We need regulations to allow a third (and more) competitors to exist.
Ban developers from picking winners?
But that doesn’t create additional competition at the operating system level which is where we need increased competition.
Is that because too many don't know how or care to change the way Chrome works?
Having an OS is of no use if there’s no hardware to run it on. Developers probably think that making the hardware is the easy part, all their typing… and then more typing, THAT’S the hard part.
But, no, designing hardware that people might want to spend their money on, then building/testing that hardware, packaging that hardware and shipping that hardware, selling that hardware AND supporting that hardware after the sale, that’s the hard part. Oh, and don’t let me forget creation and upkeep of the development tools + supporting developers. That’s also a part of the hard part.
I just might be puzzled. If you are saying normal users don't tweak stuff, then I get it.
Apple’s main business focus is sales of Macintosh computers, smartphones and tablets.
Apple - together with Google - have used their OS and giving away developer tools and resources for (nearly) free to establish a duopoly in distribution of mobile apps.
Apple did NOT create the vast majority of iOS apps - yet they have a monopoly on their distribution (to consumers).
Exactly: that’s Apple’s monopoly or gatekeeping power.
The moment you say “together with Google” you are no longer talking about anything that would be remotely similar the causes/reasons for actions against the singular companies, Microsoft and Standard Oil (It wasn’t Microsoft and… Standard Oil and…). I understand why you do, because without adding “extra stuff” it’s just “Apple sold things that people wanted to buy and some people don’t like the choices that those customers have made.”
And, Apple doesn’t have a monopoly over the vast majority of iOS apps. Many of those apps actually appear on other platforms, so there’s not even any exclusivity which WOULD be a cause for concern (as that would be an attempt to control commerce on platforms beyond those that Apple directly controls, which is what Microsoft and Standard Oil did, and why Apple wisely avoids doing those things). Those apps are controlled by the developers that make business decisions to make them available on Apple’s App Store. At any time, they could remove those applications from the App Store and there’s literally nothing Apple could do.
It’s not a monopoly by definition, which is why nothing in the DMA SAYS it’s a monopoly (because if it did, they wouldn’t have been able to get the member countries to sign off on a falsehood), so if anyone referred to it as a monopoly they would not be relating to anything truthful about the DMA. So, even you know it’s not “whatever you want to call it”, you just want to make it appear to be a semantic difference.
Yes, it is, considering Apple and Google have operated the same busibess models and conditions in their stores to the point of collusion. Whether it’s one or two companies that are controlling 95% of the market amount to the same - if and when the two companies act and behave the same.
But over their distribution.
Doesn’t matter, because these platform don’t compete with Apple’s App Store directly - as gas stations do (customers are free and many do switch day-to-day).
When they’re confronted with and have no other option than “take it or leave it” from one distributor, that distributor has monopoly power.
Except for no. So now, it’s collusion? So, who were Standard Oil colluding with? Who was Microsoft colluding with? Compared against ACTUAL monopolies, well, there’s literally no comparison which is why no case using the term has gone forward and was successful.
You mean the Apple App Store? APPLE App Store? Yes, Apple has control over distribution of apps for Apple products when businesses decide to place their wares on the APPLE App Store to be distributed to APPLE iPhones running APPLE iOS by APPLE.
Of course Apple has monopoly power over the Apple iPhone, the Apple App Store, Apple iOS, Apple Cleaning Cloths, Apple Mac Pro wheels and the Apple Vision Pro. Though most rational people call those “goods and services provided by the company who’s name is emblazoned on the products”. Even in the EU, the DMA does not refer to it as a monopoly either. So anyone that wants to call it a monopoly is at odds with the EU regulators that determined that Apple, clearly, has no illegal monopoly.
Apple and Google are, regarding their App Store pricing and policies.
Yes. And they should have complete control over it.
Of course. And you know what? They’re free to market their products anyway they want, at any price and distribution channel they want.