I would say you are looking at this wrong, mainly that there are better arguments to support what you want to occur. For example, it is a weak argument to poin

I would say you are looking at this wrong, mainly that there are better arguments to support what you want to occur. For example, it is a weak argument to point out they have not produced a game or a gaming-first console, ie marketed to gamers primarily with the additional capabilities of doing other things. Gaming has been "the other thing". The reason being that antitrust and anti-monopoly actions from the government are to highlight antimcompetitive practices towards other competitors. Simply winning the lion share of the market has no regulation against it, becoming more vertically integrated or it being pure happenstance that consumers choose to generate revenue for you on the platform is not something we regulate. Now, by "hostage situation" you must be referring to the developers? You might have an angle here but not in a way that would really change anything. Antitrust regulation here would simply make Apple provide the ability for developers to have alternative payment methods. So, not clear exactly what you are referring to or want to happen. But I think there are stronger arguments to support what you want to happen. As long as Apple doesn't ever do anything to Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo etc in the gaming space, they'll be fine.