Chrome is free software, you're not being forced to use it, there are alternatives, the most relevant ones are even using the same engine.
It's like everyone is trying to capture some unique visitors because they know it works: $service is spying on you.
> the most relevant ones are even using the same engine
Firefox is very relevant.
Also, Google isn't exactly a randomly sampled spying $service. It is probably one of top two offenders in this regard.
When did that happen?
Chromium is free software. Chrome isn't, by any stretch of imagination.
Chrome might be provided without cost but it is certainly not free software. It is proprietary.
There's no one pushing Google down its users' throats. Yet people ask Google to behave like they want. Well, surprise! Google is a private entity and they'll do whatever they want. If you don't like it, leave. I left a long time ago but I believe these claims are unfair to Google.
We are being bombarded with "Google's x product is a monopoly". No they are not. There are tons of alternatives to anyone of Google's services. The thing is, they do it better than their alternatives. Free market, my friend.
If x alternative to a Google's service gets better, people will gravitate towards it. But don't ask people to drop the better product in order to give (undeserved) attention to the not-so-great one. Earn it!
People also complain about Google making their services' sites suck on other browsers. Well, their site, their rules. Not so long ago all online services had dedicated clients instead of web apps. Those apps weren't called "monopolies", yet there was no alternative client. Because the root of the monopoly argument lies in the "service", if there are no alternatives to the "service", now we are talking, but there's no monopoly in the "client". If you don't like the "client", drop the service.