Apple should be legally stopped from doing this monopolistic garbage.
Apple isn't even close* to a monopoly in phones. Regulators could come down on Microsoft for doing the same thing, because, at the time, Microsoft had a 99% share of the desktop OS market. Regulators said that Microsoft could not use this monopoly to suppress competition in a legally separate domain (market for browsers).
The difference is that Apple has, what, a 30% share of the phone market? All Apple has to say is that if a consumer wants a choice of browsers, they're free to switch to Android.
But that doesn't change the fact that there are now millions of people pretty well locked into a platform (through iCloud, iMessage, proprietary integration with Mac, etc.) which are limited to a single browser and are forbidden to use another one.
A situation that is much worse than the IE6 one - switching browsers on Windows of 2000s was significantly easier and cheaper than switching out of the Apple ecosystem.
Monopoly can be defined as however you fudge the numbers. Your way of counting is like we'd say "Hey, Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly, there's loads of Linux routers and servers out there, so it's fine!". It ignores important properties on how Apples actions hinder free market.
But that doesn't change the fact that there are now millions of people
pretty well locked into a platform (through iCloud, iMessage, proprietary
integration with Mac, etc.) which are limited to a single browser and are
forbidden to use another one.
Yes, but unlike Windows in the 2000s, there is a clear alternative to Apple. In
the 2000s, if you wanted to buy a computer that didn't run Windows, you were out
of luck. But you can totally buy a smartphone that doesn't run iOS.
But what does that matter? On Windows in 2000s switching away from IE meant a few minutes of time to install another browser. In 2017, switching away from Apple means >500$ of monetary expenses and significantly reduced integration of other devices around until you replace more of them. What use is that "clear alternative" there?
Apple isn't even close* to a monopoly in phones. Regulators could come down on Microsoft for doing the same thing, because, at the time, Microsoft had a 99% share of the desktop OS market. Regulators said that Microsoft could not use this monopoly to suppress competition in a legally separate domain (market for browsers).
The difference is that Apple has, what, a 30% share of the phone market? All Apple has to say is that if a consumer wants a choice of browsers, they're free to switch to Android.