Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

[deleted] t1_j9suadb wrote

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

[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