←back to thread

398 points ChrisArchitect | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
isodev ◴[] No.45141438[source]
Oh nice. I hope other countries follow suit. It’s quite a shame Google didn’t get Chrome divested from them in the US, would’ve been a “nature is healing” moment for the web.
replies(4): >>45141476 #>>45141539 #>>45143526 #>>45145186 #
richwater ◴[] No.45141476[source]
Running a browser without an ecosystem behind it is a money pit and would be worth almost 0.
replies(3): >>45141494 #>>45141732 #>>45142090 #
isodev ◴[] No.45141494[source]
Doesn’t matter, as consumers, we’re absolutely ducked from all sides as long as our “window into the web” is fully controlled by a single corp.
replies(2): >>45141528 #>>45142038 #
mupuff1234 ◴[] No.45141528[source]
And if Chrome were to be divested it would have just gotten swallowed up by a different corp, most likely to end up in worse hands imo.

Can you name any other company that if they owned Chrome it would've been better for the users and the web?

replies(4): >>45141635 #>>45141685 #>>45142076 #>>45143283 #
bgarbiak ◴[] No.45142076[source]
In that case people (some of them at least) would switch to a different browser. Reducing Chrome market share would be healthy for the web too.
replies(1): >>45143410 #
mupuff1234 ◴[] No.45143410[source]
Or we'll just get a duopoly where Microsoft and Apple control the web, both of which don't really have business incentives to improve it.
replies(1): >>45143434 #
fsflover ◴[] No.45143434[source]
You mean, like it is now?
replies(2): >>45143598 #>>45145669 #
1. mupuff1234 ◴[] No.45143598[source]
Yes, but with companies that have even less incentive to actually make the web decent.
replies(1): >>45174982 #
2. fsflover ◴[] No.45174982[source]
I don't see how it can be worse than now.
replies(1): >>45176291 #
3. ◴[] No.45176291[source]