• conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Controlling what happens on your systems is not anti-competitive. You can’t just re-define words to mean something that’s the exact opposite of what they are. The locked down system of Apple and consoles is their biggest value add. It’s not “something I tolerate to buy an iPhone”. It’s why I buy an iPhone. They make so much money because their control of their own product makes it better. There is no such thing as a “monopoly” on your own hardware. It’s literally impossible.

    Google is a monopoly because they are controlling the behavior of competitors with their market position. That is always a monopoly. Controlling your own product never is.

    • helenslunch@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Controlling what happens on your systems is not anti-competitive.

      That entirely depends on what part of “your systems” you’re controlling. When you control how users of “your systems” can interact with other businesses, it absolutely is. When you say “if you want to create software that runs on our hardware, you have to adhere to all of our guidelines, no matter how absurd, and pay us 30% of any revenue received through this software” that’s anticompetitive…

      The locked down system of Apple and consoles is hair biggest value add.

      LOOOOOOOLOLOL okay so you’re not just a fanboy, you’re a shill!

      Good talk. Bye bye now.