[error503]

While this is probably an accurate interpretation under current anti-trust practices, I would argue that with the way things have become vertically integrated, the importance of people's 'digital life', and the extremely large amount of friction involved in moving platforms, they absolutely deserve the same amount of anti-trust scrutiny as a more traditional monopoly even if they don't fit the traditional definition. The abuse of that position exercised by these platform owners is pretty blatant, and very clearly anti-consumer.

The fact that either of two tech companies are able to effectively gatekeep whether a given mobile app can for all intents and purposes exist in the market is a problem.

The law and practices need to react to the state of the world, and this situation was simply not a practical concern until recent times. Hell, the courts have historically been on consumers' side in adjacent ways, such as enshrining the right to reverse engineer & various provisions explicitly permitting doing so for interoperability, the Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act, and other decisions that protect consumers from getting screwed by the company they chose to buy a product from regardless of their official status as 'monopoly'.