Google's Chrome divorce still on the cards as Trump's DoJ plays hardball If Google had hoped a bit of cosying up to President Trump would soften the US government's breakup demands in the wake of its search antitrust conviction, then it was seemingly mistaken. The Trump Department of Justice filed a revised proposed final judgment [PDF] in Washington, D.C. District Court on Friday. This made most …
But that wouldn't stop the US government choosing what happens for the US market, and it would expose Google to the confusing and contradictory tax and regulatory system in India. As furreignrs are always treated worse by US regulators and courts, it'd be mad for any US tech company to relocate outside the US, even with the orange loon and his clown show government.
Not sure why you think an Indian company would care about "US regulators and courts". Google can just move all of the stuff the USA wants to stop to a fully owned Indian subsidiary and become a shell company in the US. They're pretty close to that already...
Like how Starbuck's and MacDonald's don't actually own any coffee shops and restaurants. The USA market isn't a big fraction of worldwide sales of any of these companies.
McDonalds worldwide sales: a bit over $25 billion, of which US accounts for something between 30 and 40%. Not sure where you're getting your figures from.
Google total revenue: a bit over $300 billion, though I haven't found any convincing breakdown by country - it's pretty hard to allocate earnings by country in a web business, or to put it another way it's easy to obfuscate where the money comes from.
Wow - where did *YOU* get your numbers? The population of the USA is about 300 million (Europe 750m, China 1200m, etc).... and you think that's 40% of McD sales worldwide? Maybe 40% of the North and South America.
10%-15% seems like a sensible number for a global company to me... maybe this is why America is going to fail, you people are all clueless about reality.
Which one is the bad one now? I would like to see less Googly infiltration into global mindshare, yes. But they are most certainly not the only monolith in the tech sphere which bears investigation and possible divestments. Further, if this is a generic issue, are we seeing any other monolith getting the same spanking, or are the feds only hot for California Chrome? Mightn't it be possible that there is a bit of the hanky-panky going on with who does, and who does not, get such tender discipline? Hmmm...?
The simple answer to your question is to ask yourself "who else is legally a monopoly, and is utilising other tools to reinforce that monopoly?"...
So, yes there are other corporate behemoths, but as far as I can see, none of them are doing that in particular. None of the social media firms have a monopoly.
Microsoft might still be a monopoly, if you narrow the market to desktop/laptop PC OS, but if you just go with OS, then they aren't. They certainly aren't a monopoly in the browser, server or productivity suite space any more.
Apple are a monopoly in their own ecosystem, so there's potentially some argument to be had their about app store access.
But your post was rather a wide brush, so who is it you're thinking of?
This is a genuine question. I used to prefer Chrome, but now I use Edge, which is also Chromium based. I know a lot of others who do. It's a good browser that runs well on all platforms. Microsoft has been very smart with their rewards program, which is how I got onto it or maybe why I've stuck with it. I also use Bing now pretty much exclusively for search. I see Google losing its monopoly, and I question whether Chrome still has the edge (pun intended) going forward.
I was as surprised as you are, but I like Microsoft Rewards so much that I ended up adopting it. Turns out it's a really good search engine, especially coupled with Co-Pilot.
According to these statistics, Chrome still has 70% share, with Safari a distant second: https://gs.statcounter.com/. Clearly Google are still dominant.
How does selling off Chrome actually work?
I've seen estimates saying it's worth $20B but that's because of the Googley bits that were added to open-source Chromium; and there are plenty of alternative Chromium based browsers out there - even Microsoft has one! Those have either replaced the Googley bits with their own equally evil bits or they're selling point is the lack of eny evil Googley bits.
So how does Google sell something for $20B that anyone who's really interested in can get for free already?
And who would be interested in having a browser, and has the expertise to maintain and continue developing it, that has $20B lying around that hasn't already built a Chromium based browser (don't say Apple because a. they're openly hostile towards the Chrome way; and b. Chromium was originally based on WebKit that Safari is based on).
Maybe they can do a swap with ByteDance?!
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
