PARIS, FRANCE – JUNE 08: In this photo illustration, Google app logos, Drive, YouTube, Gmail, Chrome, Google and Google Maps are displayed on the screen of an iPhone on June 08, 2023 in Paris, France. Users of the Google Chrome search engine are advised to update the software on their web browser as soon as possible to ensure their security. The American giant has just released a security update to correct a computer flaw representing a high risk for Internet users. This is the third time since the beginning of the year that Google has spotted a “zero day” flaw, that is to say, a computer flaw not directly resolved, a favorite prey of hackers.(Photo illustration by Chesnot/Getty Images)
Getty Images
Antitrust is always and everywhere a look backwards. It would be difficult to find more powerful evidence of this truth than the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) thankfully concluded attacks on Google for the success of its Chrome browser.
To grasp the profound foolishness of it all, readers need only conduct a search on Google while reading this opinion piece. It would reveal a totally different, and plainly evolving search experience.
Getting at least somewhat specific, the search bar itself has changed on Google to reflect the changing nature of search. It’s now essentially “two lines” to reflect the fact that how individuals interact with their computers (“computer” itself a dated word) is increasingly at odds with how people formerly used their various devices.
Thinking about this, the DOJ first targeted Google for its Chrome browser in November of 2024, which is itself instructive. To see why, readers need only contemplate the nature of a search on Chrome in 2024 versus one in May of 2026. To say that there’s a substantial difference between the two insults understatement.
Of course, what’s driven the difference is that the DOJ never had a case. Since human interaction with computers and all manner of other devices is a frontier-free concept, there’s no way to ever credibly decree “dominance.” Change is too quick, and it’s too quick because everyone in the technology space is aware that stasis of any kind is the rapid path to obsolescence.
The DOJ claimed that thanks to Chrome, Google enjoyed an unfair monopoly. But if true, it would also be true that a visit to Chrome today would be no different from one in 2024. Which is not remotely the case.
Which means the DOJ’s case against Google was the modern, sporting equivalent of the powers-that-be in the NFL harassing the New England Patriots for unfair monopolization of the League during the Tom Brady era. Brady, like Chrome, was brilliant, but sports continues to evolve as does technology.
Essential as Chrome was to users, what made it great was its usefulness. Just the same, what makes it great in ongoing ways is that Google is acting like the opposite of a monopoly as it works feverishly to constantly improve the user experience.
Which is the point about a two-line search bar on the path to searches that don’t remotely resemble the ones from 2024, and realistically not even the ones from early 2026. Stasis is yet again a killer, and the latter explains the persistently evolutionary experience of a visit to Google.com. Crucial here is that the previous truth isn’t about to change.
Think Google Gemini. As you’re reading this, Google’s AI has moved past 1 billion users. Soon enough the previous number will be small if Google continues to innovate. With it, expect Chrome to recede more and more in the public’s collective mind as feverish competition drives Google’s ongoing evolution. For now, Gemini is yet another reminder that antitrust is always and everywhere a look backwards.
Looking ahead, however, there’s sadly more to come. While Google no longer faces forced divestiture of Chrome, it suffers ongoing antitrust enforcement for its success in digital advertising.
One can only hope that the quaint nature of the DOJ’s former attack on Chrome informs restraint. Precisely because competition in the AI space is so substantive, it’s only a matter of time before advertising reflects this truth. Which means antitrust attacks on Google’s falsely presumed digital ad monopoly will soon look as silly as the attacks it suffered for Chrome’s immense popularity.