> So if Apple would basically not have an AppStore for third parties and only distribute their own apps then it would be fair. > If Apple was to not allow othe

> So if Apple would basically not have an AppStore for third parties and only distribute their own apps then it would be fair. > If Apple was to not allow other Music apps on their AppStore then it would be fair. > But when Apple allows others to distribute a competing product to Apple on Apple’s own platform for a fee then it is considered unfair? > I honestly don’t understand this logic. I mean, it's kind of textbook vertical monopoly. Selling Windows is fine - you're competing over who makes the better OS. Selling Internet Explorer is fine - you're competing over who makes the better web browser. But using Windows to push Internet Explorer is not fine - you're using your unrelated OS superiority to fight off Netscape Navigator. It's a distorted market because the consumer is induced to go with iTunes over Spotify not because iTunes has the more appealing product, but because Apple makes iPhones. If the exact same software as iTunes was made by a non-Apple company, it wouldn't necessarily compete. -- And I'm not sure it would be "fair" if AppStore didn't allow music apps, either. With web browsers and app stores, there's a decent case to be made that allowing those apps would compromise the iPhone product/ecosystem as a whole (although I'm personally of the "It's my phone and I demand to be able to install whatever the hell I want on it" philosophy and loathe walled gardens in all forms). Banning music apps simply because they compete with their own product would likely attract Vestager's ire just as well.