[shagie]

If apple prevented its licensees for the iPhone to bundle Safari rather than another browser... then this would be more applicable.

However, Apple isn't extending its dominance in the smart phone area (Apple has 53% market share of mobile devices, Microsoft had above 90% market share for intel compatible PCs https://www.justice.gov/atr/us-v-microsoft-courts-findings-f... ) to its licensees for iOS.

Apple not forcing Samsung to bundle Safari on the Samsung branded iPhones to the exclusion of Chrome.

Yes, Apple isn't licensing iOS to others and that's a key difference. Furthermore, Apple has half of the market dominance that Microsoft had in its day.

[eptcyka]

Just because they make both iOS and the iPhone doesn't mean they get a pass to be anticompetitive on their platform.

[seanmcdirmid]

They can be anticompetitive on their platform as long as their platform doesn’t have a lock on the market. So say, if you didn’t need to buy an iPhone and could buy an android instead, and if that actually happened in practice, Apple could reasonably argue they didn’t have a monopoly on the market even if they had a monopoly in their own platform.

[howinteresting]

By the HHI, Apple absolutely has a lock on the market.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herfindahl%E2%80%93Hirschman...

With 53% market share, Apple alone contributes over 0.25 to the HHI. 0.25 for the entire market is regarded as highly concentrated.

[wayneftw]

Not when their platform holds the majority of users in the US and when they're colluding with the "competition".

[ryan93]

A majority of users choose apple. but they didnt have to

[CrimsonRain]

Just like the majority of users choose to use Windows back in the day? They didn't had to. Linux was always a choice.

[ryan93]

No it wasn’t. Android is a consumer friendly replacement Linux wasn’t

[seanmcdirmid]

54% is a majority, but its not a vast majority.

> and when they're colluding with the "competition".

Unless you have evidence for that, that's just libel.

[wayneftw]

Libel? It's directly from the material referenced by the tweets that we're talking about:

> 'After another meeting between Apple and Google senior executives, notes showed that the execs agreed: "Our vision is that we work as if we are one company."'

[seanmcdirmid]

Which they already got busted for and had to pay fines on. If you mean they are still doing it, then provide evidence, don’t just assert its true.

[sciprojguy]

"Samsung Branded iPhones"? This can't possibly be a thing.

[inetknght]

Well, not at the current model with Apple's abusive position of manufacturing both the iPhone and iOS and Safari.