In the ever-shifting landscape of tech competition, Google has once again found itself at the center of an antitrust conversation, this time involving Motorola, Perplexity AI, and the intricate world of smartphone assistants.

The core of the dispute revolves around Google's contractual restrictions preventing Motorola from setting Perplexity AI as the default assistant on its devices. Online commentators quickly seized on this as another potential example of Google's market manipulation, drawing parallels to Microsoft's notorious antitrust battles of the 1990s.

The situation highlights the complex ecosystem of mobile operating systems, where seemingly simple choices about default apps can become battlegrounds for technological control. Google's Android, while technically open-source, comes with a web of requirements that can limit manufacturers' flexibility.

Some tech observers argue that this is less about protecting consumers and more about maintaining Google's dominant position in the AI and mobile markets. The company's contractual approach effectively creates invisible barriers that make it challenging for competing AI assistants to gain meaningful market traction.

Ultimately, this case represents another chapter in the ongoing narrative of big tech's competitive strategies – where control is often exercised through nuanced contractual language rather than outright prohibition.