We're dealing with the same laws, but not the same evidence. There wasn't much evidence in the Apple case that Apple was explicitly taking action to disadvanta

We're dealing with the same laws, but not the same evidence. There wasn't much evidence in the Apple case that Apple was explicitly taking action to disadvantage or harm third-parties, and there was even less evidence that Apple utilized their economic power to ensure their dominance. If anything, the evidence in the Apple case showed that Apple treated all developers with relative parity. The evidence in Google's case showed that leadership was so paranoid about a third-party store rising to prominence, since the platform technically allowed it, they were constantly wheeling and dealing to suppress competition. Google essentially wanted to have their cake (side loading is fine! Android is open!) while eating it too (The Play Store dominates). And they accomplished this by spending a lot of money, and giving certain developers better deals than others, etc.