The internet will stay the same, only the players will change.
The worst person you know finally made a great point. Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt was on CNBC and said the quiet part out loud:
“Breaking up these companies is not going to fundamentally address the annoyance you have with them.”
He was talking about the news that the Justice Department may ask a judge to force Google to sell off its Chrome browser and he's absolutely right. Breaking up Google may benefit other tech companies, but nothing will change for you and me.
The reason why isn't hard to figure out; simply look at which companies would be both willing and able to buy Chrome from Google. Do you think Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk is going to treat you and your data any better than Google does? Will either somehow make the web a better place if they suddenly own the world's most popular browser?
I don't think it's going to happen, and after Google has exhausted every appeal and tried every trick it can think of, it will have plenty of things on its plate that it hates. But selling Chrome (or Android, or its cloud platform, or any other of its "big" products) won't be one of them. Even if selling Chrome would help consumers, it hinges on finding a buyer who can face the regulatory scrutiny that Google is now facing. None of them can, or at least none of them should be able to. Big Tech is equally evil, and Meta is no better than Apple, which is no better than Microsoft.
With no buyer, the only other option would be to force Google to shut down Chrome, and that's downright un-American. Nope. Can't do it, won't do it. Remember, you think tech CEOs are fighting the good fight against Washington, but in reality, they're calling president-elect Trump to congratulate him. The posturing and feel-good social media posts are to draw your attention away from the donations and camaraderie.
In a perfect world, getting rid of Chrome could be great. It would open the way for a company with no ties to ads or operating systems to lead the charge, and we all could use Firefox and be treated a little better. In the real world, Firefox is still going to die a slow death without Google's money, while Chrome will still be around, sucking in everything it can in order to manipulate and monetize you regardless of what name is on the company letterhead.
It's my opinion that forcing Google to stop investing in Chrome actually does plenty of harm to consumers. Google spends so much money and time on Chrome's open codebase — which powers almost every WebKit browser — because it makes so much in return. Chrome is an avenue to data, and data is an avenue to effective advertisements. It's just like Android, and to Google, spending money on a free product is an investment in its ad business. No other company will do this, and names like Opera, Brave, Samsung Internet Browser, and even Microsoft Edge will pay the price for it.
People use Chrome for one reason — its integration with Google's other products. You don't (well, shouldn't) use Chrome if you want a fast and resource-friendly web browser that doesn't spy on you like a dirty old man with a pair of binoculars. You use it because it works seamlessly with all the other stuff you use, like Gmail, Google Docs, or Google Pay. This cohesion is something every other tech company dreams about, and only Apple can come close for people who only use an iPhone. For better or worse, the web belongs to Google.
Selling Chrome or making Google syndicate search results won't change any of that. It will allow other companies to make more money, but for consumers, nothing is going to change no matter how Alphabet gets carved up because all tech companies have the same goals.
For me, it's nice to see Google on the hot seat because the company does so many terrible things. I just think the people who run companies like Google are smarter than the people going after them and will always win in the end.