There are a lot of conversations about Apple's "monopoly" on smart phones and I always find it so interesting. I used to use an iPhone, then switched to an and

There are a lot of conversations about Apple's "monopoly" on smart phones and I always find it so interesting. I used to use an iPhone, then switched to an android a few years ago, and I felt like there was basically full feature parity between the two of them. I'm not aware of any "killer app" or other use case that elevates one significantly over the other. They both have app stores with all the most popular apps, web browsers, nice cameras, phone calls and messages, etc. So it seems to me like there are plenty of alternatives if you don't want an iPhone that are just as good and often more affordable. Globally Android has a larger market share than iPhone, but iPhones seem to have a "social" factor that pushes them heavily in certain demographics (particularly any intersection of wealthy, young, and US American). Something about this social factor makes it feel to many people like a complete monopoly with no alternative even though there are tons of alternative phone models made by many other companies. For me, of course I think it would be great if iPhones were better compatible with things like RCS chat, open app stores, USB instead of proprietary chargers, etc. But I feel like that can all be worked out long term by the market instead of pushing regulation on one specific company. If any of those things bother you just get a non iOS phone, and if they're truly bad things over time more and more people will gravitate away from the company until they change. If Apple wants to make certain decisions around remaining a walled garden I think they should be able to (and there are arguments that their strategy could make their product better for certain audiences rather than worse, even if we might disagree with the take).