3 ms·
>The answer is right in the text you quoted. Because it's a different market than the smartphone itself and unfair competition.* That's not an answer, it's a d
by coldtea 1y ago
>The answer is right in the text you quoted. Because it's a different market than the smartphone itself and unfair competition.*
That's not an answer, it's a decree.
Others can make their own phones and headphones just for their own devices, did Apple stop them?
- const_cast 1y agoIt's not a monopoly because if this other theoretical company which does not exist existed then there would be more than one option and it wouldn't be a monopoly. Not very convincing.
- coldtea 1y agoThere's Android which has even more market share, and several behemoths like Google, Samsung, Xiaomi making similar sets of devices, so not theoritical.
- const_cast 1y agoBut that's not even close to the argument you made. Also, you're confusing markets here. We're not talking about the smartphone market. We're talking about the market of apple accessories. Apple solely controls that market and also participates in it. Its a true monopoly.
- digitalPhonix 1y agoWell yes, that’s what laws are?
- coldtea 1y agoThat (a kind of decree) is what any law is, including unfair laws or Jim Crow. Doesn't mean it's an answer to the issue why that should be the case.