Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

bartturner t1_j9rtr2m wrote

Reply to comment by Justforthenuews in U.S. Justice Dept accuses Google of evidence destruction in antitrust case by batmaninwonderland

There was no action against Microsoft in the states.

In the EU they were required to add a screen when first starting Windows on what browser you wanted.

Kind of funny to now look back and see the results.

In the US and the EU Google completely dominates with browsers and Microsoft gave up on their own and using Google for their browser.

Google has 60% in Europe and 61% in the United States.

Looks like it made no difference.

31

want_to_join t1_j9tx46u wrote

Why lie, if you don't know?

There was action against Microsoft in the states. The suit was settled following concessions from the company.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp.

7

MississippiJoel t1_j9w674u wrote

I think he meant penalties. You took his "no action" statement literally, but missed his point.

2

want_to_join t1_j9w98e8 wrote

But there was action and penalties, they just decided to make changes to avoid the penalties. That's what settling a court case entails. Not sure how their statement is accurate in any sense.

Edit: they did not avoid penalties, they made changes to lessen their penalties.

2

bartturner t1_j9w4c1e wrote

Sigh...

In the US they were NOT required to have a screen when you first start Windows. In the EU there was.

We get to see the result with a fantastic A/B test.

It made no difference. Google won the browser both in the US and the EU. Basically have the same percent in both.

0

want_to_join t1_j9w9nk8 wrote

Not having the same result does not mean no action/no penalties... Which might sound KISS simple, but it is honestly hard to understand what point you are trying to make. There was action against Microsoft. There was a result of said action. It was not the same result as the EU case, no. Not sure why anyone would think it would.

1

bartturner t1_j9wauf1 wrote

It is so simple.

In the US there were no action with the browser. They were allowed to continue to have IE the default browser. Nothing.

In the EU they were required to add a screen so you could choose your browser.

We now get to see the results of the A/B test.

In both cases Google won the browser wars and has basicallly the same market share in both areas.

Not complicated and we are so lucky to have such a nice and clean A/B test.

Clearly the action made NO difference!!

The market spoke and wanted Google for their browser.

0

want_to_join t1_j9wbequ wrote

> In the US there were no action.

Right... Bud, IDK exactly what issue is going on here but this statement is 100% not correct. There WAS an antitrust lawsuit that the US government brought and successfully prosecuted against Microsoft. It ended with them paying antitrust penalties and changing their contracts with third party computer manufacturers...

Again, IDK what blockage you are having, but you're wrong. Different action does not mean no action. The US ABSOLUTELY 100% DID take action against Microsoft.

3

Ill-Poet-3298 t1_ja37mlq wrote

You are clearly dealing with a Google astroturf drone. Has a vested interest in the idea that monopolies aren't so bad, MS wasn't punished, so Google won't be either, shut up and take it. Such a weird choice on Google's part to support such a thing.

1

bartturner t1_j9wddhc wrote

> Right... Bud, IDK exactly what issue is going on here but this statement is 100% not correct.

I am American and have installed Windows and can guarantee you that we do NOT get the screen asking about browser that you get in the EU. No action was taken in the US.

I have no idea why you are even challenging.

I actually prefer the invisible hand because actions often times cause an unexpected result.

But I do love this one because we get such a nice and clean A/B test.

Clearly the invisible hand (Market) is what really dictates things.

I think about it right now with Apple and Gogole default search. If that changed it would just be the vast majority still using Google.

People are going to go towards what works best in most cases and Google is just a lot better.

Edit: I should say that now I spend half my time in South East Asia and where I am now. But I have lived most of the time in the US since the EU took action with the browser being a choice when first start Windows and the US not taking the same action.

0

want_to_join t1_j9wdt83 wrote

> guarantee you that we do NOT get the screen asking about browser that you get in the EU.

No one is debating that point. I am pointing out that the statement, "The US took no action against Microsoft," is not correct.

You are making it sound like you define the word, "action," as "a different computer screen."

Do you understand the meaning of the word "action"?

A lawsuit is action. A lawsuit was brought. Action was taken. Not the same action was taken.

2

bartturner t1_j9wdxhg wrote

Apparently you have.

So we finally have agreement that the US did not require the choice on browser and in the EU they did. Perfect A/B test.

Good. That took a lot.

0

want_to_join t1_j9weoxz wrote

No one, including myself, ever told you that the US forced them to add a loading screen.

You are still wrong, because the US did take action. Not even sure why you would spend the time to comment if you are going to act ignorant of the vocabulary... Stop wasting our time, maybe? Admitting you made an error of choice of words is far less embarrassing than pretending to not be able to understand english as an American.

See, I ALSO am an American, who has ALSO installed Windows, and so I would never argue with you that a screen exists when it does not.

Are you capable of admitting you are wrong? Or are you just going to continue this weird "refuse to acknowledge" game you seem to be playing?

2

bartturner t1_j9wf3dj wrote

This is a rather silly discussion. I told you that they took no action with the browser.

You were challenging that but seem to finally have admitted the truth.

It gave us a great A/B test.

BTW, I am old and was around during this time in the tech industry.

In the EU they did take action that they did NOT in the US.

0

want_to_join t1_j9wfbir wrote

> I told you that they took no action with the browser.

Not what you said. You said they took no action. Do you lack the understanding of this difference or not?

1

bartturner t1_j9wfi55 wrote

You are a bit too much. It is what I said. Not my fault you do not listen.

BTW, you are missing the entire benefit with the fact that the US took NO action and the EU did.

We got our A/B test.

0

want_to_join t1_j9wfolw wrote

But the US did take action, and it WAS involving the browser, so youre completely wrong. Still.

1

want_to_join t1_j9wfwga wrote

> There was no action against Microsoft in the states.

Thats the quote you posted. Just take the L, dude. You're embarrassing yourself.

1

bartturner t1_j9wh5kh wrote

Geeze. Read it again. I said no action in terms of browser.

0

[deleted] t1_j9suadb wrote

[deleted]

−5

guitar_vigilante t1_j9tpgke wrote

Anti-trust action doesn't usually require one to have an actual monopoly in a market. Being sufficiently large and concentrated such that one can influence the market in an anti-competitive and bad-for-consumers manner is all it takes. And 60% is certainly enough to trigger that.

3

[deleted] t1_j9u7ftj wrote

[removed]

0

guitar_vigilante t1_j9u7td7 wrote

Because anti-trust jurisprudence in the US has been incredibly poor for the past 30 years. The courts have in general been much more willing to allow industry concentration and will put down anti-trust suits pretty often. It's part of why pretty much every industry has seen a trend towards concentration in the past 30-40 years without much pushback from the federal government and why the last major successful anti-trust action was the Bell breakup in the 80s.

edit: and AT&T only had a 45% market share before the breakup.

6

bartturner t1_j9t3qsj wrote

No but they have about 15x what Microsoft has today. Microsoft actually gave up on doing their own and now just use Google (Chromium).

0

[deleted] t1_j9t80wp wrote

[deleted]

−1

DrPreppy t1_j9v00ko wrote

> that means browsers have a relatively healthy ecosystem

What? Market share. That chart boils down to "either they are using Google Chrome or they are on a Apple product". The current browser ecosystem is probably the least healthy it's ever been. Everybody else is a rounding error.

2

bartturner t1_j9t84io wrote

You missed my entire point. It made ZERO difference.

Nothing in the US and Google has 61%. In the EU they did add the screen and 60%.

The market took care of things and Google won in both places. Google has 15x the market share that Microsoft has.

−6

[deleted] t1_j9tie2m wrote

[deleted]

−1

bartturner t1_j9timgs wrote

But there was NO browser choice law in the US. So we got a pretty good A/B test.

The end result is that Google had 60% and 61%. Basically no difference.

The law made no difference was my entire point.

I find that interesting. It is kind of rare we get such an A/B test to see.

3

quiplaam t1_j9uezxz wrote

Google started winning in the browser space because early chrome and it's v8 rendering engine was soooooo much faster then the competition. By 2010, web programs got much more complex and Javascript more essential, so speeding that up made everything much better. Additionally, Google's dominance in search meant that it was easy for people to find about and try it out. It got better and better, while IE was stagnant. It is likely that the EU's regulations had minimal impact on on the adoption of Chrome

1