> their dominate market power in search to push their own, worse products.

This is the central problem. Yes, Google use market dominance to push their products. But by and large their products were also better. Gmail was better than Yahoo/Hotmail. Chrome was better than Firefox/IE. Maps better than MapQuest. Android was better than what non-Apple phone makers were using.

Just like Microsoft did in the 80s/90s, Google has created some awesome products. At some point, it stops being worth it to compete and way easier to leverage existing strengths. For example, any product that relies on Adwords sales, Google can bid infinitely high and take the top spot. Or in the case of search, just putting their widgets in at the top like they've done for flights. It stops being about creating a better product and only about creating a winning product. Competition is really hard and risky. Owning your competitor's sales channel and then pushing them out is so much easier. Google now seems to be crossing this line.

How did that work out? 20 years later MS still has the same share of PC operating systems and approximately the same share of the office productivity space.

It seems to have worked well. I doubt you're using Internet Explorer to respond to me.

The antitrust case was about bundling Internet Explorer with Windows. It was called the Browser Wars and related to preventing Netscape from competing. The result is pretty obvious. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor....

It was also about operating systems and productivity software.

Now instead of having an operating system vendor with 80% market share now we have an ad vendor. Win????

Meet the new boss....

Those investigations were closed. Maybe it's more of a failure of the legal system than anything. The one thing that sticked actually seemed to work in the long run.

Isn't this whole conversation around Google being a monopoly? Yes, a new boss and hopefully a new antitrust case. Hopefully more sticks this time.

How did an antitrust lawsuit that ended in 2002, lead to MS losing browser market share a decade later? Even if you do count that as a victory - it was still only 1 out of 3 areas that the government went after MS for. Since when was 33% score considered a success?

And the largest anti trust lawsuit before that in technology was IBM. It started in 1969 and it was dismissed in 1983 and nothing came of it.

Maybe the government is just incapable of understanding let alone regulating tech?