How disappointing but expected. I'm not even sure what would break googles search engine dominance outside of search engines becoming obsolete. I use DDG and I find it to be better than google but still so many people stand by google search with strong loyalty.
I very much dislike Google but constantly search stuff on DDG, with little to no success. Then I’ll add !g to the front, and a decent chunk of the time what I’m looking for is top 3, not including all the sponsored shit.
Are there specific ways you search for DDG to be better?
I've had the exact opposite experience for the past year. I had to switch the default to DDG at work where I need to search for specific model numbers every day. I don't remember the last time I actually Googled something on the PC or phone (Firefox search bar with DDG default). I only use Google for maps where it's always been the best.
The only time I ever need to use a google bang is when im searching for something specifically local like a restaurant. DDG uses apple maps and apple maps is complete garbage.
When I cant find something on DDG and I use the !g 99% of the time I cant find it on google either.
It really seems to depend on the topic. I would say, on average DDG is better from my experience. However, when it doesn't work it really doesn't work. Google usually has something you want fairly early in the results.
I moved to DDG because I felt Google results were getting worse. You would search for something specific and instead just get varying degrees of the same article on different sites about it instead.
Then I felt DDG was getting worse in just not always getting what was related, so I've moved to qwant.
Other than not always getting geo-related results, the results have been the best I've seen in a while so I've stuck around for now.
Barring them from offering exclusive deals, which allows competitors to get in the mix at places like Mozilla.
I did not come up with this idea, this was one of the remedies the Judge chose. @Squiddork@lemmy.world Telling them to drop Chrome was just flashy talk.
I dont think that would help because chrome would offer good by default and apple would offer chrome by default for the "best experience" and they dont need the money. Then alternative browsers with an already low market share would get paid less to offer other search engines. Its risky to ship a non google search by default.
You think other companies would provide sideloading like samsung, and oneplus? They would lock the OS hard and make it difficult to even unlock. Making android more closed than before.
They need to maintain compatibility with play services to access apps on play store.
Also, starting with OnUI 8 bootloader unlocking is no longer supported. On OxugenOS 16 its only allowed with restrictions. The hardening is already started.
Samsung blocks installing apps outside Playstore if you enable their advanced blocker mode. Xiaomi also warns and shows a pop-up for 10-30s preventing it.
Pixel's advanced protection mode does the same.
Also, when i metioned that I was talking about OEMs forking android and making it harder to use per your needs. Which would mean modifying android which could mean failing some CTS tests for play services. Boot loader unlocking is already on the verge of being killed. Installing apps and other things you currently do on your android could be next if OEMs were allowed free reign.
I received quite a few responses about apps when I wanted to Highlight the bootloader unlocking, custom ROMs, root, etc. I guess my comment was not too clear.
With reports of Elon Musk eying to buy Chrome or OpenAI… sorry but I believe this was the best outcome, what we need is people using more Firefox that is one of the few non-Chromium browser out there.
Was that anything more than just rumors? Letting a currently monopolistic company keep the browser because another bad billionaire might buy it and do something bad with it just prevents anything from changing.
Who would buy a browser for billions and billions of dollars? Just see who has this amount of money and how aggressive they would need to be to get return of investment.
But he did...bar the search giant from making exclusive deals to distribute its search or AI assistant products in ways that might cut off distribution for rivals.
edit: seems like that hasn't changed by this ruling either
United States District Judge Amit Mehta has ruled that Google can continue to pay other companies, including browser makers like Mozilla, to be their default search engine.
In return for Google being the default search engine in Firefox, Mozilla is expected to bank $400M+ a year.
Literally what I am talking about. I can still switch away from the default. No other search companies are being denied access to being set as the default search engine in Firefox. Google just pays a premium so they are the default out of the box, which would not be anti-competitive under this order.
bar the search giant from making exclusive deals to distribute its search or AI assistant products in ways that might cut off distribution for rivals.
This by definition does not cut off their distribution in Firefox. Google can still make this deal with Mozilla. It is not an exclusivity deal, it's a default search engine deal. Exclusivity or cutting off distribution would be making Google the only search engine option in Firefox.
United States District Judge Amit Mehta has ruled that Google can continue to pay other companies, including browser makers like Mozilla, to be their default search engine.
I see, I'll edit my other comment. So what even changes then, were they even making exclusive deals in the past? The discussion I remember was about how being the default made it difficult for others to compete since most people don't change the defaults.
I'm on ecosia with okay search results. Sadly if I know it exists but still having problems I resist to Google but Supposedly ecosia plants trees with some of the revenue
I mean, of all the things to cut off of them, Chrome made the least sense to me. It's not a profitable part of the business, it would just die if spun off. The only reason Firefox is alive is because Google is funding them. Plus changing what browser you use is much easier than some of the other monopolies they have (Android, ads, YouTube).
57 Comments
Squiddork@lemmy.world · 269 pts · 359d
So they found Google guilty of monopolistic practices then agreed to do nothing about it.
Sounds about right.
FenrirIII@lemmy.world · 28 pts · 358d
Welcome to the capitalistic oligarchy!
TimewornTraveler@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 4 pts · 358d
it's not even close to being over yet
kerntucky@infosec.pub · 1 pts · 357d
Auth@lemmy.world · 117 pts · 359d
How disappointing but expected. I'm not even sure what would break googles search engine dominance outside of search engines becoming obsolete. I use DDG and I find it to be better than google but still so many people stand by google search with strong loyalty.
ifItWasUpToMe@lemmy.ca · 20 pts · 359d
I very much dislike Google but constantly search stuff on DDG, with little to no success. Then I’ll add !g to the front, and a decent chunk of the time what I’m looking for is top 3, not including all the sponsored shit.
Are there specific ways you search for DDG to be better?
Lag@lemmy.world · 24 pts · 358d
I've had the exact opposite experience for the past year. I had to switch the default to DDG at work where I need to search for specific model numbers every day. I don't remember the last time I actually Googled something on the PC or phone (Firefox search bar with DDG default). I only use Google for maps where it's always been the best.
Auth@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 358d
The only time I ever need to use a google bang is when im searching for something specifically local like a restaurant. DDG uses apple maps and apple maps is complete garbage.
When I cant find something on DDG and I use the !g 99% of the time I cant find it on google either.
ifItWasUpToMe@lemmy.ca · 4 pts · 358d
Funny how experiences can be so different. I find Apple Maps much better than Google maps.
Auth@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 358d
Exactly why the freedom for users to choose between different software is so important :)
Scolding7300@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 358d
blinfabian@feddit.nl · 3 pts · 358d
i use ecosia, it works :3
ifItWasUpToMe@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 358d
Never heard of it! I’ll check it out
kerntucky@infosec.pub · 2 pts · 357d
Cethin@lemmy.zip · 3 pts · 358d
It really seems to depend on the topic. I would say, on average DDG is better from my experience. However, when it doesn't work it really doesn't work. Google usually has something you want fairly early in the results.
MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 357d
I moved to DDG because I felt Google results were getting worse. You would search for something specific and instead just get varying degrees of the same article on different sites about it instead.
Then I felt DDG was getting worse in just not always getting what was related, so I've moved to qwant.
Other than not always getting geo-related results, the results have been the best I've seen in a while so I've stuck around for now.
someguy3@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 358d
Same. Ddg can't find shit.
muntedcrocodile@hilariouschaos.com · 8 pts · 359d
I'm on searxng and find most of the good results come from google
fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com · 4 pts · 358d
Barring them from offering exclusive deals, which allows competitors to get in the mix at places like Mozilla.
I did not come up with this idea, this was one of the remedies the Judge chose. @Squiddork@lemmy.world Telling them to drop Chrome was just flashy talk.
Auth@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 358d
I dont think that would help because chrome would offer good by default and apple would offer chrome by default for the "best experience" and they dont need the money. Then alternative browsers with an already low market share would get paid less to offer other search engines. Its risky to ship a non google search by default.
fodor@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 358d
DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works · 106 pts · 359d
Google should lose control of Android. Maybe then we'll keep the ability to install any app we want.
interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml · 36 pts · 359d
Google should be disconnected and erase from the internet like any other worm/virus
limerod@reddthat.com · 9 pts · 358d
You think other companies would provide sideloading like samsung, and oneplus? They would lock the OS hard and make it difficult to even unlock. Making android more closed than before.
Ghoelian@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 6 pts · 358d
Well then why aren't they doing so now? They're already maintaining their own forks of android, should be pretty trivial to do.
limerod@reddthat.com · 8 pts · 358d
They need to maintain compatibility with play services to access apps on play store.
Also, starting with OnUI 8 bootloader unlocking is no longer supported. On OxugenOS 16 its only allowed with restrictions. The hardening is already started.
WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 358d
allowing 3rd party app installs is not required for play services
limerod@reddthat.com · 3 pts · 357d
I never said it was. Not sure what you mean.
WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 357d
you said this:
but that does not explain why don't they already block installing 3rd party apps. they don't need to allows this to oeep access to the play store.
limerod@reddthat.com · 1 pts · 357d
Samsung blocks installing apps outside Playstore if you enable their advanced blocker mode. Xiaomi also warns and shows a pop-up for 10-30s preventing it.
Pixel's advanced protection mode does the same.
Also, when i metioned that I was talking about OEMs forking android and making it harder to use per your needs. Which would mean modifying android which could mean failing some CTS tests for play services. Boot loader unlocking is already on the verge of being killed. Installing apps and other things you currently do on your android could be next if OEMs were allowed free reign.
I received quite a few responses about apps when I wanted to Highlight the bootloader unlocking, custom ROMs, root, etc. I guess my comment was not too clear.
Goodlucksil@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 3 pts · 358d
I highly doubt AOSP can't mantain itself, and that manufacturers could build from it and do whatever.
lordbritishbusiness@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 358d
It'd probably take some sort of Linux Foundation style arrangement with manufacturers supporting a neutral team built from Google's Android division.
captainlezbian@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 352d
Google needs the AT&T treatment. And while we're at it give AT&T the AT&T treatment
db2@lemmy.world · 79 pts · 359d
Completely expected. Google paid the protection money.
interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml · 7 pts · 359d
That's it ? Usually these things go into appeal over and over but google just has to win once ?
Stovetop@lemmy.world · 30 pts · 358d
kerntucky@infosec.pub · 2 pts · 357d
DarkSideOfTheMoon@lemmy.world · 48 pts · 358d
With reports of Elon Musk eying to buy Chrome or OpenAI… sorry but I believe this was the best outcome, what we need is people using more Firefox that is one of the few non-Chromium browser out there.
ATPA9@feddit.org · 15 pts · 358d
Yeah, i had the same thoughts. The current chrome is better than the "Hitlerdidnothingwrong AI-First" browser those goons would have cooked up...
chaospatterns@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 357d
Was that anything more than just rumors? Letting a currently monopolistic company keep the browser because another bad billionaire might buy it and do something bad with it just prevents anything from changing.
DarkSideOfTheMoon@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 356d
Who would buy a browser for billions and billions of dollars? Just see who has this amount of money and how aggressive they would need to be to get return of investment.
black_flag@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 45 pts · 359d
Oh boy there goes Firefox
SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 10 pts · 359d
Nah its just the default search engine and you can still change the default, thus not cutting off distribution of other engines.
otter@lemmy.ca · 25 pts · 359d
I think they're referring to Firefox's funding, a lot of which was through search deals
An article from 5 years ago: https://www.pcmag.com/news/mozilla-signs-lucrative-3-year-google-search-deal-for-firefox
edit: seems like that hasn't changed by this ruling either
https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2025/09/google-antitrust-ruling-firefox-search-deal
SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 12 pts · 359d
From the article you linked:
Literally what I am talking about. I can still switch away from the default. No other search companies are being denied access to being set as the default search engine in Firefox. Google just pays a premium so they are the default out of the box, which would not be anti-competitive under this order.
This by definition does not cut off their distribution in Firefox. Google can still make this deal with Mozilla. It is not an exclusivity deal, it's a default search engine deal. Exclusivity or cutting off distribution would be making Google the only search engine option in Firefox.
otter@lemmy.ca · 11 pts · 359d
https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2025/09/google-antitrust-ruling-firefox-search-deal
I see, I'll edit my other comment. So what even changes then, were they even making exclusive deals in the past? The discussion I remember was about how being the default made it difficult for others to compete since most people don't change the defaults.
Ghoelian@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 6 pts · 358d
I think that was mainly solved (here in the EU at least) by requiring a choice of search engine when first opening a browser.
kilgore_trout@feddit.it · 2 pts · 357d
I don't remember this being enforced.
monogram@feddit.nl · 3 pts · 358d
black_flag@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 358d
Thank you for clarifying.
ozymandias117@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 359d
KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml · 39 pts · 358d
I see the checks to Trump cleared!
Zedd_Prophecy@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 358d
You are spot on.
Tortellinius@lemmy.world · 28 pts · 358d
Who cares about chrome? Of all the things Chrome is the easiest to replace. Android is the real deal.
magguzu@lemmy.ml · 18 pts · 358d
The problem is Chromium.
Tortellinius@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 357d
How would they lose Chromium when it's only about Chrome?
clot27@lemmy.zip · 19 pts · 358d
No one saw that coming
theneverfox@pawb.social · 13 pts · 358d
Fuuuuck.
Korkki@lemmy.ml · 9 pts · 359d
So they have to give away search data?
Is there an antitrust on android or appstore ongoing?
altphoto@lemmy.today · 9 pts · 358d
Just don't do it again mmmkay?
Mad__vegan@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 359d
I'm on ecosia with okay search results. Sadly if I know it exists but still having problems I resist to Google but Supposedly ecosia plants trees with some of the revenue
UltraBlack@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 358d
Ecosia uses google, no?
kilgore_trout@feddit.it · 1 pts · 357d
Microsoft Bing.
Redex68@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 356d
I mean, of all the things to cut off of them, Chrome made the least sense to me. It's not a profitable part of the business, it would just die if spun off. The only reason Firefox is alive is because Google is funding them. Plus changing what browser you use is much easier than some of the other monopolies they have (Android, ads, YouTube).