[TeMPOraL]

Does this mean that existence of Android allows both Google and Apple to mutually shield themselves from antitrust accusations? They basically get to do what they want, and argue "us refusing to give you X is not antitrust-relevant, because there's the other 50% of the market that refuses to give you X in an entirely different way".

[gafage]

This has nothing to do with android. iphone comes with an app store and that app store contains lots of messenger applications. Users overwhelmingly download one or several messenger applications from the store and use them instead of imessage. What's the similarity to IE here? IE had over 90% of browser share at some point.

[TeMPOraL]

Integration. None of the alternative messaging apps are first parties on iOS. Just like IE, for a moment, was the only first-party browser on Windows.

[TerrifiedMouse]

I believe MS didn’t get nail on integrating IE into Windows - at least in the US - they got nailed on threatening to increase Windows prices for OEMs (which will ruin them in the competitive OEM market) that bundled Netscape, i.e. abusing their Windows monopoly to harm a competitor.

WhatsApp, Signal, Facebook Messenger are all free to download on iOS - heck it’s offered for download at Apple’s expense; since it’s from their App Store servers.

[threeseed]

But being first party on iOS has had no impact on the market.

Messages is not even in the top 5 used messaging apps globally.

[hifreq]

The only reason we are having this conversation is that some Americans can't fathom the idea that something they want is not available to them for free.

[gafage]

I don't see any practical difference between whatsapp and imessage. iphone has so many apis such as callkit that make apps that use them feel like first parties. I think the only real difference is that you can use the built-in messages to read and send sms... which nobody uses anymore.