Slashdot Mirror


Google Claims They "Just Aren't That Big"

The New York Times is reporting that Google is making the case that they just aren't that big, especially from an anti-trust point of view. While they certainly corner the market in search, advertising, and online video, Dana Wagner, Google's "senior competition counsel," is working hard to convince the public that "competition is a click away." "None of the investigations take aim at Google's core advertising business. And unlike other technology giants in years past, Google has not been accused of anticompetitive tactics. But the investigations and carping from competitors and critics have Google fighting to dispel the notion that it has a lock on its market, even as it increases its share of search and online advertising. Eyes are rolling, especially in reaction to the idea that Google is a relatively small player in a giant market. 'They describe where they are in a market under a kind of a fairy-tale spun gloss that doesn't reflect their dominance of key sectors,' said Jeff Chester, executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy. 'Google search is an absolute must-have for every marketer in the world.'"

24 of 283 comments (clear)

  1. Hi... by Em+Emalb · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hi! Billy Mays here for GIANTCo.

    Do you suffer from a lack of competition in your market place? Are your closest competitors light-years away from being a viable alternative to the solutions you offer? Well have I got just the thing for you! Introducing the amazing, the lovely, the Department of Justice! That's right folks, in just 10 easy years you can get a slap on the wrist and be deemed a monolopy.

    But wait, there's more! What if I told you that if you called right now, we'd throw in a second DOJ fine ABSOLUTELY FREE?!?!

    Call now, operators are standing by.

    --
    Sent from your iPad.
    1. Re:Hi... by srealm · · Score: 5, Insightful

      To be honest, I think this is exactly the way he would want to be remembered. He had a larger than life personality/persona - he would not want people moping around 'boo hoo, Billy Mays is dead.'

      Billy was not above poking fun at himself either, and it was an image he cultivated. The fact that he, and his pitch style was so recognizable speaks volumes. So no, I don't think it's too soon, I see the above as a celebration of Billy, not a satire of him.

    2. Re:Hi... by BillyMays · · Score: 4, Funny

      Hi! Billy Mays here...

      Like hell you are. Imposter!

    3. Re:Hi... by Ihmhi · · Score: 5, Funny

      IMITATION IS THE SINCEREST FORM OF FLATTERY. THAT'S WHY I'M GOING TO TYPE IN ALL CAPS FOR THE NEXT COUPLE OF DAYS - A TRIBUTE TO ONE OF THE GREATEST ADVERTISING PERSONALITIES OF OUR GENERATION.

      .

      .

      .

      .

      .

      Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING. Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING. Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING. Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING. Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.

  2. The alternative is much worse by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's better than having a software monopolist tying their awful search engine into all their products and becoming number one.

    1. Re:The alternative is much worse by Freetardo+Jones · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What you mean because I installed Windows as my OS, I'm forced to use IE now? You mean I can't just surf to mozilla.com or opera.com and download an alternate browser because of some sort of blocking mechanism? Wow, I just never noticed that before. Guess I'll have to look closer.

    2. Re:The alternative is much worse by bami · · Score: 5, Informative

      The IE rendering engine (especially in XP, no experience with Vista) is so tightly integrated it's not funny any more. Every application besides your browser will use IE, loads of applications just go "iexplore.exe http://www.awesomecorpsite.com/" instead of digging in the registry to get the correct browser (MSN Messenger used to open up Hotmail or Windows Live Mail with IE by default, you had to install third party hacks to get firefox to open it), and it's just everywhere.
      The fact that Explorer is just an extension of IE (XP still opens IE when you type a url into the adress bar of Explorer) speaks for itself.

      IE is everywhere in XP, less in Vista, but thanks to some EU regulations, no more in Windows 7. So until that day, yes, you are forced to use IE.

    3. Re:The alternative is much worse by ScentCone · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The fact that Explorer is just an extension of IE (XP still opens IE when you type a url into the adress bar of Explorer) speaks for itself

      Yeah, it's almost like you have this "operating system," and it's designed to open files and stuff. And it's almost like the company that makes that operating system is, you know, a software company. And it's almost like they've realized that a browser-type app is the right front-end metaphor for most of the information that typical users of their operating system will want to see. So Eeeeeevil of them to provide a basic information tool as a built-in and well-integrated part of the operating system that is being used to, you know, work with information.

      I suppose you'd also prefer that their OS didn't ship with a file system, or at least preferred that the file system was very poorly coupled to the operating system and the user experience? Excellent idea! In fact, the operating system maker has no business deciding what tools their customers might find useful. Other companies and governments should be in charge of designing the software made by that company. We can't have companies deciding what features to add to their own products, or what sort coupling with a web browser their own operating system should have. No way. That's too much freedom for a software company. We can't have freedom. We have to have software designed by goverment committees and courts! Unless, of course, it's a Mac, and that's OK. Or a Linux distro.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    4. Re:The alternative is much worse by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But how is it any different? After all, all IE really just a shell for trident. I could in a few lines of VB "make" a browser that had a totally different UI that ran trident, would you consider that the same thing as IE? Or is my browser suddenly different? And yes, effectively the use of Gecko is more or less "using Firefox" in the fact that it uses a major component of Firefox that is the main component in Firefox itself.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    5. Re:The alternative is much worse by ScentCone · · Score: 4, Insightful

      MS used its MONOPOLY in Operating Systems to stifle the browser segment

      How about the Notepad Text Editor segment? How about the TCP/IP stack segment? How about the disk defragging segment? Should all of those be ripped out of the operating system? I consider a web browser to be an essential part of the operating system. I don't ever want to install an operating system that doesn't natively know how to grab an IP address from DHCP, resolve hostnames, connecto to web sites, and show me information. But you think that I should not be able to do that without interacting with third parties and their own software.

      Why arent you simply saying that Microsoft should not be allowed to make operating systems? That's the logical step for your point of view. Even though there are other operating systems to choose from, you find that MS should not be allowed to have a definition of what a web browser is, as it relates to their own OS. Why? What about Firefox and Opera and Chrome and Safari is it that MS is suppressing? Or are you really just complaining because most people are lazy, and don't want to have to assemble their own operating system out of essential modules (like a web browser), and would rather just have something that works? They can buy that from Apple, or they can buy it from Microsoft. But you think one of them shouldn't be allowed to compete in the providing of an operating system that has vital things (like web browsing capability) already installed - even though they can run out and download any other tool they want, any time they want.

      Are you even listening to yourself?

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    6. Re:The alternative is much worse by Elwood+P+Dowd · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm not sure I follow your point. What you are describing is the result of a decade of anti-trust litigation against Microsoft. Had they been allowed, they certainly might have attempted to prevent you from installing Firefox or Opera.

      --

      There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
  3. They're not big. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They only dominate the market because of one thing.

    They made a search engine that works and doesn't piss everyone off with flashing blinking ads everywhere!

    Did google do anything to make all the other search engines suck ass? No.

    Did google buy out the competition so they were #1? No.

    Google just made a good service people CHOOSE to use.

    1. Re:They're not big. by Mordok-DestroyerOfWo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You're exactly right. Bing does do some pretty neat things. But I use Google Documents, GMail, and am eagerly awaiting Voice when it comes out. Google just knows how to make products people want to use, and how to keep them free.

      --
      "Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right" - Salvor Hardin
    2. Re:They're not big. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Did google buy out the competition so they were #1? No.

      Er.. curious how you got to 'no'

      Google did google video, it wasnt doing well, they bought Youtube and are now #1.

      Google did maps, it was okay but not #1, they bought Keyhole(now google earth) and advanced their tech to become #1

      They've also bought sketchup, grandcentral(google voice), and a few other smaller projects with varying success.

    3. Re:They're not big. by nschubach · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Right. The difference between Google's market share and Microsoft's share is that I can take my email elsewhere, I can search another site, and I can go to any of 50 video sites. I never have to look at another Google app the rest of my life and I'm not going to have to suffer to pay rent. With Microsoft, you can't just pack up your Games, Office applications/Exchange app, and development suites and move to Linux. You can't work in the business world without having to support Microsoft in one way or another... or find a job that has nothing to do with computers.

      It's a matter of being able to leave if you don't like the service. Anyone can leave Google in an hour if they wanted. Even though I use Linux daily, I still have to use Windows at work and at home if I want to play the latest game.

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
  4. they're not that big by most measures by Trepidity · · Score: 5, Informative

    They might still be subject to antitrust issues if they're dominant in a particular market, but the statement that they "aren't that big" does seem objectively true, by most measures other than public fame.

    Some major tech companies by number of employees:

    • IBM: 400,000
    • Microsoft: 90,000
    • Google: 21,000

    And by revenue:

    • IBM: $104 billion
    • Microsoft: $60 billion
    • Google: $22 billion

    And by net income:

    • Microsoft: $18 billion
    • IBM: $12 billion
    • Google: $4 billion
    1. Re:they're not that big by most measures by macbeth66 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How about market cap?

      $134 billion for Google.com
      $139 billion for IBM
      $211 billionfor Microsoft

  5. Google Monopoly today... by loteck · · Score: 4, Interesting

    the Register has an article up today entitled A Google monopoly today means packet sniffing tomorrow. Seems like the tech community has possibly learned from its past and may be a lot more hesitant to blindly support monopolies, no matter what their supposed "slogan" is.

  6. Competition is a Click Away." by camperdave · · Score: 5, Funny

    "competition is a click away."

    Yeah, just type the word competition in the search field and click on the "I'm Feeling Lucky" button.

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  7. Somewhat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They are THAT big (that's what she said) but it's true that competition is just a click away. Apart from the obvious of just using another search engine, any documents you have on google docs can be converted properly to a lot of open source formats and you can leave. Social networking? Plenty of those. News aggregators? Plenty of those. Rss feeds? Plenty. Geolocation? Just throw on a tracker and use your own maps.
    Really, there's nothing google does that can't be done by anyone else. They just do it damn well.
    Fuck you microsoft and other motherfucking disable-fucking-copy-paste-if-licence-expires Office counterparts, THAT is anti-competitive, not google.

  8. Re:That's Weird, Because Fiscally ... by larry+bagina · · Score: 5, Informative

    Market Cap is a mixture of future expectations, growth, hype, and irrational exhuberance.

    GMGMQ, -- General Motors in a pink sheet -- has a market cap of 677 Million (10 times more than /. corporate parent sourceforge). Yet GM has earnings per share of -$60. Their true value is -$100 billion or so. In a few weeks, they'll finish their bankruptcy and that 677 million in market cap is guaranteed to drop to 0.

    --
    Do you even lift?

    These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

  9. We'le Vely Smarr by clang_jangle · · Score: 4, Funny

    Google: "Googlee-uh penis-ah vely smarr. Amelican Govelnment penis-ah so big... sooo big."

    --
    Caveat Utilitor
  10. Re:What's their motto? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well then you're in idiot.

  11. Re:Keep telling yourselves that by MBoffin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't know how strong my point will be here, since I haven't bothered to look up the data, but I wonder....

    How many of the companies Google has bought out were publicly-traded companies? From first look, it doesn't seem like that many at all. And if that's the case, then the companies that sold out to Google, did so of their own volition and not because they were beholden to their public investors to make a decision that would make more money for the investors.