|
|
|
|
|
|
by reaperducer
2505 days ago
|
|
|
remember how terrible search engines used to be? Do you remember how terrible email was before Gmail? How awful MapQuest was before Google maps? You seem to be under the impression that Google is the only company that could have achieved this. Fastmail is proof that this is simply not true. Google was the leader, and used slimy tactics to kill competition wherever it could. That's not innovation, that's monopoly. Here's the corollary to your statement: "Remember how great the internet was when there were lots of choices for services? Remember when web sites competed to produce the best content in order to attract readers, instead of gaming Google's SEO? Remember when sites didn't have to make separate AMP versions of their content? Remember when you could surf the web and not be tracked from site to site to TV to store? Remember when your credit card purchases were between you and your bank, and not handed over to a Mountainview advertising company? Remember when you bought into an internet service and it would keep running until it went out of business, instead of just being randomly terminated for no reason?" I could go on. |
|
|
> Remember when sites didn't have to make separate AMP versions of their content?
This one contradicts your "kill competition" narrative. Any search engine can implement its own AMP cache, and all the major ones do. A slimy kill competition tactic would be to demand publishers integrate directly with Google instead, like Apple News or FB Instant Articles.
> Remember when web sites competed to produce the best content in order to attract readers, instead of gaming Google's SEO?
This also contradicts your thesis because it's actually a benefit to competitors instead of an example of Google killing competition. Competitors that use different algorithms from Google are less likely have their rankings gamed by SEO black hats, causing their results to appear comparatively better.
> Remember when you bought into an internet service and it would keep running until it went out of business, instead of just being randomly terminated for no reason?
No, I don't remember when this was ever the case.
Actual examples of killing competition are things like making it difficult to use alternate app stores, push notification services, and location services on Android. Enabling some of these would be difficult (not impossible) to do securely, and Google has no incentive to expend resources to enable them, but a working regulatory body could require it for the public good.