3 ms·
I think monopoly is the right word because their really are two markets. A customer is only looking for either iOS or Android apps, and isn't going to choose a
by leereeves 3y ago
I think monopoly is the right word because their really are two markets.
A customer is only looking for either iOS or Android apps, and isn't going to choose an Android app if they have an iPhone, or vice versa (IOW, iOS apps don't compete with Android apps).
Imagine only one company sold diesel fuel, and only one sold gasoline. Wouldn't you say they each had a monopoly?
- adastra22 3y agoThis is an example of vendor lockin, which is a troubling practice that needs to be stopped, but it is legally and practically distinct from monopoly as defined in antitrust legislation.
- leereeves 3y agoWe shouldn't limit our use of language based on laws written 100 years ago. It's pretty clear that those laws are inadequate to restrain the monopolies that exist now. Said another way, you might be right about US antitrust law, but when that law was written the technology didn't exist to create "vendor lock-in" on millions of products at once. I am curious about the example though, from a legal perspective. Would the only seller of gasoline have a monopoly, even if other fuels were available, and the only barrier to using them was the switching cost of buying a new vehicle? Edit: For what it's worth, wikipedia uses the word monopoly when "a single vendor controls the market for the method or technology being locked in to". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vendor_lock-in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vendor_lock-in
- adastra22 3y agoIt's not a monopoly though. My point is that there is a relevant technical difference, and we should be accurate in the words that we use.