I do think there are important differences between MS and Apple’s behaviors. MS was getting their product out using other companies products, and then constrain

I do think there are important differences between MS and Apple’s behaviors. MS was getting their product out using other companies products, and then constrained the UX of those OEM’s customers. Apple would have to get an app store on some android devices and windows/linux machines and then try to enforce their rules there to be in the same ballpark. The fact that Apple puts rules on companies that use their platform is the inverse of this scenario: this would be like if a bunch of the OEMs were trying to dictate terms to MS. What Epic wants to do is have their game store on multiple OSes produced by other companies and then call the shots on those. I actually think they are closer to the spirit of what MS was doing, and given the chance they would leverage any advantageous market position they could achieve (or run to the courts) to shape OS customers’ UX in a fashion that is more similar to what MS did. Apple wants a sandbox in the world; Epic and MS want the world to be their sandbox. If Apple’s sandbox becomes dominant it will be de facto because of people choosing to use a better competing product; Epic’s and MS’ actions are attempts to create a de jure dominant sandbox.