Everything here you accuse Google of doing, Apple is running circles on. Ultimately, if this case goes through Google are right about one thing. The UX on Chrome is going to take a steep nose dive.
Apple does not run the largest advertising network on the planet. As simple as that.
Even for the matter of the browser, Apple does not have the same push as Google does. Yes, Safari is the default browser on a phone. But outside of the mobile world, Safari is a rounding error.
There's nothing inherently illegal about monopolies, just anti-competitive behavior. While Apple is engaging in clear anti-competitive behavior (eg shoving the app store down customers throats), they've reined in restrictions of competing browsers so that they're actually worth using now.
Can't you apply the exact same logic to Google and Google's services being bundled together? The bundle is their product; nobody's forcing anybody to use the Google services bundle, but you're certainly at a disadvantage if you don't - the exact same - as with Apple, not using their provided APIs/following their ridiculous rules/not upsetting daddy or he'll take your app away is the exact same thing.
Probably worse so as Google don't seem to copy the features of companies and then spin them as their own all the time like Apple gets away with. Or to kill/remove/restrict competing apps when Apple decides to get into the market for something, or just generally as a "punishment" for not following Apple's strict rules (that only exist to benefit Apple, whilst they tell consumers "it's all 4 u baby").
Before Google, there were multiple competing browsers based on different technology, all of which were either offered for free or explicitly licensed as FOSS. Google used Chrome to put the web on an upgrade treadmill. The only way to keep your own code up-to-date with what websites expected was to either commit unending amounts of resources to the problem (Google), do the bare minimum to keep websites working as your resources are stretched thin (Safari, arguably Firefox), or just ship modified versions of Chrome so that it's easier to merge in new features (Edge, Opera, Brave, Vivaldi, etc).
Before Google, all of those options sucked. Chrome was a breath of fresh air, which was why it exploded in popularity.
I don't do web dev, but from what I've heard, web devs also suffered trying to support multiple conflicting browsers, and Chrome's dominance actually makes life much easier.
