DOJ vs Google – Another Microsoft Fiasco?
Here we go again. The DOJ is looking at Google as a monopoly, just like they did once before when they looked at Microsoft. But is Google really a monopoly if people like their stuff better than the competitions? This is what really needs to be looked at. Not just a dictionary term of what a monopoly is but whether or not Google is in fact unfairly competing against others in the business.
The two companies that appear to be the main players against Google are Yahoo and Microsoft. It is a well known fact that Microsoft has spent millions of dollars, including a whopping $100 million to advertise BING, so what has happened thus far? People still prefer to use Google.
In a recent article over at Wired they state the following:
For most of its history, investors, users, and tech gurus shared Google’s view of itself. After all, the company’s rise to prominence—on the back of search algorithms so powerful and elegant they changed the Internet forever—is a case study in heroic entrepreneurialism. Its long-tail business model gives even the smallest Web sites a chance to make money. It routinely creates and distributes great products for free, even when there is no obvious benefit to the company. Its spirit of openness and collaboration laid the groundwork for the mash-upable, user-generated modern Web.
Than there is this:
For much of its history, Google has responded to most criticism with two words: Trust us. The company has repeatedly persuaded skeptics that its immensity is a mere byproduct of its altruistic mission and that the algorithms it uses to organize the Internet, while proprietary, are objective and benevolent. But in an economy destroyed by bad faith, secretive formulas, and complicated mathematics, trust is in short supply, and Google’s assurances are losing their persuasive power. More than 15 years ago, federal regulators began making Microsoft the symbol of anticompetitive behavior in the tech industry. Now, a newly activist DOJ may try to do the same thing to Google.
Interesting take. But what exactly did the DOJ move against Microsoft actually accomplish? One could argue that it provided an incentive for Google, Mozilla and others to attack the browser market which Microsoft previously controlled. But was it the actions of the DOJ or just that Chrome, Firefox, Opera and others have a better browser?
What is your take?
Comments welcome.
10 Comments
Manny Borges
July 21st, 2009
at 12:42pm
MS spent 100 million to advertise Bing?
Seriously, I didn’t know it even existed until IE 8 changed my search engine on me.
As far as google acting in an unfair manner,well thats a seperate idea.
I will say that my personalopinion is that google is not my favorite company, but that they make good products.
To demonstrate why I dislike the company,try to contact them.
Just try.
Hotrao
July 21st, 2009
at 1:19pm
Google position is not a monopoly, but a predominant one.
You’re right when you say that it was determined by people’s free choice, and not by an economic manouvre.
In fact what Google did and does is working so well and broadening they’re offering that people choose Google again and again.
DOJ, Microsoft and Google « How I see the world
July 21st, 2009
at 1:22pm
[...] DOJ, Microsoft and Google Ron Schenone at Lockergnome writes an article on DOJ vs Google, asking some questions about Google monopoly (full article at http://www.lockergnome.com/blade/2009/07/21/doj-vs-google-another-microsoft-fiasco). [...]
Ryan Farmer
July 21st, 2009
at 2:03pm
Hell, anyone that gets IE 8 foisted on them by auto updates will get IE trying to herd them towards Bing.
I tried Bing out for a while, ended up leaving it largely because they rigged it to where things like maps complained if you were using Opera (but worked fine if you spoofed the user agent and said it was Firefox), and they also rig the search results so you can’t use it to find torrents as easily as with other engines.
Microsoft can go suck an egg cause I tried to use Bing and it just drove me off.
mhz
July 21st, 2009
at 7:31pm
>>>>Google aims to create a world in which
>>>>Web services replace desktop software.
>>>>That vision seems to terrify regulators…
Terrifies me too. Mostly because cloud downtime will probably always be unpredictable, and customers will always hate downtime.
>>>>Schmidt says that Google
>>>>could never take undue advantage of its position
>>>>in the search market—not just for vague ethical reasons
>>>>but as a matter of self-interest.
>>>>Such a practice, he says, would destroy the trust
>>>>that Google has built with its users—
>>>>and ultimately Google’s entire business.
That is naive. The whole point is, “taking undue advantage” happens after you have people in a situation where they can’t leave even if they want to. There are plenty of companies that wish they did not have to keep using Microsoft Office. There are great, free alternatives now, but are corporations switching en masse? Or is everyone afraid to switch…afraid they would be sacrificing too much time and money?
>>>>”If you become dissatisfied with Google,
>>>>it’s very easy to move to a competitor.”
Not true. E.G. If I want to know whether there’s going to be a class reunion, I have to check Facebook. Its the only place the info will get posted. Previously you could rely on things like Classmates, or Alumni, etc. But Facebook has reached the point where people feel that “if so-and-so isn’t using Facebook, he’s probably dead.” You can say “its easy to switch to something else” but its a lie. Sure I could decide not to use Facebook. The result would be missing the reunion.
It doesn’t matter whether Google has a corporate philosophy that discourages exploitation. Odds are that it won’t always be that way. You can never implicitly “trust” a corporation, only individual people who have proven themselves. You still need safeguards. You still have to allow for accountability, (competition in this case).
I’m not against Google at all. But I am against applying the law differently toward one company just because it seems to have noble intentions, and “could never take undue advantage of its position.” Thats a ridiculous idea. Let them investigate. Just make sure its done fairly, without leaving any gaps that can be filled by Microsoft, who will always be watching and waiting for an opportunity to enslave us for good.
You Need a Thick Skin to Participate Online | Chris Pirillo
July 22nd, 2009
at 1:52am
[...] The DoJ vs Google – is this another Microsoft fiasco? [...]
You Need a Thick Skin to Participate Online | Tech-monkey.info Blogs
July 22nd, 2009
at 2:05am
[...] The DoJ vs Google – is this another Microsoft fiasco? [...]
You Need a Thick Skin to Participate Online | dv8-designs
July 22nd, 2009
at 2:42am
[...] The DoJ vs Google – is this another Microsoft fiasco? [...]
Steve
July 22nd, 2009
at 6:46am
It’s not surprising that the DOJ gets nervous when any company wields such influence in the any marketplace. No one had had a gun to their head to use Google or any of it’s fine products. Not like Microsoft wrapping their apps tightly with their OS. Frankly, I think the comparison is unfair to Google.
Indoorsman Clearwire ~ Windows Fanatics
July 22nd, 2009
at 9:08pm
[...] DoJ vs Google — is this another Microsoft [...]