This week, our trial with the Department of Justice and State Attorneys General came to an end. After 10 weeks, the evidence confirms what we’ve said all along: People have many choices when searching for information online, and they use Google because it’s helpful.
Throughout the trial, we heard testimony on the many ways Google constantly innovates in Search to create a better experience for our users. As our VP of Search Quality, Pandu Nayak, said on the stand, “there’s no sense that Search has ever been good enough.” That’s why we invest billions in R&D every year and have pioneered advancements in machine learning and artificial intelligence. By comparison, Microsoft’s CEO Satya Nadella confirmed that Microsoft’s “failure to make capital expenditures to support its search business” was not because they lacked the resources, and that in 2018, Google Search’s engineering team was five times bigger than Bing’s. And DuckDuckGo’s CEO testified that it has distributed capital to shareholders several times, rather than investing in improving its search engine.
Our former VP of Search, Ben Gomes, testified that in 2007, our founders instructed a “mobile-only” approach to innovating and improving Search. The Court heard how this was a gamble, since mobile queries were a small fraction of total queries and the vast majority of searches still occurred on desktop. Google’s investments and innovations to advance mobile computing and Search on mobile devices — including the launch of the open-source Android operating system and the Android mobile application distribution and revenue share agreements — made us the most attractive partner to mobile device makers like Samsung. As our CEO Sundar Pichai testified, these companies wanted to give their users “essential out-of-the-box functionality.” By contrast, a Microsoft executive testified that they did not even launch a mobile browser until 2017 and failed in various efforts to develop a competitive mobile platform.