The US DOJ's Apple lawsuit has many parallels to its Microsoft lawsuit in the 1990s, but Apple's monopoly position is not nearly as clear-cut as Microsoft's was
“Apple inhibits third-party smartwatches from maintaining a reliable connection with the iPhone.” — To be fair, Apple does that to its own smartwatches too. X: Charles Arthur / @charlesarthur : We turn now to someone who was at Microsoft when the DOJ sued it on antitrust grounds to see what he thinks of the DOJ suing Apple on antitrust grounds Charles Arthur / @charlesarthur : This is simply ahistorical. The DOJ-Microsoft trial had no effect on iTunes forWindows. Microsoft had no reason to restrict iTunes - it had no competing device, and every iTunes for Windows installation cemented Windows dominance. [image] Parker Ortolani / @parkerortolani : “Not only is the DOJ's take on the iPhone's success a complete misunderstanding of the actual market dynamics for phones, it's flabbergastingly insulting.” https://daringfireball.net/... Ben Bajarin / @benbajarin : Agree either way this in the context it's insulting to consumers. To believe the DOJ you have to believe consumers are dumb and incapable of making sound choices knowing the pros and cons. Which is 100% false and only a fool would believe. Steven Sinofsky / @stevesi : Today the US DOJ+16 states/DC (HA we had 19+) filed suit against Apple over abuse of market position ̷b̷y̷ ̷m̷a̷k̷i̷n̷g̷ ̷a̷ ̷v̷a̷s̷t̷l̷y̷ ̷b̷e̷t̷t̷e̷r̷ ̷c̷o̷m̷p̷u̷t̷e̷r̷ in an effort to keep customers reliant on iPhone. 🧵contd until I lose steam [image] Paul Thurrott / @thurrott : “Apple says the US DOJ's lawsuit sets a dangerous precedent and empowers the 'government to take a heavy hand in designing people's technology'” Note that Apple celebrated this when it happened to Microsoft. Guillaume Champeau / @gchampeau : Sure, however Microsoft didn't make a mandatory “Windows App Store” for developers who wished to distribute their software. Apple set rules that all iOS developers must follow to enter the iPhone market. This control of the iPhone market is way more impactful than Microsoft's... Adam Demasi / @hbkirb : With the US v Apple antitrust lawsuit news (and it's about time), I figured looking back to the last landmark antitrust case, US v Microsoft, would be useful to understand what might happen in the future. The problem: Microsoft owns Windows, and Windows is the only reasonable... [image] Steven Parker / @asteveparker : Bill Gates in 2001/Steven Jobs in 2010 yet no-one remembers Bill Gates for bringing the tablet PC to the world, Apple is widely attributed for popularizing tablet PC use, 9-years later than Microsoft, who are terrible at marketing. [image] Dan Papscun / @papscun : Apple is engaging in “many of the same tactics that Microsoft used” before it was sued for monopolization in the 1990s, Associate AG Mizer says. Matt Rosoff / @mattrosoff : Took a while, but here's my first post for @techcrunch on a subject near and dear to my heart - antiantitrust: https://techcrunch.com/... via @techcrunch @modestproposal1 : The DOJ starts and finishes its argument by analogizing Apple to bad old Microsoft. Their efforts to force open the iPhone are natural successor to their efforts to open Windows up to cross platform applications which they claim as enabling Apple's survival and success. [image] Gene Munster / @munster_gene : I just finished listening to the DOJ $AAPL press event...They took about 5 questions after prepared remarks and it's clear the complaint is focused around the iPhone as a “core monopoly” and the products and “ecosystem” that orbits it. These include services (Music, iCloud, Apps Store, connection between Apple Watch and iPhone) and payments (Apple Pay). Brian Albrecht / @briancalbrecht : Did you know DOJ is suing Apple? You did? Okay. Well, there's a lot of talk comparing the Apple antitrust case to Microsoft back in the day. What were the effects of the Microsoft lawsuit? There's an important paper you should know 🧵 Sam Bowman / @s8mb : Antitrust now means going after companies making best-in-class products that consumers think are great. Ignoring consumer welfare makes it possible to misuse antitrust - for rent-seeking by competitors, or for attacks on corporations motivated by anti-capitalism. [image] M.G. Siegler / @mgsiegler : “If left unchallenged, Apple will only continue to strengthen its smartphone monopoly,” U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a statement. The iPhone has 50% - 60% smartphone market share in the US. The legal gymnastic to get this to stick will be fun to watch. M.G. Siegler / @mgsiegler : Apple has done itself absolutely no favors with regulator (and developers recently) with their silly and stubborn stances. But the one area they seem most sound is legally. At least in the US! (I'm no lawyer, but I'm playing one on Twitter, as many of us will today.) Ben Bajarin / @benbajarin : Qualcomm won the last time this tactic was tried by using a highly narrow definition of the market. I'd wager Apple will also. @swiftonsecurity : Today, the DoJ has filed suit against Taylor Swift, arguing her dominance over culture constitutes a monopoly. The complaint says her capture of music, performance, sports, and media are exclusionary to other challengers. A lawyer for Swift said they will dispute this vigorously. Ryan Naraine / @ryanaraine : Great line from the DOJ complaint: “Apple users could use their iPod with a Windows computer, and Microsoft did not charge Apple a 30 percent fee for each song downloaded from Apple's iTunes store.” Steven Sinofsky / @stevesi : This is the worst antitrust case ever brought. So embarrassed for the US. It is against privacy, security, safety, reliability, and more. Literally the AG talking about green bubbles. Out of the gate falsely stating messaging is insecure for non-iPhone users. I can't even. Jon Fortt / @jonfortt : Amazing how Apple has managed to build a smartphone “monopoly” with barely 50% share in the U.S. and a wildly profitable rival with a $1.8 trillion market cap. What's the definition of monopoly again? $AAPL $GOOGL #DOJ Eriq Gardner / @eriqgardner : As big as the U.S. v. Microsoft case a quarter century ago https://www.documentcloud.org/ ... Forums: Hacker News : Why the DOJ's case against Apple has everything to do with Microsoft in the '90s r/technology : Apple's iPhone is not a monopoly like Windows was a monopoly r/apple : Apple's iPhone is not a monopoly like Windows was a monopoly | TechCrunch
TechCrunchMatt Rosoff
Context & Ripple Effects
The DOJ and 16 states framed Apple’s iPhone ecosystem as a “core monopoly,” alleging restrictions spanning app distribution, payments, cloud services and device interoperability in the government’s Apple antitrust complaint. This analysis tests that framing against the Microsoft precedent rather than treating the comparison as settled.
Related coverage identifies the central fault line: the government may have evidence of harm to consumers and developers, but defining Apple’s market power could be difficult. That makes the Microsoft analogy consequential because it shapes what conduct and market definition a court might view as legally comparable.
First-order effects
Apple must defend both its product-design choices and the DOJ’s proposed smartphone-market definition; the case puts its App Store rules and iPhone interoperability practices under coordinated federal and state scrutiny.
Developers and makers of connected devices gain a formal vehicle for challenging alleged limits on access to iPhone capabilities, though the complaint itself does not change those rules immediately.
Second-order effects
The dispute raises the stakes for platforms that combine hardware, software and distribution: product restrictions that support an integrated ecosystem may face closer examination as potential exclusionary conduct.
Apple’s defense can draw on the uncertainty highlighted by analysts who saw arguments favoring Apple, encouraging rivals and partners to focus challenges on concrete consumer or developer harm rather than broad claims that integration alone is unlawful.
Third-order effects
If courts accept the DOJ’s theory, US antitrust enforcement could more readily examine ecosystem control across adjacent services and devices, not only dominance in a single software product.
If Apple prevails on market definition or product-design grounds, the Microsoft comparison will have clearer limits for modern multi-device platforms; the eventual standard remains contingent on the litigation.
The trend: This is one data point in the shift from policing single-product monopolies to testing whether control of a platform ecosystem can foreclose competition in connected markets.
The US complaint has a whole section on Apple Watch tie-in protecting iPhone monopoly, and restricting other smartwatches from working well with the iPhone. That's something the EU hasn't really cared about (yet?).
Thinking of a matrix across the EU/DoJ Apple complaints: Where is this just very silly? The ‘green bubble’ nonsense, obviously Is Apple actually hurting users with this (yes on eg Spotify/ebooks)? Is there any performance/privacy/security story? …
I think this is a straight-out lie, and I don't use that word lightly. On what planet is is remotely possible to claim that Microsoft going to block the iPod?
I feel conflicted in talking or writing about tech regulation, especially of Apple. On one hand, things like trying to ban personalised advertising or remove security protections are really dumb. But on the other, none of it matters for where tech is going in the next decade. …
From the DOJ complaint: — “Apple inhibits third-party smartwatches from maintaining a reliable connection with the iPhone.” — To be fair, Apple does that to its own smartwatches too.
We turn now to someone who was at Microsoft when the DOJ sued it on antitrust grounds to see what he thinks of the DOJ suing Apple on antitrust grounds
This is simply ahistorical. The DOJ-Microsoft trial had no effect on iTunes for Windows. Microsoft had no reason to restrict iTunes - it had no competing device, and every iTunes for Windows installation cemented Windows dominance. [image]
“Not only is the DOJ's take on the iPhone's success a complete misunderstanding of the actual market dynamics for phones, it's flabbergastingly insulting.” https://daringfireball.net/...
Agree either way this in the context it's insulting to consumers. To believe the DOJ you have to believe consumers are dumb and incapable of making sound choices knowing the pros and cons. Which is 100% false and only a fool would believe.
Today the US DOJ+16 states/DC (HA we had 19+) filed suit against Apple over abuse of market position ̷b̷y̷ ̷m̷a̷k̷i̷n̷g̷ ̷a̷ ̷v̷a̷s̷t̷l̷y̷ ̷b̷e̷t̷t̷e̷r̷ ̷c̷o̷m̷p̷u̷t̷e̷r̷ in an effort to keep customers reliant on iPhone. 🧵contd until I lose steam [image]
“Apple says the US DOJ's lawsuit sets a dangerous precedent and empowers the 'government to take a heavy hand in designing people's technology'” Note that Apple celebrated this when it happened to Microsoft.
Sure, however Microsoft didn't make a mandatory “Windows App Store” for developers who wished to distribute their software. Apple set rules that all iOS developers must follow to enter the iPhone market. This control of the iPhone market is way more impactful than Microsoft's...
With the US v Apple antitrust lawsuit news (and it's about time), I figured looking back to the last landmark antitrust case, US v Microsoft, would be useful to understand what might happen in the future. The problem: Microsoft owns Windows, and Windows is the only reasonable... …
Bill Gates in 2001/Steven Jobs in 2010 yet no-one remembers Bill Gates for bringing the tablet PC to the world, Apple is widely attributed for popularizing tablet PC use, 9-years later than Microsoft, who are terrible at marketing. [image]
Took a while, but here's my first post for @techcrunch on a subject near and dear to my heart - antiantitrust: https://techcrunch.com/... via @techcrunch
The DOJ starts and finishes its argument by analogizing Apple to bad old Microsoft. Their efforts to force open the iPhone are natural successor to their efforts to open Windows up to cross platform applications which they claim as enabling Apple's survival and success. [image]
I just finished listening to the DOJ $AAPL press event...They took about 5 questions after prepared remarks and it's clear the complaint is focused around the iPhone as a “core monopoly” and the products and “ecosystem” that orbits it. These include services (Music, iCloud, Apps…
Did you know DOJ is suing Apple? You did? Okay. Well, there's a lot of talk comparing the Apple antitrust case to Microsoft back in the day. What were the effects of the Microsoft lawsuit? There's an important paper you should know 🧵
Antitrust now means going after companies making best-in-class products that consumers think are great. Ignoring consumer welfare makes it possible to misuse antitrust - for rent-seeking by competitors, or for attacks on corporations motivated by anti-capitalism. [image]
“If left unchallenged, Apple will only continue to strengthen its smartphone monopoly,” U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a statement. The iPhone has 50% - 60% smartphone market share in the US. The legal gymnastic to get this to stick will be fun to watch.
Apple has done itself absolutely no favors with regulator (and developers recently) with their silly and stubborn stances. But the one area they seem most sound is legally. At least in the US! (I'm no lawyer, but I'm playing one on Twitter, as many of us will today.)
Today, the DoJ has filed suit against Taylor Swift, arguing her dominance over culture constitutes a monopoly. The complaint says her capture of music, performance, sports, and media are exclusionary to other challengers. A lawyer for Swift said they will dispute this vigorously.
Great line from the DOJ complaint: “Apple users could use their iPod with a Windows computer, and Microsoft did not charge Apple a 30 percent fee for each song downloaded from Apple's iTunes store.”
This is the worst antitrust case ever brought. So embarrassed for the US. It is against privacy, security, safety, reliability, and more. Literally the AG talking about green bubbles. Out of the gate falsely stating messaging is insecure for non-iPhone users. I can't even.
Amazing how Apple has managed to build a smartphone “monopoly” with barely 50% share in the U.S. and a wildly profitable rival with a $1.8 trillion market cap. What's the definition of monopoly again? $AAPL $GOOGL #DOJ