Google: We're not pushing our gear over rivals

Antitrust probe told everything is a search result


Eric Schmidt claimed in a letter to the US Senate's antitrust subcommittee that Google's huge array of web properties are not "separate products and services" offered by the company.

The Chocolate Factory's chairman made that assertion in a follow-up missive to questions lobbed at him during his testimony to on Capitol Hill in September this year.

[W]hat is crucial to understand is that universal search results are not separate 'products and services' from Google.

Rather, the incorporation of thematic and conventional results in universal search reflects Google’s effort to connect users to the information that is most responsive to their queries.

Because of this, the question of whether we 'favor' our 'products and services' is based on an inaccurate premise.

These universal search results are our search service — they are not some separate 'Google content' that can be 'favored'.

Schmidt added that so-called "oneboxes" that give web surfers direct answers when making certain queries was not unique to Google's service. He pointed out that Microsoft's Bing search engine displayed "similar 'oneboxes' prominently in their results as well".

Throughout the letter, the one-time Google CEO repeatedly contended that the company doesn't make separate products because each new offering has universal search results built in.

But convincing Congress to accept Schmidt's argument might prove difficult, given that Google consistently talks up new offerings as products and services, sometimes without even bothering to place universal search results front-and-centre from the start.

Google+ is a good example here. The world's largest ad broker only inserted search into that "product" after debuting it for a limited test field that just so happened to have, according to Google, millions of users signed up at launch.

Many have argued that Google+ is simply Mountain View's response to Facebook. Of course, execs at both companies have recently played down the idea that their products are social networks. Both outfits increasingly consider those properties as platforms. Which is a grand way of saying, "come pay and play on our flash online real estate".

Indeed, Google wonk Bradley Horowitz recently said that Google+ was simply an extension of Google's search engine. Arguably, though – in light of Schmidt's testimony in September and subsequent letter to the Senate late last Friday – he would say that, wouldn't he?

“We think of Google+ as a mode of usage of Google, a way of lighting up your Google experience as opposed to a new product. It’s something that takes time to appreciate, even internally," Horowitz told Venture Beat a day before Schmidt's letter landed on the antitrust subcommittee's desk.

"It’s easy to think of Google+ as something other than just Google, and I think it’ll take more launches before the world catches up with this understanding.”

Schmidt, elsewhere in his follow-up letter to the Senate, claimed that Google was not "dominant" in the online search business.

He argued that many of his company's rivals aren't just search engines. Schmidt said that social networks and mobile apps also posed a significant threat to Google's search estate.

"So inferring that Google is in any way 'dominant' would be incorrect," he concluded.

Schmidt said that social search had "become a serious competitor in helping people find ... answers online."

He added that Cupertino was becoming a more formidable rival in the search biz.

Apple’s Siri is a significant development — a voice-activated means of accessing answers through iPhones that demonstrates the innovations in search.

The tech industry is one of the most competitive and dynamic spaces in the entire economy, with small companies as well as larger companies competing hard against each other in lots of areas.

Google has many strong competitors and we sometimes fail to anticipate the competitive threat posed by new methods of accessing information.

We compete against a broader array of companies than most people realise, including general search engines (Microsoft’s Bing, Yahoo!), specialised search engines (Kayak, Amazon, WebMD, eBay), social networks (Facebook, Twitter), commercial software companies (Apple, Microsoft), mobile apps, and even direct navigation.

The Internet is incredibly competitive, and new forms of accessing information are being utilised every day.

Fairsearch.org, a Microsoft-backed organisation that was founded to persuade the US Department of Justice to block Google's proposed purchase of ITA Software, said Schmidt had "thumbed his nose at Senators' concerns about how Google exploits its monopoly power in its business practices".

The group argued that: "Schmidt may be chairman of one of the most powerful companies in the world, but he cannot simply make facts and evidence of Google’s pattern of anti-competitive business practices disappear by denying their existence." ®


Other stories you might like

  • Robotics and 5G to spur growth of SoC industry – report
    Big OEMs hogging production and COVID causing supply issues

    The system-on-chip (SoC) side of the semiconductor industry is poised for growth between now and 2026, when it's predicted to be worth $6.85 billion, according to an analyst's report. 

    Chances are good that there's an SoC-powered device within arm's reach of you: the tiny integrated circuits contain everything needed for a basic computer, leading to their proliferation in mobile, IoT and smart devices. 

    The report predicting the growth comes from advisory biz Technavio, which looked at a long list of companies in the SoC market. Vendors it analyzed include Apple, Broadcom, Intel, Nvidia, TSMC, Toshiba, and more. The company predicts that much of the growth between now and 2026 will stem primarily from robotics and 5G. 

    Continue reading
  • Deepfake attacks can easily trick live facial recognition systems online
    Plus: Next PyTorch release will support Apple GPUs so devs can train neural networks on their own laptops

    In brief Miscreants can easily steal someone else's identity by tricking live facial recognition software using deepfakes, according to a new report.

    Sensity AI, a startup focused on tackling identity fraud, carried out a series of pretend attacks. Engineers scanned the image of someone from an ID card, and mapped their likeness onto another person's face. Sensity then tested whether they could breach live facial recognition systems by tricking them into believing the pretend attacker is a real user.

    So-called "liveness tests" try to authenticate identities in real-time, relying on images or video streams from cameras like face recognition used to unlock mobile phones, for example. Nine out of ten vendors failed Sensity's live deepfake attacks.

    Continue reading
  • Lonestar plans to put datacenters in the Moon's lava tubes
    How? Founder tells The Register 'Robots… lots of robots'

    Imagine a future where racks of computer servers hum quietly in darkness below the surface of the Moon.

    Here is where some of the most important data is stored, to be left untouched for as long as can be. The idea sounds like something from science-fiction, but one startup that recently emerged from stealth is trying to turn it into a reality. Lonestar Data Holdings has a unique mission unlike any other cloud provider: to build datacenters on the Moon backing up the world's data.

    "It's inconceivable to me that we are keeping our most precious assets, our knowledge and our data, on Earth, where we're setting off bombs and burning things," Christopher Stott, founder and CEO of Lonestar, told The Register. "We need to put our assets in place off our planet, where we can keep it safe."

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022