Feds may target Google's Chrome browser for breakup

Re:Feds may target Google's Chrome browser for breakup by mjburgess on Monday October 12, 2020 @09:16AM (#24754054)

See my comment below. I meant a more general sense of open, maybe "unbiased" or "biased towards their users preferences". ie., where any decision about the platform (including defaults) is left to the users, or defaulted to their clear general preference.

The "issue" is that they are charging for something the users would set themselves, and otherwise, already want.

Google is being "forced" into paying for this only because apple is willing to act against its users preferences, and eg., set a Bing default.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Feds may target Google's Chrome browser for breakup by waon on Tuesday October 13, 2020 @01:17AM (#24762499)

> Well, consider that if Apple were an open platform, this default would be set by most "for free".

> If the platform invited the user to set a default, or was "biased towards their user's preferences", as most would select google, google would be the "natural default".

You almost make it sound like defaulting to Google without making people aware of the alternatives is “open” and unbiased.”

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Feds may target Google's Chrome browser for breakup by dan1234 on Monday October 12, 2020 @10:10AM (#24754471)

iOS/macOS users can set their own default search engine. Google just know that most people won't change what's set by default.

[ Parent | on HN ]