How exactly Google will overhaul its web-search engine in Europe is unlikely to be aired in public: the European Commission's competition officials have sent out copies of the advertising giant's package of concessions to its rivals for comment – along with a requirement for them to agree to confidentiality clauses. Despite …
So the sham is revealed.
The EU will force Google to operate their business as their rivals see fit, so much for the free market.
Re: So the sham is revealed.
Actually it shows how the EU just love oligarchies.
So much for Confidentiality,...
Seems to me the ones that are violating the law are the EUC for sending confidential info to Google's rivals without Google's permission.
When you are provided info in confidance, you are bound and beholden to keep quiet about the info, NOT to forward it to the competition regardless of what 'clauses" you place on that info.
Just proves what I have been saying for the last two years, that the EUC is biased, protectionist and corrupt.
Eff them and everything they stand for.
Re: So much for Confidentiality,...
The parcel was sent CID like COD like Cash on Delivery, Confidential Info Delivery requires an agreement signed in advance of the delivery of a sealed info-package. The intent of the EU is plain for all to see. This is your last chance. Comment or not, but keep your mouth shut.
Re: So much for Confidentiality,...
Really,... Who cares how the frikkin parcel was sent? The info was for the EUC! NOT FOR ANYONE ELSE!!
If I sign you to ANY form of confidentiality agreement, I would damn well hope that you don't hand off the details of a "PROPOSED" agreement to the "competition".
As this appears to be exactly what happened, how can anyone trust the EU Commission? This literally proves what I have been saying is spot on. The fix is in and Google should exercise it's options to shut off the EU from the click trough until there is a change in the commission.
And by the way, anytime you want someone to take your threats seriously, I would not make them in an open forum, especially one like El Reg.
You should be banned for bullying.....
Last chance my arse, you tosser!
Place your bets now!
Googles competitors still not happy with the latest proposals.
Seriously giving control of what's required to the competition is like letting Liverpool FC handle the transfers for Manchester United for a season. "Yeah uhm, we're selling rooney, and well, pretty much every good player they have for £50 a pop. And we're selling them some of our players for a few hundered million..."
Right now it is my honest opinion that google are in their current, leading position because they provide a superior service. There is no lock-in, there is no lock-out if you do not like google you're free to go to bing, yahoo, duckduckgo etc. If you don't like google maps you're free to go to bing maps, or streetmap, or any number of other mapping websites.
The fact that when you search for maps, google comes up top, followed by streetmap etc shouldn't play in to it. I don't walk in to a 3 store and see adverts for a vodaphone contract, I don't go into asda and get told "hey don't buy that booze here, tesco has it for half price right now" I don't go into the bank and have them say "well we could offer you a mortgage for 5.3%, but nationwide are offering a mortgage rate of 4.8%"
Are google in a dominant position? Yes they are
Are they abusing that position? No, if they were they'd stop google search from displaying bing / streetmaps at all, rather than just putting their own results near / at the top.
I mean seriously streetmap are complaining about losing market share because of google. Have you looked at streetmap lately? They're losing share because their site still operates based on the same stuff they had in the 90s. And how the hell can Microsoft even begin to complain? Everything they're accusing google of doing, they're also doing, only less successfully.
Sorry I know this has come out ranty but this has been gonig on for so long now it's like an endless torrent of BS. If it weren't for the fact that the EU paycheck (microsoft) were involved, they'd have probably canned the entire thing by now.
Re: Place your bets now!
"Sorry I know this has come out ranty but this has been gonig on for so long now it's like an endless torrent of BS."
No, doesn't make you ranty, it makes you look like an arse.
I have to say, I don't agree with Europe on this one, and im in Europe. The reason being that I honestly believe if any of Googles competitors offered a better product, people would already move to them. Nobody is forced to use Google's services and people already know about the competition, it's just that a very small number of people that know about it, choose to use it.
Im afraid you should not be told you can not advertise or market your own products in a prominent way. In the most prominent way even, of course you are going to, nobody advertises others products in their own backyard.
What is even more ridiculous, if you type maps into bing, the first most prominent result is Google Maps...so clearly they agree they are most relevant and sort after themselves.
All we are Binging .... is give Yahoo a chance.
(The one with the Google powered phone and fondleslab in the pockets.)
Surely, since it's the public that have (supposedly) lost out due to Google's actions, it should be the public who get consulted on this? Asking their competitors isn't going to get an unbiased opinion.
Every month or two I run a test using the exact same query in Google, Bing, and usually Yahoo. In every case over the last few years Google has provided the most useful results. In a few, Bing has been as good. Yahoo always has been at the back, and noticeably so. I avoid price comparison sites, having found them not very useful, and increased my aversion to them after one managed to become my browser startup page.
Distinguishing Google's ads from others and from genuine search results can only be a problem for the terminally inattentive. Constraints based on the pleas of rent-seeking whiners can only cause its utility to deteriorate. If, as I suspect, others can ignore the ads easily, it will not help them greatly in the end anyhow.
My suggestion to Google is that they flag entries that result from dictated algorithm changes as they identify paid content now.
> Distinguishing Google's ads from others and from genuine search results can only be a problem for the terminally inattentive.
I agree with you (hence upvote), except on mobile platforms. Google's search app has no highlighting, lowlighting or other distinguishing features on its "promotional" results.
The problem isn't getting good search results it is in getting unshaped results. If they carry on shaping my searches the way they do I may as well just look up stuff on my history and bookmarks and leave attempting to access the web alone.
I liked this quote though:
"Information is sought, in particular, from complainants in the ongoing proceedings and from all those who responded to the initial market test of Google's
proposals search for Information, in particular, from complainants which the Commission launched in April."
Just who is forced to use Google?
This post is required and must contain letters.
Re: Just who is forced to use Google?
Nobody, but nobody was forced to use IE6 beyond the diktats of their employers and that still rates half-informed jeers of "convicted monopolist".
- One HUNDRED FAMOUS LADIES exposed NUDE online
- Google flushes out users of old browsers by serving up CLUNKY, AGED version of search
- China: You, Microsoft. Office-Windows 'compatibility'. You have 20 days to explain
- Twitter: La la la, we have not heard of any NUDE JLaw, Upton SELFIES
- Apple to devs: NO slurping users' HEALTH for sale to Dark Powers