http://blogs.computerworld.com/obama_anti_trust_chief_google_is_a_monopoly_threat_not_microsoft

"The blogosphere regularly excoriates Microsoft for being a monopoly, but Google, not Microsoft, may be in the cross-hairs of the nation's next antitrust chief for monopolistic behavior.
...."

None of the two companies is a monopoly, they're just dominant.

"Monopoly = A situation in which a single company or group owns all or nearly all of the market for a given type of product or service. By definition, monopoly is characterized by an absence of competition – which often results in high prices and inferior products." (Investment Dictionary. Copyright ©2000, Investopedia.com)

Would Google search fit the "owning nearly all of a market" criterium? I I know that Yahoo etc. often shows up rather big in statistics (like Comscore), but if I take a (non-scientific) look at my search referrer stats, only Google is really crucial here. Just looking at one of my sites, Yahoo is at 2.4% of Google in the referrer stats. (Again, this is non-scientific, because my sites may use approaches that happen to be ranked lower in Yahoo etc. which would lower the Yahoo referrers, but still...) In Germany for instance, Google search is a near "monopoly" (not using legal term, I'm not a lawyer...) if you go by percentage.

Google search is a near monopoly, but Google search does not generate the revenue per say and is a free service. However, Google ads on the search results page and the rest of its' ads business would be the target.

However, honestly, I believe Microsoft is the bigger threat because it has monopolies in multiple areas. (Office products, Server Products, Operating System, etc)

In addition, Microsoft has shown that when it is given the chance it will screw you like a two dollar whore.

I think it's their practices that set them apart. Anyone disagree?