Linked by David Adams on Thu 25th Feb 2010 04:19 UTC
Google My colleague Thom wrote an excellent evaluation of the European antitrust investigation of Google yesterday. I agree with much of what Thom says in his article, including the statements that the investigation isn't surprising and that it's fishy that the complaining companies have ties to Microsoft. What I don't agree with is the offhanded comment that Google has "pretty much a monopoly in search." There was a lively discussion on this point in the comments, but I thought that rather than join the fray there, I'd exercise my monopoly power and put my thoughts into an editorial.
Permalink for comment 410962
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Disagree
by ahmetaa on Thu 25th Feb 2010 09:59 UTC in reply to "Disagree"
Member since:

I obviously disagree with this.

... This idea is wrong: even perfectly legal barriers to entry, such as the technical superiority Google undoubtedly has over its competitors, is a barrier to entry. The mindshare among people is a barrier to entry. The sheer imposing popularity of Google is a barrier to entry.

Huge majority marketshare? Check. Barriers to entry? Check. Yup, sounds like a monopoly to me.

So you are saying "you are technologically advanced so your products are better, therefore you are a monopoly". i disagree with you because it is nonsense.

But What happened to MS about IE was also wrong. MS should have been punished because they delibreately abused their marketshare by making web software works only in their browser-OS, not because you cannot uninstall the browser form the OS.

Edited 2010-02-25 10:02 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2