I think we're defining markets differently which is where this is debatable. If you say that the App Store is an extension of the iPhone and you're buying into

I think we're defining markets differently which is where this is debatable. If you say that the App Store is an extension of the iPhone and you're buying into that when you buy a phone, sure I can see the argument that the App Store by default has no competitors on the iPhone and people are agreeing to that when they buy an iPhone/develop for the iPhone, and so the competition is Google (and by extension the Play store. I just don't think we should accept the tight coupling of hardware and software distribution by default though. Even then if you do, the strongest argument for Apple gives us a duopoly that both exhibit strong anti-competitive behaviours. I do have some sympathy for Apple here though. When Nintendo takes tight control over distribution on the switch is that also a monopoly? When your product essentially becomes a utility though I think some form of regulation ends up being good for society as a whole.