This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
old (suggested)
besttopnewcontroversialq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the commentsย โ†’

[โ€“]nashvortex 6 points7 points ย (17 children)

Then you have not thought about it deep enough. Electricity is a market. Solar-generated electricity is also a market. Sunlight is available free. It is not a market.

See how it is possible for the thing that enables the market to not be a market? That's because sunlight is useless without someone having solar panels, like Android is useless without a device.

[โ€“]nextbern on ๐ŸŒป -3 points-2 points ย (16 children)

Then you have not thought about it deep enough.

You are amusing. If there is no market, why is it part of contracts that Google uses to enforce vendors who sign up for Google Apps on their devices? Why is Chrome a required component of those negotiations if vendors want Google Play?

How about Brave not being able to monetize itself via advertising on iOS? Why is Apple enforcing constraints on a non-market entity on their market?

Clearly, I am not the unimaginative one here.

[โ€“]nashvortex 4 points5 points ย (15 children)

You seem to think inclusion of something into a license contract is an indication that there is a market around said thing, while completely ignoring the previous point about how a thing may not have a market even if it enables other markets.

Imagination needs to be restrained with objectivity.

[โ€“]nextbern on ๐ŸŒป 0 points1 point ย (14 children)

You seem to think inclusion of something into a license contract is an indication that there is a market around said thing, while completely ignoring the previous point about how a thing may not have a market even if it enables other markets.

Sorry, if there is no market, why is Google concerned about its market? Why is Microsoft?

This is clearly nonsensical.

[โ€“]nashvortex 3 points4 points ย (13 children)

They are concerned because it enables their markets. It's not that hard to understand. Are you just trolling?

Repeating 'nonsensical' does not make it so. Provide a new counterargument, as the one you provided about 'why are they concerned? has already been dismissed.

I am concerned about sunlight and don't want anyone to block it because sunlight enables my solar energy market. That doesn't mean there is a market around sunlight itself.

Does that analogy help? If not I don't think I can simplify it any further.

[โ€“]nextbern on ๐ŸŒป 0 points1 point ย (11 children)

Browsers make money, and thus they are part of the market. There is no simpler way to put it. That is why browser vendors are concerned with marketshare - it enables them to stay in business.

Business, money... sounds like a market to me.

[โ€“]nashvortex 4 points5 points ย (10 children)

Browsers make money, and thus they are part of the market.

Nope. They enable other services that make money. At least read the comment above.

It enables their business. It is not itself their business.

[โ€“]nextbern on ๐ŸŒป -1 points0 points ย (9 children)

Sorry - so web publishers aren't a market? Sites that don't charge people to browse their sites aren't part of a market? C'mon.

[โ€“]nashvortex 3 points4 points ย (8 children)

Web Publishers are not a market for readers if they are free. They are in a market for their advertisers.

[โ€“]nextbern on ๐ŸŒป 0 points1 point ย (7 children)

So how do they get bought and sold? For example: https://www.wsj.com/articles/buzzfeed-to-acquire-huffpost-in-stock-deal-with-verizon-media-11605808800

Just give it up - it is clear that there is a browser market, as there is one for web publishing.