I wonder the same for Microsoft. Apple are being just as anticompetitive now as Microsoft were 'back in the day'.
Talk about being hypocritical.
When Apple is convicted of your phantom antitrust scenarios, get back to me.
There is no strong-arming going on by Apple. There is no illegal behaviour. They've also had the benefit of watching MS' antics, including anything in the area of antitrust. Apple tends to have their legal ducks in a row.
It takes a lot to get to
this point:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft
Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates was called "evasive and nonresponsive" by a source present at a session in which Gates was questioned on his deposition.[2]
He argued over the definitions of words such as "compete", "concerned", "ask", and "we".[3] BusinessWeek reported,
"Early rounds of his deposition show him offering obfuscatory answers and saying 'I don't recall' so many times that even the presiding judge had to chuckle.
Worse, many of the technology chief's denials and pleas of ignorance have been
directly refuted by prosecutors with snippets of E-mail Gates both sent and received."[4] Intel Vice-President Steven McGeady, called as a witness, quoted Paul Maritz, a senior Microsoft vice president as having stated an intention to "extinguish" and "smother" rival Netscape Communications Corporation and to "cut off Netscape's air supply" by giving away a clone of Netscape's flagship product for free. The Microsoft executive denied the allegations.[5]
A number of videotapes were submitted as evidence by Microsoft during the trial, including one that demonstrated that removing Internet Explorer from Microsoft Windows caused slowdowns and malfunctions in Windows.
In the videotaped demonstration of what Microsoft vice president James Allchin's stated to be a seamless segment filmed on one PC,
the plaintiff noticed that some icons mysteriously disappear and reappear on the PC's desktop, suggesting that the effects might have been falsified.[6] Allchin admitted that the blame for the tape problems lay with some of his staff "They ended up filming it -- grabbing the wrong screen shot," he said of the incident.
Later, Allchin re-ran the demonstration and provided a new videotape, but in so doing Microsoft dropped the claim that Windows is slowed down when Internet Explorer is removed. Mark Murray, a Microsoft spokesperson, berated the government attorneys for "nitpicking on issues like video production."[7]
Microsoft submitted a second inaccurate videotape into evidence later the same month as the first. The issue in question was how easy or hard it was for America Online users to download and install Netscape Navigator onto a Windows PC. Microsoft's videotape showed the process as being quick and easy, resulting in the Netscape icon appearing on the user's desktop.
The government produced its own videotape of the same process, revealing that Microsoft's videotape had conveniently removed a long and complex part of the procedure and that the Netscape icon was not placed on the desktop, requiring a user to search for it. Brad Chase, a Microsoft vice president, verified the government's tape and conceded that Microsoft's own tape was falsified.[8]
Abuse of monopoly, lying, presenting false evidence in court, etc.
Sorry. Apple is *nothing* like Microsoft. Nothing they've done to date even approaches that.
Because they
don't need to resort to anything like that.
Apart from that, testing the competition's IP (and by virtue, Apple's IP) in court is hardly "anticompetitive." It's exercising their right to submit a problem to the courts. Just like it is
anyone's right.
But some people like living in the land of "maybes" and "could be's".
