USvApple is meant to be similar to USvMicrosoft, but marketshare is so different
US v. MS in the 90s was big and I'd agree quite helpful. The argument then was "MS has a monopoly and is using it to squash competition from competing applications" And going by the numbers they absolutely did have a monopoly[1]. Macintosh was a rounding error compared to IBM PC.
This new fight over the iPhone seems so drastically different in one key aspect. Apple does have a large share and the court can decide whether it's unfairly treating competing apps but... it is clearly not a monopoly, iPhone only accounts for 25% of sales, far less than Microsoft owning the computer market in the 90s.
Any one have any takes on this aspect? Does the market share not matter just the practices?
This new fight over the iPhone seems so drastically different in one key aspect. Apple does have a large share and the court can decide whether it's unfairly treating competing apps but... it is clearly not a monopoly, iPhone only accounts for 25% of sales, far less than Microsoft owning the computer market in the 90s.
Any one have any takes on this aspect? Does the market share not matter just the practices?
[1] https://arstechnica.com/features/2005/12/total-share/
[2] https://www.statista.com/statistics/216459/global-market-share-of-apple-iphone/