Yes, Google has a near-monopoly, but selling Chrome won’t make things better
Google’s Chrome browser is dominant; not like Google’s search engine is, but on 67% market share, according to Stat Counter, it sits comfortably atop competitors like Safari, Edge, and Opera, which are mostly fighting over scraps.
For the US government, and that is the case now calls for the breakup of Google By selling Chrome and perhaps Android, what matters isn’t so much market share, but how Chrome serves as a powerful fulcrum for Google’s other interests, the most important of which is maximizing ad revenue.
Here’s how it works. Chrome is a web browser like Safari and others, but it is also a search engine interface. The default search engine when Chrome comes on your desktop or smartphone is, of course, Google. Nowadays, few people just type websites into the address bar of their browser (supposedly because we were supposed to enter in it only the ‘address’ or URL of our desired website). Now we use our browser’s address bars as prompt fields. That’s right; Long before the advent of AI, we typed fully formed sentences and invariably received clever answers from Google’s powerful search engine.
I’ve argued here and elsewhere that Google’s search dominance comes from quality, not coercion.
That’s not all we got. When I type, “Where can I find the best mattresses?” in my Chrome address bar, Google Search immediately returns a page of results. ‘Sponsored’ links, by my estimate, account for 95% of results on desktop web pages. I have to scroll down to perhaps the fourth result to see some suggestions from The New York Times.
Google gets paid for those ads; and virtually every time you search, Google takes a cut for every result with ads. When Google doesn’t serve partner ads, it serves ads in search results and across millions of websites through its own Doubleclick ad network. It’s a system that swaps out countless unsold inventory (pages where a specific advertiser has not chosen to sponsor the site or page) and then fills it to the highest bidding advertiser. Google gets paid here too (just like publishers).
Everything from Google
Even if you don’t use Chrome, Google Search is ubiquitous. The search company pays Apple up to $20 billion a year to be the default search engine in Safari’s address bar.
If you own an Android phone, Chrome is often the default browser, or at least comes pre-installed, and virtually all phones also have Google Discover, which you can usually find by swiping right on your Android homepage. This feed is full of news and advertisements, with Google again getting paid for the latter.
Google’s reach and perhaps control are undeniable. Is it a monopoly? A US federal judge said yes in August. I’ve argued here and elsewhere that Google’s search dominance comes from quality, not coercion. Google entered a crowded search market and later a browser market dominated mainly by Microsoft and Internet Explorer. None of these competitors rolled over. Google simply did better.
Technology has a habit of picking winners and losers. It is also the nature of the beast to demand standards and uniformity. If there were twenty operating systems on our desktops and mobile phones, developers would struggle and probably fail to support them all. In fact, they wouldn’t; and they, along with consumers, would soon pick the winners and losers.
Google is in control
Google is not blameless here. It’s hard to deny the power and control that a dominant market share gives you, and while consumers may initially choose a laptop manufacturer and a platform, ultimately it’s the tech companies like Google that lead and make decisions for us. They choose how the platforms will work and which third-party systems they want to invite. They’re the ones connecting the dots at the back – and that too is a deliberate decision that’s usually hidden from our view.
Chrome isn’t just a web browser; it is an ecosystem, a platform within the platforms on which we live and work. I manage multiple email accounts, edit documents in Google Docs, manage my photo library, post to social media, and lately have AI conversations all within Chrome, with every action and interaction passing by Google’s unblinking eye.
I’m not complaining. Google Search is still the best search engine in the industry, and Chrome is an excellent browser that is finally getting to grips with its massive resource issues. It still deserves its place on my desktop.
Will I be served by someone else who owns Chrome and then send the code in a different direction, perhaps away from tight integration with the Google corpus? I don’t think so. I know Google definitely doesn’t think that. In a briefly formulated response on the DoJ’s letter proposing the break, Kent Walker, Google & Alphabet President, Global Affairs & Chief Legal Officer, wrote:
“The DoJ’s approach would result in unprecedented government overreach that would harm American consumers, developers and small businesses – and endanger America’s global economic and technological leadership at precisely the time it is needed most is.”
He added that this would hinder access to Google Search, compromise consumer privacy and harm Google’s investments in AI.
Disable Google
Google is about to radically reimagine our search with deeper integration of AI summaries, Gemini-powered generative results that could soon overtake traditional Google search results. Again, since Chrome is our de facto search prompt window, shifting the browser to another company means it could be any AI that returns a result.
Google’s AI is not necessarily the best yet, but it is in a strong competitive position compared to, for example, OpenAI and ChatGPT. I like how these companies push each other. A Google breakup won’t help the race, nor will it put the US in a better position relative to the rest of the world when it comes to AI development.
Ultimately, I don’t want anyone to take Google Search out of my Chrome either. It’s a marriage I love, and a marriage that works for me and, I think, for billions of others. Taking them apart may make Google seem less of a monopoly, but it won’t improve anyone’s lives. I’d prefer the DoJ and others focus on Google’s advertising activities and SEO controls – there may be more sensible solutions for that.
I don’t know what will happen next. Google is now being labeled a monopoly, and the DoJ is calling for a breakup that could even include Android. But the X-factor here is that we are about to see a new administration in the White House, and changes at the top of the DOJ. These changes could mean stopping this initiative or accelerating it; it could go either way, and your guess is as good as mine. Maybe ask Google Chrome. I’m sure it has the answers.