Google Spiffs Up Search with Chrome
Now how did I miss this earlier—or is it new? While comparing Bing and Google search for the post before last, I came across something surprising (see photo below). Google is more aggressively hawking Chrome with search. Will Chrome’s shine blind trustbusters?
Does anyone else remember how Microsoft got in trouble with the US Justice Department for bundling Internet Explorer with Windows? The DOJ accused Microsoft of trying to leverage its monopoly in desktop operating systems into the browser market. Hell, Microsoft is still paying for this behavior. The European Union is soon expected to impose sanctions, and possibly another big fine, for browser bundling.
Bundling is like breathing. Of course, companies are going to seek synergies between products. But antitrust agencies apply different rules to monopolies. Bundling for one company might violate laws for another. Microsoft’s problem was different rules. My question: When will they apply to Google, which search dominance should qualify as monopoly in many countries?
In mid May, I warned that trustbusters would go after Google, with its high search share and bundling tactics drawing scrutiny. Perhaps Google feels so huggy kissy with the Obama Administration, there is nothing to fear. Google’s little Chrome installation offer is interestingly selective. The option appears on Internet Explorer 8, but not Firefox 3.5 Beta 4. Is it coincidence that Google is Firefox’s default search engine? You tell me. That what comments are for.
I would watch for an increasing number of Google cross-product ties and bundles over the next 60 days. Google is going to get aggressive, and for lots of very predictable reasons:
- Microsoft’s European troubles will create distraction, opportunity to make advances while everyone watches antitrust regulators kick the shit out of the software giant.
- Google is feeling bullish about its Obama Administration relationships. New lovers are forgiving.
- Carol f-bomb” Bartz, Yahoo’s six-month-old CEO, is going to be trouble for Google. She’s not puckering up to Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer, which some people assume is good for Google. No fraking way. Yahoo’s brand and banner ad business are gold she’s ready to mine.
- Ad sales aren’t what they used to be. Google’s best strategy is to pull its properties and services more tightly together. Online real estate is leverage.
- Bing is here, and Azure Services Platform and Windows 7 are coming this year. Google is good at getting Microsoft to chase its paranoia. But Google has its own, and falling ad sales and shattered share price are reasons enough to worry. Now Microsoft is pushing harder onto Google turf. Microsoft has rediscovered marketing and branding.
- Android will come to as many as 20 handsets—and even a few netbooks—this year. Mobility is the future of computing, and the more natural place to use search. Google wants to pull its products and services together for mobile. What else is Android but an operating system bundled with a Google browser and supporting services?
Google should be careful where it bundles. The European Union is already on the watch, and the Obama Justice Department looks askance at goings on in Silicon Valley. The Clinton Justice Department targeted Microsoft in 1998 for fear the company would become gatekeeper to the Internet. From a perception perspective, Google is a much more likely gatekeeper—the kind of target that makes political careers.
Do you have a Web story that you’d like told? Please email Joe Wilcox: oddlytogether at gmail dot com.
Spot on, Joe!
I think it is especially good that you identify work as analysis apart from reporting. It\’s decent and sets a standard others would do well to follow.
To be honest, Microsoft being targeted as a monopoly was probably one of the best things that happened to the company (United States Courts; the European stuff seems to be all about harming the company rather then anything else). Microsoft gained focus, bettered its products (also a result from the security scare it got) and started componentizing stuff, all the while making it work better together. Now we have a triple-A line up of Xbox, Zune, Windows 7, Surface, and much more. Microsoft is making decent products, irregardless of if anyone is buying.
Google being targeted is a possibility, and one that I think could help Google, but only if the company has more screw ups to fix then it does now.
But currently I think Google is on a halfway decent course that they can correct any mistakes on, so long as the competition doesn\’t keep current pressures. In fact, Google getting labeled as a monopolist would harm it far more right now then it would help, as it would at very least shut up every naysayer who whines about a ten year old case Microsoft fought and claims that it is just resorting to old behavior.
But who knows? We can\’t tell the future perfectly. Google could keep a perpetual 60%+ marketshare, or it could not, losing it to Bing, or even, in some fluke, Yahoo!. We\’ll never really know until it happens.
Bundling is where you force someone to buy product b when they just want product a. Google are not forcing anything.
Besides, nobody cares if someone bundles a browser as long as they are following standards and therefore they are able to replace the browser with another. IE was DESIGNED to kill the competition and was tied to the kernel so people still have trouble replacing it. Microsoft would not have had anywhere near the number of problems if they had just stuck to standards rather than stifling them.
See the internet tidal wave memo for more information.
Joe -
How can this possibly be construed as \’bundling\’ ? … it\’s targeted advertising, plain and simply. Nothing is forced on you. It\’s strictly voluntary if you want to use the Chrome browser.
By your logic, if I go to microsoft.com, that stupid pop-up that asks if I want to download Silverlight( again and again and again ) is bundling. Although I just about despise Microsoft\’s business ethics, I would have a hard time calling that \’bundling\’.
And Joe, what is it with that Security Code thing and Firefox? I’ve got Adblock set to allow all scripts, and everytime I submit, it tells me that the number I picked is invalid, It works on IE everytime ( and I don’t like using IE ).
I am not sure how much control you have over the site, but I have had very good results by adding a field which is hidden by CSS (not using type=hidden), name it something enticing like \’telephone\’. Bots always complete the field and humans never do.
P.S. You have some human spammers visiting the site regularly. They are the ones that always give a website and then leave a message like \"Great post!\". Sorry but they do not think it was a great post, they just wanted the website link.
http://www.joewilcox.com/2009/06/when-a-problem-comes-along-you-must-bing-it/comment-page-1/#comment-347
acquisto levitra online rfCredo che lei abbia sbagliato. Sono sicuro. Scrivere a me in PM. comprare levitra ervdalotvf comprar viagra
Well said, billybob.
I sometimes get the feeling that you and I are the only 2 people on the planet that understand this.
I totally agree in principle – well said.
However let’s get the facts right, IE was designed to be bundled into other areas of Windows, but it’s not tied with the kernel in any way.
This is one of my pet hate misunderstandings, along with the notion that Windows’ main issues lie in the kernel. That would be great for Microsoft because it would be so much easier to improve things without breaking existing applications. The NT kernel by most accounts is pretty competent and efficient compared to it’s contemporaries.
Google search is clearly designed to be bundled, too, but that’s not the point. It’s a question of how will fearmongers respond to Google’s ever-increasing search and online advertising dominance. Google’s reputation for openness is ill-founded. Does Google publish the secret sauce behind search? No. Like Microsoft, Google’s platform has many, many proprietary aspects. True, many of the interfaces are published, something Microsoft also does.
The point of the post: For many reasons, Google has reached an inflection point where it will more aggressively tie together products, just like Microsoft. And just like Microsoft, Google’s dominance makes it a target of antitrust investigation.
It’s not about the kernel and the IE market share and bundling at all. It’s about the perversion of standards which FORCE people to use Windows in order to properly view and use Outlook Web Access, web sites created with MS Publish, web sites that use the latest Silverlight.
Google search share is what it is because it works better. And Google, Gmail, and others work JUST AS WELL with IE on Windows as they do with Firefox on Linux or Safari on Mac or Opera or Chrome. And if you like Yahoo or Bing better, you are free to go there using whatever platform and operating system you choose… as determined by the owners of Yahoo and Bing.
Now of course, Google’s dominance, due to its superior offerings and NOT to back-room arm-twisting illegal bundling deals, might be giving it leverage over advertisers that is suspect. I don’t know, and I don’t pretend to understand how advertising can support a company, so that’s all hocus-pocus to me. So if Google is doing something “Bad”, it may be its relationship with advertisers .
And let’s fact the fact that Ballmer’s purchase of Yahoo would have PROVEN that he is brain-dead. If a wealthy company cannot hire the right employees to build a product, they don’t have what it takes to buy employees to build a product. Yahoo’s refusal of Ballmer’s offer saved Ballmer from becoming the world’s biggest brain-dead moron. He ought to be thanking Yahoo every day for saving him from a huge blunder. And Bing’s overtaking of Yahoo search share is further proof that Microsoft was MUCH better off using its own employees instead of paying a back-breaking price for someone else’s employees and their incmpatible BSD-based technology.
But Google is NOT bundling. If anything, they annoy me that Chrome only works on Windows (beta Linux and Mac versions are junk right now), that Picassa only runs on Windows, and that most of their other client toys only run on Windows.
I spoke to an ex-Microsoft employee the other day and he told me that IE was very deeply integrated into the kernel and they had a very hard time extracting it.
He also told me a few things which make me believe that 90% of their current problems are because of the kernel. In particular, WinFS was a no-go because if the kernel not userland. MS have a lot of upcoming problems with their kernel in the next 10 years. The biggest problems will come after Dave Cutler retires.
Hi, Joe,
I logged out so that I could try the CAPTCHA code myself using Firefox 3.5 Beta 4. I had no trouble. How strange. Once you’ve done the CAPTCHA test once, you shouldn’t need to again. Which version Firefox?
I use CAPTCHA to deter comment spam. I could ask people to register but would prefer not to at this time. I did a quick search on adblock and found that it does cause problems with some CAPTCHAs.
I’ll look for a different spam deterrent.
Joe
Thanks, billybob,
It’s my site. I have as much control as my capabilities allow.
I am well aware of this “great post” folks who put in questionable or nefarious links. I had to manually delete thousands at Microsoft Watch. But I missed the link in the comment you linked to. Thanks. I’ve fixed that.
Best,
Joe