

Google Deserves To Be Celebrated, Not Persecuted By Trustbusters - gibsonf1
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?secid=1502&status=article&id=329002707691108&secure=1&show=1&rss=1

======
zealog
It's unclear to me how a company that auctions off its only real product
(eyeballs to advertisers) can be an anti-competitive monopoly.

I will say that I firmly believe competition is a good thing and would love to
see competition for Google so they only get better. However, government
intervention here is not the way to do it. In fact, that has the opposite
effect by giving others the chance to succeed without earning it and dragging
down the market leader. Talk about lose-lose.

I certainly hope this article is really just jumping to conclusions and living
on hyperbole, but I doubt it.

------
ZeroGravitas
Quote: "Epstein is an analyst at the Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights."

You can guess the rest from that and the title.

------
pragmatic
The same could have been said about MSFT. Without standardization on the
desktop, we would have had a tower of Babel effect (like cell phones today)
with specialized apps and hardware vendor lock in.

It's a double edged sword. However, where desktops OSes and Uitlities provide
a natural monopoly, does the same apply to search engines?

Search engines are easy to switch. I can go use Bing right now if I want to.
So I find it hard to believe that Google is a monopoly in the way MSFT is/was
or like my local gas company.

It's way too easy to switch search engines.

