4 ms·

I don't think DOJ is arguing that. Their argument seems to be that Apple isn't supporting Android. Providing an api is different from actively supporting anothe

I don't think DOJ is arguing that. Their argument seems to be that Apple isn't supporting Android. Providing an api is different from actively supporting another platform. API would usually be agnostic. Also, couldn't Apple make a first amendment argument?

shuckles 3y ago
Yes, but I'm saying some would respond to your claim that it's Google's responsibility to bring Watch support to Android with the fact that Apple doesn't allow 3rd parties to bring Watch support to any platform. It's like saying it's Google's responsibility to support iMessage on Android: sure, but it's not technically possible anyhow without Apple doing work. I agree that government forcing interoperability in this way is pretty concerning. Maybe Apple is an exception (arguable, I don't believe it, but not preposterous).