• Squiddork@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    248
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    So they found Google guilty of monopolistic practices then agreed to do nothing about it.

    Sounds about right.

  • Tortellinius@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    Who cares about chrome? Of all the things Chrome is the easiest to replace. Android is the real deal.

  • DarkSideOfTheMoon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    1 day ago

    With reports of Elon Musk eying to buy Chrome or OpenAI… sorry but I believe this was the best outcome, what we need is people using more Firefox that is one of the few non-Chromium browser out there.

    • ATPA9@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 day ago

      Yeah, i had the same thoughts. The current chrome is better than the “Hitlerdidnothingwrong AI-First” browser those goons would have cooked up…

    • limerod@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      You think other companies would provide sideloading like samsung, and oneplus? They would lock the OS hard and make it difficult to even unlock. Making android more closed than before.

      • Ghoelian@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 days ago

        Well then why aren’t they doing so now? They’re already maintaining their own forks of android, should be pretty trivial to do.

        • limerod@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          They need to maintain compatibility with play services to access apps on play store.

          Also, starting with OnUI 8 bootloader unlocking is no longer supported. On OxugenOS 16 its only allowed with restrictions. The hardening is already started.

              • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                17 minutes ago

                you said this:

                They need to maintain compatibility with play services to access apps on play store.

                but that does not explain why don’t they already block installing 3rd party apps. they don’t need to allows this to oeep access to the play store.

        • lordbritishbusiness@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          19 hours ago

          It’d probably take some sort of Linux Foundation style arrangement with manufacturers supporting a neutral team built from Google’s Android division.

  • Auth@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    112
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    How disappointing but expected. I’m not even sure what would break googles search engine dominance outside of search engines becoming obsolete. I use DDG and I find it to be better than google but still so many people stand by google search with strong loyalty.

    • ifItWasUpToMe@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      2 days ago

      I very much dislike Google but constantly search stuff on DDG, with little to no success. Then I’ll add !g to the front, and a decent chunk of the time what I’m looking for is top 3, not including all the sponsored shit.

      Are there specific ways you search for DDG to be better?

      • MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        12 hours ago

        I moved to DDG because I felt Google results were getting worse. You would search for something specific and instead just get varying degrees of the same article on different sites about it instead.

        Then I felt DDG was getting worse in just not always getting what was related, so I’ve moved to qwant.

        Other than not always getting geo-related results, the results have been the best I’ve seen in a while so I’ve stuck around for now.

      • Lag@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I’ve had the exact opposite experience for the past year. I had to switch the default to DDG at work where I need to search for specific model numbers every day. I don’t remember the last time I actually Googled something on the PC or phone (Firefox search bar with DDG default). I only use Google for maps where it’s always been the best.

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        It really seems to depend on the topic. I would say, on average DDG is better from my experience. However, when it doesn’t work it really doesn’t work. Google usually has something you want fairly early in the results.

      • Auth@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        The only time I ever need to use a google bang is when im searching for something specifically local like a restaurant. DDG uses apple maps and apple maps is complete garbage.

        When I cant find something on DDG and I use the !g 99% of the time I cant find it on google either.

          • Auth@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            21 hours ago

            Exactly why the freedom for users to choose between different software is so important :)

      • Scolding7300@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Try search aggregators, at least the fingerprint won’t be attached to you (with some at least)

    • fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      Barring them from offering exclusive deals, which allows competitors to get in the mix at places like Mozilla.

      I did not come up with this idea, this was one of the remedies the Judge chose. @[email protected] Telling them to drop Chrome was just flashy talk.

      • Auth@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        22 hours ago

        I dont think that would help because chrome would offer good by default and apple would offer chrome by default for the “best experience” and they dont need the money. Then alternative browsers with an already low market share would get paid less to offer other search engines. Its risky to ship a non google search by default.

    • fodor@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Oh come on now. All of the strong options would have worked. Don’t let Google buy its competition off. Don’t let Google buy it’s default position. Don’t let Google control the browser. That’s it, problem solved.

      You claim people are loyal, but if that were true, the aforementioned payoffs would not exist.

      • Stovetop@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        ·
        2 days ago

        Who would appeal? The case was started by the DOJ and the DOJ made this decision. Google apparently paid the requisite tribute to the Trump admin to make all of this go away, and so it has.

  • black_flag@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    But he did…bar the search giant from making exclusive deals to distribute its search or AI assistant products in ways that might cut off distribution for rivals.

    Oh boy there goes Firefox

    • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Nah its just the default search engine and you can still change the default, thus not cutting off distribution of other engines.

      • Otter@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        I think they’re referring to Firefox’s funding, a lot of which was through search deals

        An article from 5 years ago: https://www.pcmag.com/news/mozilla-signs-lucrative-3-year-google-search-deal-for-firefox

        edit: seems like that hasn’t changed by this ruling either

        United States District Judge Amit Mehta has ruled that Google can continue to pay other companies, including browser makers like Mozilla, to be their default search engine.

        https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2025/09/google-antitrust-ruling-firefox-search-deal

        • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          From the article you linked:

          In return for Google being the default search engine in Firefox, Mozilla is expected to bank $400M+ a year.

          Literally what I am talking about. I can still switch away from the default. No other search companies are being denied access to being set as the default search engine in Firefox. Google just pays a premium so they are the default out of the box, which would not be anti-competitive under this order.

          bar the search giant from making exclusive deals to distribute its search or AI assistant products in ways that might cut off distribution for rivals.

          This by definition does not cut off their distribution in Firefox. Google can still make this deal with Mozilla. It is not an exclusivity deal, it’s a default search engine deal. Exclusivity or cutting off distribution would be making Google the only search engine option in Firefox.

          • Otter@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            2 days ago

            https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2025/09/google-antitrust-ruling-firefox-search-deal

            United States District Judge Amit Mehta has ruled that Google can continue to pay other companies, including browser makers like Mozilla, to be their default search engine.

            I see, I’ll edit my other comment. So what even changes then, were they even making exclusive deals in the past? The discussion I remember was about how being the default made it difficult for others to compete since most people don’t change the defaults.

          • monogram@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 days ago

            I’m questioning why they would make such a lucrative deal with Mozilla in the future, now that antitrust is just a front for government extortion

  • Korkki@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 days ago

    So they have to give away search data?

    Is there an antitrust on android or appstore ongoing?

  • Mad__vegan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    I’m on ecosia with okay search results. Sadly if I know it exists but still having problems I resist to Google but Supposedly ecosia plants trees with some of the revenue