[onlyrealcuzzo]

Unless Google is banned from providing a browser entirely, they'll just re-fork Webkit and release another browser, and it will very quickly replace Chrome usage.

Especially on Android - which is the most used OS in the world.

It seems strange to ban Google from offering a Search Engine, when all the other big tech companies can get into any field just fine, but the legal system is primarily a weapon for corruption these days, so who knows.

I mean, sure, if you want to start limiting what big companies do, and there's some fairness in how it's applied, fine.

But that's not what will happen.

[wand3r]

Presumably they would include a clause they can't do that? If not, why wouldn't they simply fork Chromium if they haven't already. They must be bargaining that there will be some lockout period and regulatory scrutiny that would prevent them from immeadiately rebranding chrome and repointing all the download links to a new repo.

[twelvedogs]

It's not about stopping people from making a browser and a search engine and tying them together, it's about abusing your web browser monopoly to promote your search monopoly (and vice versa) to keep competition out

The rules apply to everyone it's just that no one else has a search or browser monopoly

Microsoft had a browser monopoly at one point and it should have happened to them but they generously pissed it away

[bigmadshoe]

Google pretty clearly has a monopoly on search though, and their ownership of Android + the #1 web browser in the world maintains this. I don't think a new fork of Webkit would change this argument.

[dismalaf]

Let's not forget that during the trial it was established that Bing's top search is "google"...

MS literally forces Edge and Bing on users yet they'll seek out Google and Chrome.

[JonChesterfield]

Had. Google search doesn't find things any more.

[johnnyanmac]

They lose the brand so that's the most important part. And chrome has far divestd from chromium in all the important ways Google makes money. It'd take years for chrome to to lose its marketshare even if Google had a chrome clone made tomorrow.

If anything, they may try to start from scratch, like with Fuschia. In which case the anti-trust was a success in making companies compete again.

[sofixa]

> Especially on Android - which is the most used OS in the world.

In the EU, they're forced to ask you which browser and which search engine you want.

> It seems strange to ban Google from offering a Search Engine, when all the other big tech companies can get into any field just fine, but the legal system is primarily a weapon for corruption these days, so who knows.

Letting one instance of blatant anti competitive and anti consumer behaviour fly because others are allowed isn't the way to go. Google are a bit monopolistic abuser, fix that. Apple are too? Good, that's the next job.

> I mean, sure, if you want to start limiting what big companies do, and there's some fairness in how it's applied, fine.

> But that's not what will happen.

That's how the EU is approaching with the DMA and DSA.

[onlyrealcuzzo]

And in the EU, there's little difference in Chrome & Google market share on Android.

It's almost as if people actually like Google's products.

[magicalhippo]

You can use multiple browsers. Even my non-technical SO does, with no input from me.

[onlyrealcuzzo]

That would show up in market share.

If you're assuming the vast majority of European users don't use Chrome except when tricked by Google to game MAUs - it would show up in usage that the vast majority of European Android users are regularly using a different browser.

There's hardly a difference compared to RoW.

[orionblastar]

I have to use multiple web browsers, and what doesn't work on Firefox works on Chrome or Edge, and vice versa.