I'm sorry but the Heritage foundation is wrong on this one.
Google v. Microsoft: Trustbusters Not Needed
This developing challenge may confound those who have argued that Microsoft had a permanent, unassailable monopoly, which could only be weakened by government intervention. Perhaps someone should tell the trust busters in Washington and Brussels that technology markets are working—and that their services are no longer needed.
WRONG
The most common example of such Web-based services are e-mail systems such as Hotmail and Google’s own “Gmail,” which are alternatives to standard e-mail systems that run directly on a PC on top of a desktop operating system. Today, many applications can be run over the Web.
Hello, the 1990's is when the big push to the web happened... maybe he's hinting at webservices.... nope not that either... It's actually closer to someone embedding Cassini (a compact local web server) in a application while only providing an HTML interface, then calling it a “web” application.
Someone needs to tell these guys that Windows is a platform. Unless Google is coming out with a Google OS then your comparing apples to oranges. While Google is putting pressure on MS, it's not on the level that this article implies. I'm sure after MS releases their new search tool/add on, we'll hear the same arguments against Microsoft that Netscape's and Real had. (Not to mention the very courts that they say we don't need. The fact that MS has a lock on the OS as well as the deep internals of the OS, is the real key. I know that the Heritage foundation is looking to find justification to end regulations and anti trust laws in the US but this isn't it...