Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 9th May 2008 11:11 UTC
Last week, when Microsoft's attempt at buying Yahoo stranded, Steve Ballmer specifically mentioned Google, and how a possible deal between Google and Yahoo would limit choice and competition in the marketplace. Google explained yesterday how it would fend off possible antritrust concerns following an ad-sharing deal with Yahoo. In addtion, Google noted the irony in Microsoft's complaints.
Thread beginning with comment 313593
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: I note the irony of google complaining about com
by sbergman27 on Fri 9th May 2008 14:09
in reply to "RE[6]: I note the irony of google complaining about com"
Member since:2005-07-24
That's a whole different story. If that's what you mean, then say so,
But I *am* saying so. I thought that my original post was clear enough when I posted it. Your post alerted me to the fact that not everyone defines monopoly in the same way, so I clarified my intent.
If I may make an observation... sometimes it seems that no matter how careful one tries to be in posting here on OSNews, somebody always wants to turn it into a fight. I don't see the utility in that. I know that you say that you don't really care, but the tone of your words suggests otherwise. Or perhaps I am just misinterpreting the tone.
Edited 2008-05-09 14:10 UTC
RE[8]: I note the irony of google complaining about com
by Thom_Holwerda on Fri 9th May 2008 14:16
in reply to "RE[7]: I note the irony of google complaining about com"
Member since:2005-06-29
It's not about fighting, it's about using the proper terminology. Google_ninja stated that Google are a monopoly, and you said they weren't, because they do not abuse their position. I replied stating that abuse-or-not is irrelevant to the question whether somebody has a monopoly or not.
There's nothing about fighting in there. I'm just trying to explain that a company can hold a monopoly without abusing that position. That's all.
RE[7]: I note the irony of google complaining about com
by sanctus on Fri 9th May 2008 14:28
in reply to "RE[6]: I note the irony of google complaining about com"
Member since:2005-08-31
According to wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly):
The term monopoly (from Greek monos , alone or single + polein , to sell) can bear two main definitions:
1. In Economics, monopoly (also "Pure monopoly") exists when a specific individual or enterprise has sufficient control over a particular product or service to determine significantly the terms on which other individuals shall have access to it. [1] Monopolies are thus characterized by a lack of economic competition for the good or service that they provide and a lack of viable substitute goods. [2]
Where does it talk about percentage?
I seriously don't see how google fit this definition.
RE[7]: I note the irony of google complaining about com
by apoclypse on Fri 9th May 2008 20:06
in reply to "RE[6]: I note the irony of google complaining about com"
Member since:2007-02-17
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2005-06-29
I can very well call OSNews a butterfly, stating I don't want to hammer out the definition of butterfly, but that still doesn't mean OSNews magically becomes a butterfly.
Look, Google is a monopoly because it owns 53.6% of the online search market share. End of story. I know monopoly has a negative sound to it, and that's probably the reason why people don't want to call Google as such - since everybody loves Google and wants to hug and kiss it.
That's a whole different story. If that's what you mean, then say so, instead of coming up with new definitions or disregarding accepted ones. Personally, I don't really care. At this point, Google is the best search engine there is, and that's why I use it. If someone else comes along, and does search better than Google, I'll be the first to jump ship.
I *really* couldn't care less.
Edited 2008-05-09 14:01 UTC