Android users in Europe will be asked which browser and search engine they want

https://www.blog.google/around-the-globe/google-europe/supporting-choice-and-competition-europe/

by _jgvg • 7 years ago

155 109 7 years ago

shkkmo• 7 years ago

Why just Europe?

Pharmakon• 7 years ago

Because the EU has a history of at least pretending to care about consumer rights, and (more) aggressively going after anti-competitive practices?

Mirioron8• 7 years ago

Yeah, and this pretending comes at the annoyance of the end-user.

snthd• 7 years ago

It's a move to appease the European Commission.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-google-android-idUSKCN...

Google could be fined up to 5 percent of Alphabet’s average daily worldwide turnover if it fails to comply with the EU order to stop anti-competitive practices.

roasm2• 7 years ago

Non-European here. Does iOS have to do the same thing?

sigzero• 7 years ago

Probably not since Apple doesn't license iOS to anyone else and solely controls it.

snrji• 7 years ago

Therefore, if Google and all the Android OEMs merged, no antitrust action would be taken with regards to Android apps. Is that correct?

roasm2• 7 years ago

Does that matter? I would think it would have to do with market share more than any licensing. iOS has ~28% share in the EU.

http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/europe

saagarjha2• 7 years ago

This seems like it would be interesting, given that Google reportedly pays Apple billions of dollars to remain the default on iOS.

azernik• 7 years ago

Definitely not for search engine, since Apple isn't a potential monopolist in that market. Possibly not for browser either, depending on how popular EU competition authorities think a browser/OS pairing needs to be before looking askance at the cross-promotion.

jdietrich3• 7 years ago

No, because Apple do not have a dominant position in the smartphone market within the EU. Google pay Apple billions of dollars a year to make Google the default search engine on iOS devices, which was a significant factor in the European Commission's ruling against Google.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_competition_law...

http://fortune.com/2018/09/29/google-apple-safari-search-eng...

scarejunba• 7 years ago

Oh Christ. I wish I could just express "give me your version" as a setting on some universal identity service and they'd leave me alone.

sanxiyn• 7 years ago

A great day for consumer choice. US should do the same. (They did for Microsoft!)

jwr• 7 years ago

Fat chance, with the amount of lobbying in Washington DC by Google.

cronix• 7 years ago

Sure, we'll allow you to change that stuff!! (thank goodness they didn't ask what the OS itself is collecting)

qwerty4561272• 7 years ago

Probably as useful as the cookie warning law.

If this meant the Google stuff was not going to be installed if you choose different and the device was still going to be fully functional (you could still install apps from the store) that would be something but I doubt this is the case.

By the way, why do they use the Chinese《一》character instead of hyphens?

boulos• 7 years ago

By the way, why do they use the Chinese《一》character instead of hyphens?

Are you sure that’s not an emdash?

zapzupnz3• 7 years ago

Copy and paste the character then run it through a search engine, is definitely the Chinese/Japanese character for 'one'.

jjjjjjjjjjjjjjj• 7 years ago

I thought so too, but for some reason they're actually using cjk unified ideograph 4e00, 一 which is the Chinese (also used in Japanese) character for 1...

zapzupnz3• 7 years ago

It's more like when Microsoft was forced to offer a choice of web browser with certain versions of Windows sold in Europe, less in line with the cookie thing.

qwerty4561272• 7 years ago

Sure, but I classify these in the same cohort - yet another nagscreen that can probably do some tiny good but is hardly going to do significant.

rstuart41332• 7 years ago

It's amusing to see Microsoft managed to turn that law to their advantage.

Before that law came in I could install and use an alternative browser with a minimum of fuss. After, Microsoft insisted they were required by law to display a couple of dialogues telling me their browser was the best in the word, and forcing me to acknowledge each one.

The irony is only people who were going to install an alternative browser anyway got to see those warnings multiple times. I very much doubt it had any effect on anybody who continued to use Microsoft's offering.

lostmsu• 7 years ago

I like their title

Supporting choice and competition in Europe

Like it was their initiative!

jake_the_third• 7 years ago

And only in the EU...

Hey Google, how about supporting choice and competition in the rest of the world?

aboutruby• 7 years ago

On Android phones, you’ve always been able to install any search engine or browser you want, irrespective of what came pre-installed on the phone when you bought it.

cough cough cough, that google search bar in the home screen by default is pretty Google Search specific.

0815test• 7 years ago

It's integrated in the launcher, which is a replaceable part of the system. Just pick a launcher that doesn't have it, or makes it optional.

acct1771• 7 years ago

Your parents: "Wait...say that again?"

staticassertion2• 7 years ago

Are launchers fully replaceable now? I remember years back you could run another launcher but the default launcher process would still execute and remain in the background. Not really a 0 cost choice at that point - especially when phones had weak hardware.

danShumway• 7 years ago

You're getting downvoted for trivializing the user confusion around replacing it, but when I first got Android I did want to get rid of it, and originally didn't know how.

So this is potentially useful information if you've gotten to this point in the thread and are suddenly saying, "wait, I can remove that?"

mythz2• 7 years ago

we’ve always agreed on one thing一that healthy, thriving markets are in everyone’s interest.

We're so much in agreement that we're only going to trial that healthy, thriving market in the EU - where we're legally obligated to.

freedomben• 7 years ago

Haha agreed. I'm generally not in favor of regulation, but sadly this does seem to show that it can be effective. Google could have done this before but chose not to. Clearly they don't really believe their own PR, or else they'd institute it worldwide.

mancerayder• 7 years ago

I believe they call it, as for forgiveness rather than ask for permission. It's funny how fines can sometimes act on that philosophy in ethical ways.

quest88• 7 years ago

Maybe to legally force Apple into a similar pattern? I don't know the details of the law.

angott3• 7 years ago

Apple is not affected by most of these rulings as they only apply to firms that control the majority of a given market (the goal of these laws is to impact potential monopolists, not smaller actors). Apple is not considered to have majority market share in smartphones because iOS represents only 20% of the market, as opposed to Android which is ubiquitous.

Mirioron8• 7 years ago

That's because it's going to cause frustration in users. I guarantee it.

kerng• 7 years ago

Customers in Europe are used to these choices, it was the same with Microsoft and Windows and their browser.

flukus• 7 years ago

If they're worried about users being confused then they can automatically install a random browser and save users the imposition of selecting one. I think the EU would be cool with that.

slim• 7 years ago

Operating an Android phone for the first time involves going through a wizard for setting up things like language, timezones, wifi, etc.. one more screen in that wizard does not add any frustration

mikorym• 7 years ago

That's because it's going to cause frustration in users. I guarantee it.

Which users, exactly?

The ones who don't know what chrome is other than "my google"? Or even, "my internet"?

kgwxd• 7 years ago

Yeah, when they realize they could have been using a browser with extension support, like FF with uBO, and have been needlessly tortured using Chrome for years.

mtgx• 7 years ago

We also agree so much with a healthy and competitive market that we're still going to appeal all of EC's anti-trust rulings against us.

rk404• 7 years ago

I wish Google would take a page from Apple's book and be more forceful with their public responses to this stuff.

Basically like Apple saying that they invest in their products and Spotify just wants a free ride (which I agree with) Google has an even better case as they also let users sideload apps and change defaults.

Barrin922• 7 years ago

Basically like Apple saying that they invest in their products and Spotify just wants a free ride (which I agree with)

nobody's going to use a phone that isn't supported by applications. In fact every application provided by developers to the apple ecosystem increases the marginal value of the phone. In what world is that free riding? And why would anyone support this egregious behaviour of giant companies commanding around the rest of the market?

sam0x173• 7 years ago

In what world is that free riding?

In the world where there exists a platform where paid software on that platform gets 30% of its revenue automatically sucked out just by virtue of existing on that platform

ViViDboarder2• 7 years ago

Commission for marketing and/or maintaining a platform for sale is not uncommon... They’ve got a store, and if you’d like to sell there then you have to pay a commission.

My real issue is that there is no alternative. You can’t opt out and use a different store.

jdietrich3• 7 years ago

Google has an even better case as they also let users sideload apps and change defaults.

Google already lost their case; they were fined $5bn.

https://www.npr.org/2018/07/18/630030673/eu-hits-google-with...

Smithalicious• 7 years ago

So what's the point? You could always install a different browser and search engine, and that really isn't so difficult that an average user couldn't figure it out. I'm all for combating anticompetitive practices but this really doesn't look like one. This just gives me a "users are idiots" vibe.

angott3• 7 years ago

that really isn't so difficult that an average user couldn't figure it out [...] This just gives me a "users are idiots" vibe

It's not a matter of difficulty, but rather a matter of awareness. Based on my experience from friends and family, I have reason to believe there is a significant chunk of Android users who don't know they can use an alternative default browser. Most people just click on the Chrome icon that comes built-in at the bottom of their home screen, and that's all for them. It's not the average HN user we are talking about, obviously...

Mirioron8• 7 years ago

Yes, and now that average user goes: why can't I use the internet on my phone? It gives me this stupid pop up and I don't know how. Please fix it.

euyyn3• 7 years ago

Last LG I bought came with some vanilla non-Chrome browser preinstalled. I don't know if from AOSP or from LG themselves. Has that changed in the last years? If not, how does this affect companies like LG?

mythz2• 7 years ago

Defaults matter. Users don't change defaults unless they have a good reason to, and statistically they don't.

ViViDboarder2• 7 years ago

If it didn’t matter, Google wouldn’t pay so much to be the default search engine everywhere.

lern_too_spel2• 7 years ago

It's the same as the browser choice system that Microsoft had to implement. I have no doubt that it helped Firefox and then Chrome gain market share. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BrowserChoice.eu

krageon3• 7 years ago

Given the amount of trouble a new phone will already give a user, I sincerely doubt the average user wants to spend a lot of time figuring out what the alternatives actually are and how to get them. They want a phone that works right, and they should have a choice about what that means. That's what these laws should be giving them.

Theodores• 7 years ago

"Which interface to the Webkit/Blink browser technology do you want?"

"Which provider of Google Search results do you want?"

I will cheekily assume Microsoft are still craftily getting Google search queries into Bing somehow. And that Duck Duck Go, Ecosia, Yahoo and everything else are dipping into the Google goodness.

The EU should build their own search engine and browser. That is what is happening in places like Russia and China where they don't want to be reliant on Silicon Valley.

It seems silly to be not view information search and presentation of web pages as a strategic thing in this day and age, particularly when there is Five Eyes snooping in.

saagarjha2• 7 years ago

I will cheekily assume Microsoft are still craftily getting Google search queries into Bing somehow. And that Duck Duck Go, Ecosia, Yahoo and everything else are dipping into the Google goodness.

What?

sam0x173• 7 years ago

He is saying that non-google search engines are just repackaging google search results because no one actually has the resources to build a search engine anymore. Bing was already caught doing this like 10 years back if I remember correctly, and while I doubt Bing still does this, I bet a number of the smaller players do.

It's as easy as setting up a lambda with headless chromium and then integrating those results into whatever internal results your system has (if any) on the fly. Google is fast enough that this could be done without any perceptible performance impact, and that's ignoring the possibility of massive caching of common searches. It will look like normal web traffic to google, and the lambda network will result in a diversity of IP addresses, so it might never get flagged.

reubenmorais• 7 years ago

“Which interface to the Webkit/Blink browser technology do you want?"

Firefox for Android uses Gecko, not Webkit/Blink.

teddyfrozevelt• 7 years ago

Gecko exists, and DuckDuckGo doesn’t use Google, so it’s not like you have no real options.

angott3• 7 years ago

It will be interesting to see how the different browser choices will be presented. If the EU commission pushes for browsers to be featured with a few lines of text and not just an icon (like they did back in the days with MSFT), it could be a significant problem for Google.

Example: Mozilla would be able to advertise that Firefox provides ad-blocking, as opposed to Chrome which doesn't. This has the potential to hurt mobile advertising revenue significantly.

minxomat• 7 years ago

Listing unique benefits was how the old msft implementation worked: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BrowserChoice.eu

bfrog• 7 years ago

I can only read so much horse manure in one sitting, bravo google, bravo

Mikeb85• 7 years ago

Just an anecdote here, but I use Google and Chrome on Linux, where it's not default, as well as Android.

DeonPenny• 7 years ago

Doesn't this subvert googles entire reason for building Android. Shouldn't they just start charging in europe to use the software there? Like is would incentivize them to push updates for europe

callahad• 7 years ago

The cynic in me is worried that Google taking its ball and going home: if Chrome can't be the default, then nobody can.

I'm excited for increased choice, but Google is starting this race from a position backed by a decade of anti-competitive licensing agreements around Android. From the press release, this move seems designed to preserve that lead by preventing other vendors from offering meaningful defaults.

I'd be especially curious to hear from the Samsung Internet team, as the press release states that Google will be "asking users of existing and new Android devices" which browser they would like to use.

billpg• 7 years ago

How do I get my browser on the list?

(And it totally is a browser and not some keylogger and bitcoin miner with a copy of lynx on top.)

Android users in Europe will be asked which browser and search engine they want

Related Stories