[jjk166]

> Consumers are choosing a desirable physical good with undesirable digital restrictions.

So long as it is the customers making that choice, and they have access to alternatives, then it's not really a problem. If apple were advertising the iphone as a consumer product that had no such digital restrictions in an effort to hoodwink people into buying them, or if iphone were the only serious game in town, then those restrictions would be an issue, but right now iphones are advertised as being worth more than their competitors specifically because of those restrictions, and people are willing to pay such premiums. That you personally would not make the same decision does not mean they've been manipulated by anti-competitive measures into making theirs.

If someone were to make a consumer product that worked better for my use cases at the expense of being worse at or even incapable of doing things I don't intend to use it for, I should have the option to buy it. If you don't like the restrictions, buy something else. That's not anti-competitive, that is exactly how competition is supposed to work.

[megaman821]

There is literally only one other competitor. That is not flourishing, competitive market when consumers can make many different choices. There are two companies that control nearly the entirety of the mobile software market, how can you expect that there would be no oversight to make sure they don't advantage their own software offerings?

[tpmoney]

Samsung, Sony, Google, LG, Xiaomi, Motorola, Nokia, TCL, Kyocera, Fairphone, Pine64, Purism, and many others are more than "literally only one other competitor". And even if your complaint is that the only other option is "Android", there's no reason why those manufacturers couldn't make their own OS if they wanted to. There's no reason why even if they didn't want to, they couldn't make their own custom Android distribution.

If the linux community as small as it is can produce multiple varied and unique linux distributions largely on the backs of volunteers, there's no reason why these manufacturers (especially some of the bigger names) couldn't do the same with Android / Linux and their own hardware. And whatever reason is behind the failure of literally the entire cellphone industry to do what they were doing before the advent of iOS and Android, it isn't because Apple is somehow stopping them from making their own OS, and SDKs and app stores.

[dpkonofa]

But the reason is there only one other competitor isn't at all because of Apple or the competitor and doesn't have anything to do with their practices. The reason for it is because it's incredibly difficult and complex to put together a device like that and only certain types of companies have the resources and funds to create a product like that.

[ClumsyPilot]

> isn't at all because of Apple or the competitor and doesn't have anything to do with their practices.

Can you buy the display from a supplier that supplies Apple and put together your own phone? No, they have exclusive agreement with apple.

Their anticompetitive practices Make It incredibly difficult and complex to put together a device. That's the whole point!

[tpmoney]

Is the assertion that Apple's supposed monopoly is because they have exclusive agreements on their hardware?

[astrange]

I think you could buy an OLED display from Samsung if you wanted.

[intrasight]

Exclusive agreements are legal.

[Jensson]

Not if you are a dominant company.

[idle_zealot]

> right now iphones are advertised as being worth more than their competitors specifically because of those restrictions

Huh, I must've missed all the iPhone ads touting the device's inability to play Fortnight as a premium feature.