Version: 2008

Comments on: On antitrust, is Google the next Microsoft?

Google is facing opposition to its DoubleClick deal in what could be a repeat of the way Washington punished Microsoft a decade ago.

Add a Comment (Log in or register) (26 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
Microsoft Punished?
by s1kb0y July 23, 2007 7:40 AM PDT
Microsoft punished? When did this happen? The company should have been broken up into at least 4 or 5 companies. Today they can still afford huge loses (entertainment division) without breaking a sweat allowing them to break into any/all other markets they want to conquer and monopolize and still outweigh their competition banking on the gains from their Windows monopoly.
Reply to this comment
This article is not about Microsoft
by hdubya July 23, 2007 9:16 AM PDT
nt
View reply
Google should watch out.
by eurobloke July 23, 2007 8:01 AM PDT
Google is starting to realise that is becoming a monolith of its own making, and it starting to have its ass biting itself with the Department of Justice and an even more vicious opponent, the European Commission. The company with the slogan ?do no evil? is starting to become a fig leaf. I would be surprised if Commissioners Kuneva (consumer protection), Kroes (competition), Reding (information society and media) & Frattini (freedom, security and justice).
Reply to this comment
Re: Google should watch out
by eurobloke July 23, 2007 8:05 AM PDT
(Sorry I didn't finish)
Google is starting to realise that is becoming a monolith of its own making, and it starting to have its ass biting itself with the Department of Justice and an even more vicious opponent, the European Commission. The company with the slogan ?do no evil? is starting to become a fig leaf. I would be surprised if Commissioners Kuneva (consumer protection), Kroes (competition), Reding (information society and media) & Frattini (freedom, security and justice) have a good go at Google for various reasons including privacy breakdowns ie Gmail, causing monopolies with search and acting anti-competitively.
Reply to this comment
Buying political influence?
by adasha76 July 23, 2007 8:39 AM PDT
From the article: "By comparison, last year AT&T wrote checks for at least $27 million to buy political influence and Microsoft spent $8.9 million."

What, is that supposed to be lauded? Are you saying Google is not corrupt enough? Ridiculous!
Reply to this comment
lauded
by declan00 July 23, 2007 9:40 AM PDT
It's possible to describe a situation without saying it's good or bad, which is in fact what our article did.

We didn't say Google should buy political influence -- we just reported on it being outgunned.

If anything, we noted the public choice theory argument about rent extraction, so you should have taken away exactly the opposite conclusion. You may want to reread the article.
View reply
Diffrerent starting point
by KTLA_knew July 23, 2007 9:47 AM PDT
MS had zero footprint in DC, while their competitors had regular breakfast with the DOJ. They were completely unprepared.

Google is not, and certainly has learned from MS' mistakes. They will not be cuaght ignoring DC the way MS did until it was too late. (As noted in the article, MS has since realized that they needed to play the "games" its competiors had pulled to stay ompetitive, and has done so.)

Google will not get caught the same way, they will USE DC, not have it used against them.
Reply to this comment
business as usual then
by amigabill July 23, 2007 10:14 AM PDT
If USA government puts Google through the same antitrust process, then it'll be a minor annoyance during that time and then business as usual when any possible trial is over. Isn't that how things worked out for MS?
Reply to this comment
I thought Google could do no wrong?!
by bobby_brady July 23, 2007 10:35 AM PDT
I think Msft was the evil empire and Google was our dearly beloved.
Reply to this comment
Silicon valley broght this on themselves
by LuvThatCO2 July 23, 2007 11:01 AM PDT
When all the losers like Sun, etc started going after Microsoft via legal channels when they realized they couldnt compete with MS by offering superior products, all they did was provide a little bit of room for the Camel - government regulators - to get his nose under the tent. Once government regulators get into an arena, they dont get out. I knew this was going to happen back when everybody was bashing MS for being a monopoly. I knew it'd come back to haunt all those companies jumping onto the MS break-up bandwagon.
Reply to this comment
oops...
by LuvThatCO2 July 23, 2007 11:01 AM PDT
Thats 'brought' it on themselves :-)
Google Power vs. MicroSoft
by Renegade Knight July 23, 2007 11:56 AM PDT
If I wanted I could ignore Google almost entirely. A few adds would appear, but I don't need to use their applications to use my computer. I don't have to use their check out. Gmail has alternates.

Not so much with MicroSoft. They are harder to avoid. MS has no business testifying about Googles Monopoly Power. Yes Google has taken over big chunks of the internet and they are worth watching.

In the mean time. Google.com still works and Vista doesn't. I'm stuck with using Vista much more so than Googles search. Interesting how the larger monopoly has more issues with basic products.
Reply to this comment
Lucky you
by Turlingdrome July 27, 2007 3:11 AM PDT
"If I wanted I could ignore Google almost entirely. A few adds would appear, but I don't need to use their applications to use my computer. I don't have to use their check out. Gmail has alternates."

Thats true for a user, but not for an advertiser or web site owner. Google is fast becoming the only game in town.
MS / DOJ antitust punishment for Google?
by Llib Setag July 23, 2007 12:18 PM PDT
Google: Yes?
DOJ : Stick out your arm & roll up your sleeve.
Google : O.K....?
DOJ : Wrist up.
Google : OK
DOJ : "SLAP!!!!" Now you've been "punished just like Microsoft was in the past by us. Did that hurt?
Google : a little...
DOJ : "we'll take our millions in unmarked nonsequencial bills, thank you very much.
Google : OK"
DOJ : "What antitrust actions by Microsoft...errr...I mean Google...?"
Reply to this comment
Data insulation
by ralfthedog July 23, 2007 1:20 PM PDT
I see no problem with Google purchasing DoubleClick, as long as Google/DoubleClick data is kept segregated. Google and DoubleClick both have a great deal of information about us. If that data was integrated we would loose a great deal of our privacy.
Reply to this comment
But what if...
by aabcdefghij987654321 July 24, 2007 9:08 AM PDT
Google decides to rank pages that include advertisements from Doubleclick higher than pages that use some other advertiser?

How will we know if they do that since they are so very secretive about how they rank pages already?
View reply
Google and DoubleClick
by aintnorainbowdorothy July 23, 2007 2:30 PM PDT
I don't use Google for anything. I definitely want my privacy protected. If they combine with DoubleClick, which is pervasive in the online ad business, then they will possibly have information on other companies search business, and other areas also. The merger shouldn't be allowed. Let Google continue trying to dominate the world, ignoring their motto, and DoubleClick do its' thing.
Reply to this comment
Hogwash. They are completely different companies
by technewsjunkie July 23, 2007 4:35 PM PDT
Google's founders have integrity, Microsoft's don't.

Google is BIG, yes. That's where the competitive approach ends.
Reply to this comment
Google versus Microsoft!
by JuggerNaut July 23, 2007 5:46 PM PDT
Well if I had my choice on who should be the monopoly powerhouse of the world wide web going forward, I'd choose Google over Microsoft any day. Google's approach is open and platform agnostic whereas Microsoft's is closed and Windows-only, which impedes real choice in the market (versus the perceived choice people are brainwashed into thinking Microsoft somehow delivers real choice to the market)!

So uh, yeah, go Google :-)
Reply to this comment
In Microsoft's Dreams!
by Rusty Digital Marketing July 24, 2007 2:25 AM PDT
Google is in a far better situation than Microsoft ever was. It has a commanding position in an industry - advertising - that evolves but cannot be eliminated. Business will always spend megabucks on advertising, and Google has a killer business model to extract profits from this business.

Despite the hoo-har advertising is nothing to Microsoft - it is barely 5% of Microsoft's revenues. Microsoft's problem is that it is operating in a mature business area with many, many alternatives for what it produces - many of which are free.

Microsoft's efforts so far in the advertising world reflect it's background as a product company who is not so great at marketing.

More at:

www.digitalmarketing.us/blog/
Reply to this comment
Google definitely does evil
by The_Decider July 24, 2007 10:52 PM PDT
But how are they manipulating market forces, even close to what Microsoft has done?

Google became the most used search engine through merit. Microsoft never became market leaders through merit.

Google isn't forcing their software on others, nor are they forcing anyone to use their software exclusively.

No way in hell that I would ever use their spyware, I mean desktop apps and email. But to even compare them to Microsoft is foolish.
Reply to this comment
"Google is seriously outgunned in Washington" ...
by bearded_oneder July 26, 2007 9:07 AM PDT
... "By comparison, last year AT&T wrote checks for at least $27 million to buy political influence and Microsoft spent $8.9 million."

Huh?

More importantly, shouldn't we really be questioning the constitutionality of "buying political influence" to begin with, along with the threat that this poses to free enterprise and democracy?
Reply to this comment
(26 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
advertisement

Latest tech news headlines

RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.

More feeds available in our RSS feed index.

advertisement