3 ms·
> If they'd been draconian and hyper-controlling from the start, refusing side-loading and similar like Apple does, they wouldn't have had to pay people off and
by nicce 3y ago
> If they'd been draconian and hyper-controlling from the start, refusing side-loading and similar like Apple does, they wouldn't have had to pay people off and make deals to crush competition as that competition couldn't have even gotten off the ground in the first place.
Difference here is that Apple manufactures and controls all the devices but Google does not.
When Google’s decisions impact other manufactures or they even are dependent on it, it becomes monopoly problem. But Apple does not impact anybody else.
- amplex1337 3y agoIt doesn't impact anyone? Including the 1.46 billion iPhone users?
- nicce 3y agoIn the context of monopoly, it does not, at least yet. 1. Apple does not have monopoly position in phone market. People can still choose good alternative products. Current users have chosen the iPhone. 2. Since Apple does not intentionally make deals or hinder competition among other companies, no monopoly problem for that reason either.