4 ms·

Microsoft had almost the entire PC market. Apple doesn’t have over 90% in any market afaik.

samwillis 4y ago
iPhone market share in the UK and US is a little over 50%, but in some demographics significantly higher. The point is though, you can't install an alternative browser engine on iOS, you could on windows. So it's a bit of an Apples to Oranges of a comparison (no pun intended). There is clear anti-competitive behaviour, even if they aren't a "true monopoly".
- parasubvert 4y ago
  Not all anti-competitive acts are illegal, nor should they be. Building a sustainable competitive advantage is business school 101 for 60 years. Vertical or horizontal restraints are typically evaluated case by case based on whether the actor is a monopoly.
2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
You don't need to have 100% of a market to abuse your size with anticompetitive behavior. The judge mentioned this during the Epic v. Apple lawsuit.
- parasubvert 4y ago
  The lawsuit that Apple mostly won.
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
    Sure- though there was just an appeal hearing in November. The judge also warned that Apple uses anticompetitive behavior and is on the road to becoming a monopoly. > While Apple is not considered a monopoly and did not engage in antitrust behavior on nine of ten counts, Apple’s conduct in enforcing anti-steering restrictions is anticompetitive. > A coalition of 35 states, Microsoft, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and several other groups filed amicus briefs in support of Epic's position, arguing that Apple held a monopoly and thus that Epic should prevail in its lawsuit.
    - parasubvert 4y ago
      Amicus briefs aren’t worth diddly when they’re factually incorrect. The judge also did not suggest Apple was on the road to monopoly. She correctly pointed out one anticompetitive practice and forced Apple to change that policy. Which they have.
izacus 4y ago
This is a pointless argument for hundreds of millions of iPhone users that cannot exercise their right to free market.
- yreg 4y ago
  They are exercising it by chosing to buy an iPhone.
  - tristan957 4y ago
    You act like there is a choice. "Here is an Android device or here is an iPhone." We need to protect iPhone users because the market has determined only Android and iOS are viable mobile operating systems at the moment.
- saiya-jin 4y ago
  While true, you are willingly choosing much more locked and walled ecosystem, with owning company well known for its practices. Its not something hidden, heck its being marketed to tech users as a feature. Apple has strong proposition in many ways, but if you want more freedom that's definitely not the company you should be buying products from, not now nor in near future.
KRAKRISMOTT 4y ago
The profitable upper middle class segment is absolutely dominated by Apple.

iPhone market share in the UK and US is a little over 50%, but in some demographics significantly higher. The point is though, you can't install an alternative browser engine on iOS, you could on windows. So it's a bit of an Apples to Oranges of a comparison (no pun intended). There is clear anti-competitive behaviour, even if they aren't a "true monopoly".

parasubvert 4y ago
Not all anti-competitive acts are illegal, nor should they be. Building a sustainable competitive advantage is business school 101 for 60 years. Vertical or horizontal restraints are typically evaluated case by case based on whether the actor is a monopoly.

2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago

You don't need to have 100% of a market to abuse your size with anticompetitive behavior. The judge mentioned this during the Epic v. Apple lawsuit.

parasubvert 4y ago
The lawsuit that Apple mostly won.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
  Sure- though there was just an appeal hearing in November. The judge also warned that Apple uses anticompetitive behavior and is on the road to becoming a monopoly. > While Apple is not considered a monopoly and did not engage in antitrust behavior on nine of ten counts, Apple’s conduct in enforcing anti-steering restrictions is anticompetitive. > A coalition of 35 states, Microsoft, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and several other groups filed amicus briefs in support of Epic's position, arguing that Apple held a monopoly and thus that Epic should prevail in its lawsuit.
  - parasubvert 4y ago
    Amicus briefs aren’t worth diddly when they’re factually incorrect. The judge also did not suggest Apple was on the road to monopoly. She correctly pointed out one anticompetitive practice and forced Apple to change that policy. Which they have.

izacus 4y ago

This is a pointless argument for hundreds of millions of iPhone users that cannot exercise their right to free market.

yreg 4y ago
They are exercising it by chosing to buy an iPhone.
- tristan957 4y ago
  You act like there is a choice. "Here is an Android device or here is an iPhone." We need to protect iPhone users because the market has determined only Android and iOS are viable mobile operating systems at the moment.
saiya-jin 4y ago
While true, you are willingly choosing much more locked and walled ecosystem, with owning company well known for its practices. Its not something hidden, heck its being marketed to tech users as a feature. Apple has strong proposition in many ways, but if you want more freedom that's definitely not the company you should be buying products from, not now nor in near future.

KRAKRISMOTT 4y ago

The profitable upper middle class segment is absolutely dominated by Apple.