Judge seemed to have reached into the narrowest possible ruling, a reasonable decision in a case which is likely to be appealed by both sides. Apple learnt tha

Judge seemed to have reached into the narrowest possible ruling, a reasonable decision in a case which is likely to be appealed by both sides. Apple learnt that the monopoly definition argument doesn't prevent rulings against anti-competitive practices, and Epic learnt that if it wants to attack App Store fees it needs to bring an objective criteria to the table and have it accepted. The judge skirted the App Store issue, but I never felt that was important: IMHO, 99.999% of iPhone users would have used Apple's store even if alternate stores were available; The only alternative store with any chance of success would have been an OSS store - hardly what Epic wanted.