[ralfd]

This will sooner or later be an antitrust issue. When Google is getting so successfull in their game that a new feature is impossible to fail and is even expected to dominate the market then it is getting dangerous. Microsoft is still getting flak by the European Union for bundling stuff and is forced to sell some Windows versions without their media player or have to show a "web browser choice screen".

[Sapient]

How so?

No one is forced to use any of Google's products - Bing and Facebook are only a click away.

A monopoly born from having a superior product is not the same as a monopoly gained through the practises of price fixing or forcing people to install your web-browser with no way to disable it.

[jeffdavis]

And Google products generally allow you access to your data quite easily using standard formats where appropriate (for instance, you can export your gmail contacts).

I say "generally" because there are weaknesses. For instance, I don't think you can export your search history or the archive for a google group. You can export your "contacts" but not all of your social connections (at least I haven't found a way). I also haven't found a way to export saved maps or other geo data.

If they expand this policy to all (or essentially all) of your data, they are pretty much immune to anti-trust. And more importantly, it's just better for users. Google has nothing to fear giving your data back to you, anyway -- the only companies that are afraid of that are the less competent ones.

[wallnutboy]

You still have the option of not using Google's services, and they even offer a clean way to purge your entire profile.

[methodin]

That's a point most people don't seem to remember. I can see what Google has on me, for the most part at any rate, and opt to destroy it. Contrast that with FB and I really have no clue what data they have on me.

[code_duck]

I would think Google collects plenty of data behind the scenes which they do not share with you, like Facebook.