issues, but Google Search is definitely not required.
(As an exception some phones won't allow you to disable certain Google services, but as a general rule you can.)
Microsoft once bailed out Apple to show they have competition. Google financially supports Firefox so have a modicum of competition.
The Microsoft bailing out apple for competition, is arguably worse than firefox and google. Why? Because apple software required apple hardware.
Microsoft had essentially a monopoly on every piece of computer hardware that was not made by apple, while apple was (and still is) in its own playground with its own glue to eat. They weren't really competing. If you wanted something that was not expensive apple hardware, Microsoft was the only option.
Now Linux is more of an option, but at 2-3% of the market share, it's hardly the start of competition.
I believe Microsofts 3 point plan involved these things:
And Microsoft isn't the only company guilty of this, Adobe, Autodesk, and so many more. And parts 2 and 3 are still issues today that are incredibly hard to stop. Because the vast majority of people, including politicians don't care or don't want to switch. Windows, Office and the Adobe suite are practically ingrained into society at this point, and people are more likely to use the familiar, and fear or get frustrated with the unfamiliar.
This is more of a pot calling a pot black. The whole Kettle argument is implying projection. In this they're not projecting just hypocritical.