Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 9th May 2008 11:11 UTC
Google Last week, when Microsoft's attempt at buying Yahoo stranded, Steve Ballmer specifically mentioned Google, and how a possible deal between Google and Yahoo would limit choice and competition in the marketplace. Google explained yesterday how it would fend off possible antritrust concerns following an ad-sharing deal with Yahoo. In addtion, Google noted the irony in Microsoft's complaints.
Permalink for comment 313593
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Thom_Holwerda
Member since:
2005-06-29

If you prefer another definition, that is fine with me. I don't really care that much about hammering out the definition of monopoly.


I can very well call OSNews a butterfly, stating I don't want to hammer out the definition of butterfly, but that still doesn't mean OSNews magically becomes a butterfly.

Look, Google is a monopoly because it owns 53.6% of the online search market share. End of story. I know monopoly has a negative sound to it, and that's probably the reason why people don't want to call Google as such - since everybody loves Google and wants to hug and kiss it.

I do care about whether Google's position is anti-competitive or not. I do not see evidence that it is.


That's a whole different story. If that's what you mean, then say so, instead of coming up with new definitions or disregarding accepted ones. Personally, I don't really care. At this point, Google is the best search engine there is, and that's why I use it. If someone else comes along, and does search better than Google, I'll be the first to jump ship.

I *really* couldn't care less.

Edited 2008-05-09 14:01 UTC

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 1