back to article Rivals attack Google's antitrust search settlement deal with EC

The European Commission's competition boss Joaquin Almunia - whose term of office comes to an end in November - insisted today that it was unnecessary to request a further market test from Google's rivals over its alleged abuse of dominance in search. It came after Brussels' vice president confirmed that his office was working …


This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. sabroni Silver badge

    Oh No!

    Not another Googlehatefest! How will they cope?

  2. Big_Ted


    Just what I expected.....

  3. NotWorkAdmin

    Without reading the case notes

    It would seem the only way G could really quantify why any one result appeared above any other in their SERPs would be to release full details of their algorythm. If they did do that, they'd have to either go out of business, or write a new algorythm. It's probably safe enough to assume none of those is an option.

  4. Callam McMillan

    Sour grapes

    This seems like a stupid decision made for stupid reasons. Unlike Microsoft for instance (Windows/IE/Bing as standard), you're not forced to use Google's search product by default (Android phones excepted admittedly). So I cannot see how there is a competition issue for the other companies to bitch about? The closest thing I can compare it to is Tesco moaning that Asda wont stock Tesco Baked Beans...

    Looking at other tech companies, the dominant player tends to become bloated and fairly static, allowing more nimble companies to lead the innovation and overtake it. I think the complainents have become upset that Google is still innovating and there is nothing they can do about it!

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Sour grapes

      I think a better comparison would be a private firm running directory enquiries and always answering with their own companies or the companies of people who pay them when people ask for a local Pizza restaurant etc.

      Yes, in Google's case people can go elsewhere, but they don't because they don't know that they're missing something as they do get a result. The problem is indirect as the ones who suffer are the businesses Google pushes further down the list who are not getting the custom they would normally enjoy if there was a level playing field.

  5. Paul Ry

    Can't compete? Cry!

    Can't compete? So apply political pressure. It is unfair competition if these changes are not applied equally across all search engines.

    A monopoly is where there is exclusivity, which Google does not have. The company and its services are just popular because they offer what people want. People choose to use Google over the once very popular Yahoo! or Microsoft's Bing. The fact is, Microsoft has been in a position to be number one, if their services and algorithm were as good. Default browser, default search engine in said browser, but a poor user experience.

    It's amazing the number of people I have seen using Internet Explorer's search, default to Bing, to find Google and then conduct their search with it. (Sounds odd, I know, but these are largely non-technical people, i.e. the largest audience.)

    These companies need to focus on their products and (potential) audience more, less on crying like babies.

  6. ratfox Silver badge

    Almunia's comments

    "I know what you said last time, I know you're going to say the same thing again, and I'm not impressed"

  7. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

    Bing sucks. Fix it or fuck off, Microsoft.

    1. Callam McMillan

      Succinctly put. Well done!

      Personally I'd prefer they did the latter, but then there would be less competition for Google which means that more shit would come there way in the form of the competition lot.

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019