Browser market: Search engine market

No, I don't think so.

There are tremendous learning effects, economies of scale, and network effects in search that do not exist to the same extent (or at all) in the browser market.

I. The learning effects arise from the number of searchers and advertisers using a particular platform over a given period of time. This enables Google (with the largest market share) to improve its algorithm at a faster rate in response to the behavioral data that it collects. The sheer amount of data that Google collects permits much deeper (and faster) multivariate analysis relative to competitors.

II. The economies of scale exist because Google can spread its huge fixed costs of developing, refining, and operating its search engine over a much greater number of users. For instance, if Google employs 2x the number of engineers as Microsoft in search, but fulfills 4x the number of search requests, its per search engineering costs are 2/4 = 50% of Microsoft's. The same holds for other significant fixed costs, such as data center costs.

III. The network effects arise from a feedback loop between searchers and advertisers. As the number of searchers increase on Google search, it attracts more advertisers because advertisers can reach a broader and more targeted audience. The reverse is true to some extent as well. For instance, as the number of advertisers using Google AdWords increases, it attracts more searchers, assuming that searchers find some value in the sponsored search results.

Note that the learning effects and economies of scale exist in browsers, but not to the same extent as in search. There are no obvious network effects in the browser market, while the network effects in search are quite strong.

Google's dominance in search will persist into the future, until:

1. A competitor develops a protectable technology (e.g., new algorithm) or user experience that delivers significant value to the average searcher and/or advertiser.

2. A substitute for search emerges, which provides a much more effective method for obtaining information that you would otherwise obtain using Google search.

3. Google is unable or unwilling to respond to the competitive threat in #1 or the substitution threat in #2 in a reasonable period of time.

Given Google's quick response to customer feedback (e.g., content farms) and technology change (e.g., real-time search), I don't have a sense that the company is resting on its laurels.

Note there is still room for niche search engines, such as DuckDuckGo, that emphasize particular features of significant importance to a segment of users. For instance, DuckDuckGo does not collect or store a user's IP address, yielding greater privacy.

Huh what is that supposed to mean? That made the article completely useless. Atleast offer something of substance, even it's an anecdote. Does it mean that Google is 100% according to anecdotal evidence?

But the very next line says: >Yet at the same time alternatives are arising. And more importantly wrt to the analogy, there are alternatives that in my opinion offer a different enough overall search experience to be preferable to some people, much like Web browsers.

Like which ones? Bing? Duckduckgo? Blekko? Coolio? Anything else?