I think monopoly is not the right term, but I don't know the correct one.
They control a huge share of one market, and they use it to force their way into another in an unfair way (Microsoft: windows to push edge and keep making it default and making it harder and harder and scarier to switch, and now using edge to push their own web services; Google: gmail & co to push chrome, ...).
One would argue "if it's not a monopoly is it not legal ?" but that's sort of my point, if it's illegal it should be punished, if it's currently legal it should be regulated.
We cannot keep treating browsers like a regular piece of software when they're becoming more and more like an utility. I sort of feel the same way toward OSes, but browsers are even more important.
Which mean there is still time to stop their abuse in Windows, unlike last time with internet explorer when we reacted too late.
Changing browsers went from a simple and smooth experience in 7/8, to one with roadblocks and warning in 10, to one that's absurdely abusive in 11, all to push Edge forward.
In this case Microsoft is using Bing Chat to promote Edge use, but Bing Chat doesn't have anything close to a dominant position so it's hard for me to see an argument that this isn't allowed under US anti-trust (or that it should be prohibited).
Only realistic outcome from this would be Google/Chrome becoming even more dominant since there would be no reason for anyone to use any other browser.
