Just some historical context for the anti-competitive behaviors that Microsoft refined and perfected into an art:

Obfuscated code to prevent Windows 3.1 from running on competing MS-DOS systems like DR-DOS. Microsoft VP internal memo:

    > What the [user] is supposed to do is feel uncomfortable,
    > and when he has bugs, suspect that the problem is DR-DOS
    > and then go out to buy MS-DOS."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AARD_code

Licenses and threats that prevented Hitachi from pre-installing BeOS on in a dual boot configuration with MS-Windows. From the Be complaint:

    > Hitachi eventually explained that the terms of its license 
    > with Microsoft prohibited preinstallation of another operating 
    > system in a dual-boot configuration.  Hitachi also
    > revealed that after it notified Microsoft of its intention to 
    > preinstall BeOS, Microsoft sent two U.S. managers to Japan who 
    > expressed their “anger” with Hitachi over its arrangement with 
    > Be, and “reminded” Hitachi of the terms of its Windows 
    > license."

http://www.beincorporated.com/msft_complaint.pdf

An explicit strategy of "embrace, extend, extinguish":

    > [Former Intel exec Peter] McGeady also testified to MS's 
    > professed strategy of "embrace, extend, extinguish." MS
    > planned to "extend" the HTML standard to the point where it
    > would be incompatible with the Netscape browser and then to 
    > encourage developers to use the MS HTML such that web pages 
    > couldn't be read with Netscape's browser.

http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/msdoj/transcript/summaries2.htm...

I could go on, but you get the idea. Compared to these, "Google makes it too hard for us to index YouTube" sounds pretty tame in comparison.