> having a huge market share.

Marketshare alone isn't a defining part of if a product is a monopoly.

> majority of browers are directly branded chrome

They're not Chrome, in many extremely important aspects.

> The choices of users don't change whether something is a monopoly

The fact users can make a choice is a huge part of the argument that Chrome isn't a monopoly. There are lots of competitors out there that can be freely chosen. So much so people have to go out of their way to install Chrome.

When AT&T was ruled a monopoly it was practically the only choice in many markets. When Standard Oil was ruled a monopoly it was practically the only choice in many markets. People can choose Edge. People can choose Safari. People can choose Firefox. All of these browsers work fine (I've yet to be told a single other major feature they're missing despite asking many times), and are not Chrome.

Lay's sells like 60% or so of the chips sold in the US. Are they a monopoly? Are you practically unable to buy any other chips at the store outside of Lays products? I guess it's not really just marketshare that makes the difference! So just pointing at them and saying they're a monopoly because they have a large marketshare is meaningless.

▲

Dylan16807 an hour ago | parent [-]

> Marketshare alone isn't a defining part of if a product is a monopoly.

Yes it is. You're thinking of something else.

> The fact users can make a choice is a huge part of the argument that Chrome isn't a monopoly.

That argument is wrong.

It's size and market power. If users could change but don't, the monopoly company still has huge power.

> Lay's sells like 60% or so of the chips sold in the US. Are they a monopoly?

They're at least close, yeah.

▲

vel0city an hour ago | parent [-]

> It's size and market power

Finally one states something other than its a monopoly because it has market share or because its advertised heavily. Its a monopoly because it allegedly has market power. But does it, really?

> If users could change but don't, the monopoly company still has huge power.

Is it that it has power or just that its currently popular?

I once again ask, what features actually force me to use Chrome over the other products on the market? If there are none, how does it actually have "market power"? What truly makes me use Chrome over the others? The fact its highly advertised?

Market power is usually defined as "a firm's ability to profitably raise prices above the competitive level (marginal cost) without losing significant sales to competitors." Clearly we're not talking about prices here, practically all the prices are free here. So we're talking other kinds of featuresets. What is this market power, other than users like it? I've asked many times, and yet everyone has refused to answer this core, critical part of the claim.

If people can make a choice for a competitor's product that's priced the exact same and has essentially the same feature set, how does Chrome have "market power"?

I pointed out WebUSB. For a bit pretty much only Chrome supported it. Is that really market power that's pushing everyone to use Chrome? What other things are actually giving it that immense market power you claim?

▲

Dylan16807 an hour ago | parent [-]

> I've asked many times, and yet everyone has refused to answer this core, critical part of the claim.

It's a core, critical part of a monopoly abuse claim, not a monopoly claim. I don't want to get in that argument.

They don't have some weird ultra low market power for their size. They're a monopoly.

	▲	33 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		[deleted]