I recently saw a poster here write this... That wasn't the first time I've heard statements like this. I've heard other people here claim they boycott MS products because they were sued and deemed anticompetitive for bundling Internet Explorer with every copy of Windows sold. My first question is, does anyone here actually boycott companies for stuff like that? And if so, are those posters simply uninformed about some of the darker things that Apple has done? For one, Apple's paranoid security procedures and alleged torturing of one of the engineers designing the iPhone drove him to commit suicide! And to compensate, his family was later given $44,000 and his girlfriend was given a Macbook!!! Also don't forget the recent admission that yes, indeed three of Apple's factories producing iPhones had been using child labor. And honestly, some of the stuff they've been doing recently (preventing Google Voice and Opera's Internet Browser Apps from being sold on the App Store because they are competitors), is a hell of a lot more anticompetitve than what was Microsoft was sued for (bundling Internet Explorer with Windows). I honestly don't see why that's that different from Apple bundling Safari with the iPhone. It would be much worse if Microsoft actively locked out competiting browsers from running on their operating system, which is something Microsoft has never done, but seems to be the path that Apple is heading with their blocking of the Google Voice App, and the uphill battle the Opera Internet Browser App is facing. If Apple indeed goes that route, would people here still defend them for it? If Apple isn't intending to go that route, why is Opera having such a tough time getting their Internet Browser approved. And why did Apple stick language into their new App Store policy that lets them block Apps for no other reason than that those Apps are also ported onto competing devices? I would like to get an honest discussion going here about what constitutes anti-competitive behavior (what Microsoft is frequently berated for here), and whether or not Apple is guilty of this. Apple owns a huge chunk of the smart phone market. They pretty much own a monopoly on the iPod Touch market. And they have recently started to block Apps from competitors from being sold on the App Store. I'm particularly suspicious with one aspect of their recent press release on the front page of this very site outlining new criteria that Apple will be using to block Apps from being solid on the App Store... I get very suspicious about language like that. I'm all for removing chaff from the App Store. But when a policy opens the door to blocking Apps for no other reason than that they are found on competitor's devices, I get very suspicious. It sounds like Apple levering the popularity of the App Store to prevent developers from porting successful Apps they make over to the Nexus One and other competing smart phones. Will Apple go that route? Why would they include that language if they aren't atleast entertaining the idea. Will people here continue to stand by them if they do, while attacking competitors for far less anti-competitive actions?