[the_other]

> There isn’t a business model for a company whose product is just chrome, though.

This isn’t relevant, from the perspective of the ruling.

It might be relevant from the perspective of Chrome-the-business and from Chrome-users’ perspectives.

[burnerthrow008]

It isn’t relevant that the thing you want to split off won’t be able to stand on its own two feet? Wouldn’t it be simpler to simply require Google to burn the source code?

And what is the point of the breakup if everyone (including consumers/users) is worse off? Is the point of government to make people better off, or just to maximize the number of paperclips produced?

[Jensson]

> And what is the point of the breakup if everyone (including consumers/users) is worse off? Is the point of government to make people better off, or just to maximize the number of paperclips produced?

In this case this is pushed by other tech companies that want to buy data from Chrome, or they want to move users from the web to their apps where they can be more user hostile.

This is what happens when the government is controlled by corporations.