[smoldesu]

That's speculatory, and furthermore I'd argue Apple is already failing to compete if their only competitive tactic is lock-in. Apple's anticompetitive behavior may well be the last thing stopping a browser monopoly. That's for the free market to decide though, and it's an entirely different lawsuit in the making.

[marricks]

> Apple is already failing to compete if their only competitive tactic is lock-in

Chrome has plenty of anti-competitive practices that aren't under scrutiny. Nudges in all Google owned software to switch, breaking features in other browsers (Firefox Whoops).

Like, I guess I'd be way more "pro this lawsuit" if Google was under similar scrutiny.

[smoldesu]

Google is under similar scrutiny. They are designated as a service and digital market Gatekeeper under EU law and will be reprimanded if they abuse a potential monopoly position. I personally support regulating Google, and the scrutiny of their (comparatively few) anticompetitive practices.

You and I can feel whatever way we want about it, it doesn't change a thing. Apple's market abuses are unique from Google's, and specifically you are asking the DOJ to punish Google for abuse that hasn't happened. Google's most egregious violation so far has been their advertising racket, which they were already punished for last year: https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-wraps-up-antitrust-case-aga...