Barriers to Entry

Cringely is intuitive and foretelling. His article connects very well with this week's textbook chater.
My interest is not about whether Microsoft or Google wins. It is not about Chrome vs. Bing either. I am interested in how long Microsoft or Google can maintain its monopolistic state in respective market.

• Market structures of search engine or PC operating platform is monopoly, or may be oligopoly. Difference between monopolistic and competitive market is barriers to entry. Microsoft and Google sees each other as their sole competitor. So they set up barriers with Chrome and Bing. It is a balance of terror. According to Cringely, Chrome and Bing is like ICBM, and MS and Google is safe as long as they possess Mutually Assured Destruction (MAS) capability.
• Market entry barrier in digital age is lowered, however. Product diffusion is so fast that it does not take economy of scale to catch up with the frontrunner. It's not the size in the network that matters. New concepts like fitness, which Kang hui mentioned may be important. As the chapter illustrates, Cable TV has become a competitive market in less than a decade. MS has ousted IBM. The balance MS and Google enjoy is very vulnerable.
• Entry barrier in media market could be measured in quantitative terms, just as market concentration is measured by CR4. There are hyperlocal media markets with high barriers. In these markets, old style small newspaper media enjoy monopolistic profit on and off line. On the other hand national market like Cable TV can be more easily penetrated than it seems. Like Younghwan said, entry barrier could be an interesting predictor variable for various outcomes.
• As Cringely implies, MS and Google should be more worried about attack from within than each other. After all, it is post 9/11 era, not the era of the Big Red Button of nuclear attack. The competition is not just among the giants, it can be an asymetrical fight between the superpower and a small group.