[the1pato]

>While this is an attractive bet, as Google you would have to hope that neither your OS or network got too popular or you could quickly end up in anti-trust territory.

Sadly, this is probably true. Such integration may prove too useful to consumers and too game-changing for Google's competitors. I wouldn't put it past them to use the federal government to makeup for their lack of innovation.

[Sapient]

I have seen this claim a few times, but noone ever gives any real reasons as to why.

A monopoly born through a superior product is not the same as a monopoly born through anti-competitive practises. Noone is forcing or coercing anyone to use Google+. Facebook and twitter are only a click away, and both are massively more popular.

Could we say the same if Facebook launched an email service? Or if Twitter launched some sort of search engine?

[noibl]

We're not talking about a mere monopoly, we're talking about exclusive API integrations in, hypothetically, an OS with majority market share. That's not something that has historically been tolerated well by courts.

[Sapient]

They haven't done a whole lot about MS (which is basically the definition of this behaviour) though, even looking at Europe.