It comes down to what you mean by anti-competitive. If you mean illegally anti-competitive then there’s a debate to be had. If you mean “anti-competitive” in th

It comes down to what you mean by anti-competitive. If you mean illegally anti-competitive then there’s a debate to be had. If you mean “anti-competitive” in the sense that they don’t offer their entire code base MIT licensed, then 100% they are anti-competitive in that sense, and they have every right to choose to be. To somewhat oversimplify, you are allowed to not invite competitors to sell to your customers in your own backyard. Unless you are a monopoly. Because then that “backyard” isn’t rightfully yours to control. At the moment I am inclined to believe the iPhone is Apple’s own backyard and they should have dominion over what happens there. If you want to confiscate Apple’s backyard, you do it at the risk that you damage a company that has done a great service for the world, and a company that IMO deserves the benefit of controlling its own destiny and should be left to continue innovating on its own terms. If someone thinks they can do better then there’s trillions of dollars in market cap on the line and I welcome them to try. Apple won’t stop them from trying, but will certainly compete fiercely on the merits.