> 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.

> 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?