I have not read the whole complaint, but my initial impression is that this seems like a weak case. Unlike with Microsoft 20 years ago, it’s really easy to change the default search engine, and I expect that the vast majority of the reason that Google is the most-used search engine has to do with the fact that it’s the best search engine, rather than the default. In cases where I have found myself with an OS/browser/whatever that didn’t default to Google, I have switched to Google, and I think most other people do too.
Similarly, the first thing that most people do with a new Windows computer is go download Chrome.
Back when MS got in trouble for having IE the default on MS machines, it was easy to switch browsers then, as well. IIRC, I was using Netscape Navigator. One big difference was that Windows 98 had essentially integrated IE into the OS. Even if you were to browse through folders on your computer, the explorer had a distinct IE feel to it. Here’s an old picture of IE Here’s an old picture of explorer.
I don’t know how much that played into the case, but there you go.
Another thing of note is that Google owns Android. In your quote is says “and, in many cases, prohibiting preinstallation of a competitor.” That might be where the problem is. There’s other OSes out there that, while they look like a random OS for your device, they’re basically just skins for Android. If I create and sell a device and use/license an Android OS for it, that I can’t ship it with my own search engine being the default.
Having said that, I’m not entirely sure what the problem is. If I license Android OS for my device, why can’t they require me to use their search engine? It’s not like there’s anything stopping me from coding my own OS.
Pretty sure that Netscape charged money for their browser back then, and hoped to charge OEMs to pre-install it. Once you charge for something, the barrier to getting users is orders of magnitude higher.
Imagine if you had to go put a credit card into a website in 1993 (something people were legitimately afraid of then) in order to use Bing instead of Google on your new phone. Instead of just going to the app store thing and downloading it for free in a few taps.
Right, the settlement with the DOJ ended up mandating that Microsoft open up its APIs to competing browsers. The way Android works, competing search engines have the same access as Google search does (where the default engine part comes in is when Google sells its Play Services it mandates certain apps and default search). I think Chrome works the same way, but I’m not sure.
You can. Amazon for a long time used (uses?) Android for its Fire tablets and was able to do whatever it wanted re: default search engine. Android is free and available via the Android Open Source Project. Where the Google-ness comes from is if one wants to use the Play Store (ie, all the apps vetted by and through Google). I remember when Amazon had its own App Store for a while because they wanted their own separate variant of Android.
Microsoft did this as an endrun around the lawsuit. When IE was a standalone program the courts could tell them to take it off. When they integrated it as a part of the OS the courts couldn’t stop them.
I don’t remember ever paying money for Netscape, which I used exclusively back then. If you bought it in a store, then yes, and of course large users might need licenses.
The real problem was that downloads back then were a lot more difficult than today, and there were more computer illiterate users afraid to change anything. Today you can change the default search engine in Firefox in about 3 clicks.
Is that really all that different than having to get something though iPhone app store or the MS store on windows?
I know you can ignore the MS store for windows (unless you have Windows S Mode). I don’t have any Apple products, but can you sideload apps without jailbreaking it?
In any case, I’m just going by the snippet in the OP where it says " requiring that Google be set as the preset default general search engine on billions of mobile devices and computers worldwide and, in many cases, prohibiting preinstallation of a competitor."
Yup, I just got a brand new computer and fired it up about an hour ago. The time from saying “I need to download firefox” to using Firefox was less than a minute. To get Netscape way back in the day, like you said, you could go buy it in a store, but if you wanted to download it, that probably would have been, what 45 minutes? Longer if someone picked up the phone and you lost your AOL connection.
A lot of anti-trust stuff, I’ll openly admit, I never totally understood. I don’t see why it’s a problem for someone to say ‘If you use our X, you also have to use our Y’. There’s no anti-trust suits over car makers putting their own brand of radio in a car instead of using someone elses (and that’s a difficult thing for a random car owner to swap) or your new smart TV shipping with only Hulu OR Netflix with no option to add other apps.
Download time was one problem, but you had to figure out where to put stuff. It was often a multistep process. I knew a lot of people who were petrified at the thought of downloading something, and I did a lot of maintenance for them.
Though Chrome is not a monopoly product, I’ve been surprised at how much faster and better integrated Google Meetings is with it than Zoom. (On a PC, never tried it on my Android phone.)
I think there’s a big difference between “We only sell X and Y together” and “If you want to buy our X, you have to buy our Y, and also sign this agreement that you won’t buy Z from that company over there”.
There aren’t any car manufacturers or television makers with 80+% of the market. Antitrust law only applies to market-dominant firms.
Thinking about this more, I’m not even sure what that snippet means. Like, you don’t install a search engine. You just use it. There’s a setting that indicates which server to send search queries to. “in many cases, prohibiting preinstallation of a competitor” with respect to a default search engine is either redundant or nonsensical, right?
Like, Google gives Mozilla a bunch of money and says you have to make searches go to Google by default and also you can’t make them go to Bing by default. But… there’s only one default. The second clause doesn’t do anything.
Or figure out what you can delete so you can install the next thing. 80mb of storage didn’t go real far, even back then.
And those were the people that would download anything and everything. Remember browsers with more space dedicated to toolbars than actual content displayed, dozens of pop ups, constant viruses.
I guess, but that still happens all the time.
That’s sorta where I start getting tripped up. But part of me always thought it was odd to punish a business for being too successful and force them to be less successful (ie break up into small companies). I understand the need to protect the consumer, it just always felt…strange. Like if GM and Ford (and Honda and Toyota) closed up and Chrysler suddenly had near 100% of the market share in the US, would they not be allowed to grow?
Like I said earlier, the anti-trust stuff always confused me.
I assume what they mean by ‘pre installation of a competitor’ means setting, say, duckduckgo as the default search engine. I mean, it makes sense. If google is going to license software to you, surely they want to be able to collect ad revenue from their own search engine.
Also of note, every one of my android devices comes with a widget on the home screen that one could call a pre-installed search engine, even though it simply fires up chrome and does a google search for whatever you type into it. You can see an example here. Google may be saying that you can’t have a similar search bar for a different search engine pre-installed when the item ships. Of course, being an Android, it’s trivial to change that out for whatever you want (or whatever you can find in the play store).
