Profit is not market share.

They do not control the market, and thus are not subject to -- and should NOT be subject to -- the kinds of restrictions justifiably imposed on actual monopolists.

>Android is stagnating, if anything despite the free and Open Source operating system

I might argue that Android is stagnating BECAUSE it's free/open source, and as such lacks effective leadership.

> Profit is not market share.

No, it's even better.

If a company could have 1 single user and that user could pay them $500bn in perpetuity for a product costing $1, they'd only want that customer.

They want more customers because they can't have that ideal case. First of all nobody would pay that much for such a cheap thing, secondly, nobody lives for ever. So companies expand to make more money (= profit) and to future proof themselves.

Again, as I said, very sneaky from Apple, and I'm arguing it's breaking down existing economic models.

It's basically another run-around at "winning capitalism". Monopolies were one way. This is another one.

I think you misunderstand why monopolies are regulated.

There is AMPLE computing choice today. There is even healthy choice available in mobile alone.

Monopoly regulation is about preventing those with market-controlling power from exploiting that position in unfair ways to the detriment of consumer choice. Microsoft did this when they tried to destroy Netscape by bundling a browser with Windows. There really WASN'T another viable desktop system at the time, and mobile didn't really exist; they owned the market.

Apple is free to improve their offerings in any way they see fit. They are even free to incorporate features into their systems that began life as products from other vendors; this is the normal way of things. If you don't like how Apple is behaving, you are free to shift your desktop to Linux or Windows or ChromeOS, or to migrate to mobile devices running ChromeOS or Android. That's a functioning market.

There's nothing sneaky about openly continuing to improve one's offerings.

HN is really, really bad about ascribing dark motives to every tech company not on the Approved List (which, of course, is constantly changing). Apple is pretty smart. Adding encryption to their backup scheme is one of those scenarios where yes, it's good business, but it's also the right move for customers.

> There is AMPLE computing choice today. There is even healthy choice available in mobile alone.

No, there isn't.

If I want to be a functional human being, not some dork, it's either:

1. iOS (not jailbroken).

2. Android (not rooted).

Everything else is a FOSS hippie pipe dream, to be blunt.

And in economics there aren't just monopolies. There are also oligopolies and cartels.

We will need new laws for software ecosystems, if anyone will be bold enough to write them (they won't, see lobbying).