undefined | Better HN

0 pointsTheKarateKid7y ago0 comments

> Is this not just a classic example of HN looking for the negative in every positive?

A company single-handedly helping to save a direct competitor defies all business logic and obligations to shareholders of that company. The truth is this was a business move to benefit Microsoft, even though it had a benevolent factor to it.

Thinking otherwise is overly optimistic, similar to how you believe it being a classic example of HN pessimism.

0 comments

Gatsky7y ago

DuckDuckGo is hardly a competitor to Google. I struggle to think of some future scenario where Alphabet looks back and thinks "Damn, we never should have given DDG that domain name, it was all down hill from there!". No antitrust investigation is going to believe that this small action makes any difference to Google's total dominance of search.

jhall14687y ago

There is nothing illegal about a monopoly. A monopoly that uses it's position to prevent competition is illegal. Giving DDG a very valuable domain name (given their name) absolutely does what you're saying it doesn't.

Gatsky7y ago

How is not giving the domain name to DDG using their monopoly to suppress competitors? This is not equivalent to say, removing DDG from their search results.

2 more replies

mcbutterbunz7y ago

I agree in the case of Microsoft/Apple. In Google/DDG we're talking about transferring a domain name from one company to another, not saving a direct competitor.

johnfn7y ago

I accept that MS/Apple was a competitive move. I’m not sure I accept that duck.com is.

bitxbitxbitcoin7y ago

What you described does defy all business logic... except in the presence of regulatory externalities (anti-trust legislation) that causes the business move to be a net positive.

I don't think there's any optimism or pessimism to it, just rational actions.

Zanni7y ago

At the time, Microsoft made more on application software for every Mac sold than for every PC sold. Microsoft and Apple were competitors on operating systems, but not on applications, and Apple's Macs were a significant (though smaller) part of the market. The relationship between Apple and Microsoft was never as simple as just direct competitors.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsTheKarateKid7y ago0 comments

> Is this not just a classic example of HN looking for the negative in every positive?

Thinking otherwise is overly optimistic, similar to how you believe it being a classic example of HN pessimism.

0 comments

Gatsky7y ago

jhall14687y ago

Gatsky7y ago

How is not giving the domain name to DDG using their monopoly to suppress competitors? This is not equivalent to say, removing DDG from their search results.

2 more replies

mcbutterbunz7y ago

I agree in the case of Microsoft/Apple. In Google/DDG we're talking about transferring a domain name from one company to another, not saving a direct competitor.

johnfn7y ago

I accept that MS/Apple was a competitive move. I’m not sure I accept that duck.com is.

bitxbitxbitcoin7y ago

What you described does defy all business logic... except in the presence of regulatory externalities (anti-trust legislation) that causes the business move to be a net positive.

I don't think there's any optimism or pessimism to it, just rational actions.

Zanni7y ago

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse