Comment by lumb63

What rubs me the wrong way about the Apple monopoly case(s?) is they sound to me like “we (the people) don’t want to actually solve the problem by through the totally-viable free market approach; we instead feel that we are owed some say in how this company chooses to develop its products; please strongarm them through legal means that don’t really apply, to make that a reality”.

People who are interested in Apple’s “walled garden” can buy iPhones. People who aren’t, can choose not to. Nobody is making people buy iPhones. Nobody is making people buy Androids either. Any company which thinks there is a sufficient market to be had in providing an alternative platform that does not use a walled garden approach can develop the hardware and software which would allow their customers a more open platform. There is absolutely nothing stopping this from happening today. The failure of companies and individuals to do so proves to me that nobody cares enough about this to take real action.

Contrast this with real trusts of days past like Standard Oil. If someone developed a competing company, they could undercut competitors by selling oil at a loss long enough to drive anyone else out of business. What would the parallel be in this universe? If someone developed a new smartphone, there is nothing in Apple’s walled garden approach that would prohibit that platform from taking off.

IMO when consumers buy products, they are entitled to the product they knowingly bought, not the product that they want.