3 ms·

I don't see how it hinges on the market share. If Windows had a market share of 30% those 30% would still be better off if they had greater choice. People are l

I don't see how it hinges on the market share. If Windows had a market share of 30% those 30% would still be better off if they had greater choice. People are locked into operating systems for all kinds of reasons. A lot of people use an operating system because they say, depend on an Office Suite or a piece of music creation software or to play video games. Why should this dictate their browser engine? Mind you people on Apple systems can still use Safari, people on Windows will always be able to use Edge etc, but there is no coherent argument for not putting more equal choices in front of a user across systems. All these companies make general purpose computing devices, there is no downside for the consumer in having control over them. To let a company be anti-competitive and lock down a platform, so people have to use their proprietary software rather than being able to run a real version of Firefox or Chrome is completely backwards.

hnlmorg 3y ago
Because it’s about competition. If you have a 10% market share and you use that 10% market share to expand into other markets then you’re increasing competition. But if you have a 90% market share, then you’re not simply just expanding into other markets, you’re eliminating competition from those markets. Imaging you have a birthday cake but you said only your best friend could eat it. That would be unfair to the other guests. But if everyone turned up with their own cakes and offers up slices to other people, it then means everyone gets cake and it doesn’t matter as much who you give your cake too.