But that has nothing to do with the part of the article that my comment is about.

Well, on second reading, you're right. He does slip in there next to Microsoft Windows that you somehow have to use Google Search because everyone else does, and doesn't explain how that supports the rest of his article. I don't think that's the main thrust of it, though.

> unfairly

I am as skeptical as anyone about giant corporations, but this is a stretch. How and why does our society expect players to refrain from using their current position to advance to a better position?

Because it hurts our society if they do. It's not about expecting, it's about limiting the damage they do.

It does not hurt society if they're providing a superior product / value proposition for the consumer, regardless of bundling or self-promotion.

So you plan to stay in the same job for life, turning down any better offers you get?

You should ask Bill Gates about that.

You mean the guy that had the audacity to include a web browser with an operating system? Good thing we shut that sort of thinking down, no telling how much the tech industry would have been hurt if we hadn't prevented that sort of practice.

Although Microsoft was sued for browsers and APIs, their true anti-competitive behavior lied elsewhere - pricing strategies. They will probably do it again too. I can't wait for all the surprised faces "but, but, but... windows had 3% market share".