Hacker News Reader

> If it isn’t, Google could simply release a new browser based on Chromium

Wouldn't any legal separation of Google and Chrome require that they split of all required resources as well? I would hope that there are fines for trying to just move the Chrome trademark to an empty shell company and call it a day. Also without Chrome there is no chromium, the only relevant distinction between those two is the trademark.

Not to mention Widevine, which every new browser or Chromium fork effectively needs to license from Google. If the regulators forget about that one that would be a big omission.

Had to search for this but yes, widevine is tremendously valuable.

Chrome would need to pay Google an extraordinary amount to continue to be the default browser on Android.

Would they need to pay Google or would they need to pay Samsung? While we're breaking things up, maybe Android should not mandate any default browser.

Chrome isn't the default browser on Samsung phones. Samsung ships their own browser.

So your idea of Android mandating default browser is false. These comments are for some reason full of this misinformation. Why?

Sorry, I have a Samsung phone but I must have changed the browser without remembering it. This just reinforces my point that the phone vendors are in control, not Google.

The only benefit to chrome running on Android is that Google paying them to use Google and maybe provide tracking. So it doesn't make sense to give back the same amount as other than Google's(or some other company's) money, chrome wouldn't want to be in Android in first place.

> Now Android has all the negotiating power. It can create its own browser based on Chromium and charge Google an exorbitant fee for being the default search engine.

Android is code, which anybody can use for free. Making it into a separate entity would cause it to instantly go bankrupt because nobody would have any reason to pay them for anything. Even if they changed the license, everybody would just use the free version from last week and Android Corporation would have no money with which to make improvements, so there would be no improvements for them to charge anything for. Anybody who wanted to try to do this could already fork Android and do it right now; notice the lack of takers.

The reason Samsung et al don't charge Google to be the default browser on their phones already is Google Play Services. So what they really need to separate from the search engine company isn't Android, it's Google Play. Though, of course, if they did that, the search engine company might lose interest in funding Android development.

> Android is code..

Actually, the situation is exactly the same for Chrome/Chromium:

Chrome is code, which anybody can use for free. Making it into a separate entity would cause it to instantly go bankrupt because nobody would have any reason to pay them for anything. Even if they changed the license, everybody would just use the free version from last week and Chrome Corporation would have no money with which to make improvements, so there would be no improvements for them to charge anything for. Anybody who wanted to try to do this could already fork Chrome and do it right now; notice the (non-)lack of takers.

I would assume that Play Store and Play Services would be part of Android Inc. in any breakup and thus Android would be profitable.

Maybe. Though I suspect one of the big reasons that nobody tries too hard to eat Google Play's lunch is that they're backstopped by Google's resources, so if you actually started to succeed, Google would just pour money into crushing you until you were suitably crushed.

If they were separated from unlimited resources, it would no longer be a Sisyphean task to reimplement everything they do, and then others may sense weakness and make the attempt.

Though really that could be the best thing to happen. Let Android Corporation fail, we don't need it anyway, meanwhile everybody else reimplements Google Play Services as part of the open source project, and then Google Play evaporates and there are multiple competing stores from Samsung and Valve and Amazon and Debian that anybody can use on any Android device. And Android gets developed in the same way as the Linux kernel.

Phone vendor app stores exist, ad do 3rd party app stores.

But nobody uses them because Google has market power.

I don’t see the problem? The point in breaking up Chrome and Google is that there isn’t one default browser owned by Google. Whatever breaks up Chrome and Google will prevent Google from making any browser.

>I don’t see the problem?

Is this a question or statement?

Chrome is only valuable because it is intertwined with Google properties. Outside of Google, with proprietary code removed, it is nothing more than a skinned Chromium and we have plenty of those already.

this is brilliant -> On the other hand, Chrome is nothing without promotion on google properties and being installed by default on Android. Chrome would need to pay Google an extraordinary amount to continue to be the default browser on Android. Maybe even the same amount as what Google would pay Chrome to be the default search engine provider.

Chicken? Egg?