4 ms·

> a company is large and influential enough, with an entrenched market position, it does not get to "do whatever they want" because of the harm that causes to t

> a company is large and influential enough, with an entrenched market position, it does not get to "do whatever they want" because of the harm that causes to the economy overall. I'm not sure I understand: this would be applicable if Apple was the only provider of phone/mobile OS. But... Apple is just one of the players; if I was adamant that Firefox - which, again, I've been using for the past 20 years - is the only browser I want to use on mobile, I'd simply give up on iPhones and buy something else. So, again, as long as I have a choice, where is the problem?

toyg 3y ago
You'll still have the choice to just use Safari and Apple AppStore products, so nothing is changing for you as a consumer. But other consumers will now have more choices. So why is that a problem for you? Btw, Apple is not "just one of the players". Them and Google completely control the mobile computing software market. Both them and Google are now required to stop abusing their position.
dharmab 3y ago
As said preciously, the EU considers large companies with gatekeeper status a problem _regardless of whether they have a monopoly_. In your example, Firefox/Mozilla is harmed, because they're locked out of the iOS market unfairly.