Is your argument that Google doesn't try to engage in lock-in? Or is your argument that lock-in is good for users? Either way, when there are literal emails in

Is your argument that Google doesn't try to engage in lock-in? Or is your argument that lock-in is good for users? Either way, when there are literal emails in the company saying that the reason iMessage isn't on Android is because otherwise it would be too easy for Apple users to switch to Android -- then that's what lock-in is. I don't get the whataboutism here. It's lock-in. Google is also a crappy company, but that doesn't change anything about what Apple is doing, and it doesn't change anything about the fact that the court case has revealed enough documents to show that lock-in is a deliberate market strategy that Apple undertakes. Google also acting crappy in a few cases does not mean that the very concept of lock-in is suddenly invalid. People forget that Apple is not the only company being sued for antitrust in regards to their app stores.