Count me in with MG here. This seems like classic antitrust behavior: using a legal monopoly in one market (web search) to gain a competitive advantage in a different market (social networking) through bundling. The idea from the outset was to frame “Google+” as an extension of Google, not something new. Hence the name.

It also occurs to me that there’s no company in tech with as many enemies as Google. Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, Facebook, Twitter — Google has taken the fight to all of them. In this sense they’re like Microsoft 15 years ago.

[And again, the web needs an honest broker in the search space. Only this time it should be distributed mesh of engines.]

Source: Daring Fireball