Hitwise provides more proof of Google's search dominance

Don't call Google's search business a monopoly, the company's executives have reminded us.

Unfortunately, we're running out of other ways to describe it. Researchers at Hitwise released new data Monday indicating that Google in July topped a 70 percent share of U.S. Web searches (70.77 percent to be exact). That's up 10 percent from the same month a year ago and 2 percent from the previous month. Yahoo search was second at 18.65 percent, MSN search was third at 5.36 percent, and Ask.com came in fourth at 3.53 percent.

At 70 percent, Google is joining a club of tech giants that really know how to dominate a market, including Cisco Systems in routers, Intel in chips, and Microsoft in a whole bunch of stuff.

Now before I get e-mails from Google's lawyers, let's add these caveats: There's probably no magic number at which trustbusters decide a company must be brought to heel. But with increasing dominance, comes increasing scrutiny by folks in Washington.

A few weeks ago, my colleague Charles Cooper discussed the "M" issue with Google's general counsel, Kent Walker, and Dana Wagner, the company's U.S. competition counsel. Their take, not surprisingly, is that it's inappropriate to compare Google's search dominance to IBM's mainframe business in the 1960s or Microsoft in the 1990s.

"The nature of the Internet is just a fundamentally different world from the sale of packaged software or the bundling of software with OEMs (original equipment manufacturers)," Walker said. (It's a terrific audio interview that's worth listening.) "The standard line we have is that competition is just one click away."

Maybe so. But that competition is starting to look mighty small by comparison.

[limefan913]

They're right. Entirely. If I didn't like Google, I could switch every single product by them I use to another company in no time at all. Quite literally. No more Google search, use Yahoo's homepage, Yahoo or Live Mail (hah), Yahoo Maps or MapQuest etc. The thing is, I use these services because they provide more functionality to me.

Search isn't a vital function to the entire world of computing. The OS the machines run on is. Google is a huge company, yes. Could I ever be forced to use their services? No. You can't bundle a search engine with a computer.

Get real folks. Google is winning because they did something right. If Yahoo search was as functional and accurate, I'd switch. I haven't because there is clearly something I don't like. Don't blame Google, blame the 3 runners up.

[dydy1414]

I completely agree. It is a person's choice to use Google and maybe if other search engines did a better job, more people would be going to their sites to search the web.

[walletless]

I would say that google is not a monopoly, but they are pretty close. How many companies do you come across, that FORCES its employee to use Google search engine and nothing else? I would say very few, if not none.

On the other hand, there are a *LOT* of companies that will force its employee to use Windows, Office, etc. In that sense, MS has a lot of grip on the market, and it is difficult to switch away from their products. One can switch from Google to anything else without upsetting their employers.

[Nith84]

Google dominance as a search engine does not make it a monopoly. They just do it better than others. While all the other google services (maps, mail, stock quotes etc) are a saparate entity and we should not include those when talking about google being a search giant. But even with these google provides a solid, reliable service. I use google almost exclusively for searching but on the other hand my preffered web mail is still Hotmail. I use google maps because MapQuest does not update their maps properly and is more difficult to search.

But if we talk specifically search engine wise Google is simply the best. They came up with a great idea how to rank their searches and patented it. Now they rake in the profits. Is this monopolising or just making money from an idea.

On the same note why is Apple not being investigated for monopolizing the mp3 player market. I am sure they hold about the same statistics when it comes to iPod vs all other players.

[jackdaniels08]

DEAR CNET, here is the definition of 'monopoly'.
1) (economics) a market in which there are many buyers but only one seller; "a monopoly on silver"; "when you have a monopoly you can ask any price ...

2) exclusive control or possession of something; "They have no monopoly on intelligence"

None of those match Google. It takes very little brain power to distinguish the difference between a monopoly and dominance. I would think that the total amount of brainpower at CNET would at least be able to recognize the distinguish between the two terms and not dilute the meaning of what monopoly is because that definition is a serious matter which can distinguish between what is lawful versus what is unlawful in a free market and Google does practice and believe in free market and democracy to the letter of the law where individual people have a God given right to choose at their own free will so any insinuation of monopoly or any snide contempt you have to smear Google is more then just a cheap shot by CNET but could call for serious reprimands against CNET.

[jackdaniels08]

OH BY THE WAY, if more and more people increasingly by market percentage really just want to use and prefer Google by choice like myself, is the government going to start to FORCE people to use other unpreferred inferior second rate search engines? WHAT! Give me a break!

[benjaminstraight]

What's new.